Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT141 S4 Q6 Explanation

Clinician: Patients with immune system

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

TopicsEvaluate

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Free to start

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Stimulus

Clinician: Patients with immune system disorders are usually treated with a class of drugs that, unfortunately, increase the patient's risk of developing osteoporosis, a bone-loss disease. So these patients take another drug that helps to preserve existing bone. Since a drug that enhances the growth of new bone cells has now become addition to the drug that helps to preserve existing bone.

What this question is testing

Evaluate

Your task

Break the argument into its conclusion and evidence, then do exactly what the question stem asks with that structure.

Common trap

Answers that sound relevant to the topic but don't connect to the argument's actual reasoning.

Winning move

Predict what a right answer must do, then test each choice against the conclusion-evidence gap.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
6.

Which one of the following would be most useful to know in order to evaluate

Answer choices

  1. No Impact1% picked this

    How large is the class of drugs that increase the risk

    Whether we say this class of drugs has two members or two hundred members, it has no effect. No numerical answer here is going to suggest that patients not take this new drug on top of their old bone-preserving drug..

  2. No Impact4% picked this

    Why are immune system disorders treated with drugs that increase the risk

    Whatever the backstory is, it won't change the fact that immune system disorders are treated with drugs that increase the risk of osteoporosis. These patients will be taking those drugs either way, in the context of this argument. So the exact medical rationale for why those drugs help their disorder but inflate the risk of osteoporosis has nothing to do with our task of evaluating the positives / negatives of this new drug.

  3. Weak Impact1% picked this

    Is the new drug more expensive than the drug that helps to

    If we say, "yes, the new drug is more expensive than the current bone-preserving drug they're taking", then that gives us a bit of a way to argue that "these patients should not take this new drug in addition to the current one". But the fact that the new drug would be more expensive isn't necessarily a compelling negative. If the old drug is $5 / month and the new drug is $6 / month, that's not a compelling reason to not take the new drug. For this answer to have a stern counterpunch, it needs to be worded in a way that gives us a bigger weakener: e.g., Is the new drug prohibitively expensive for most patients with immune system disorders?

  4. No Impact2% picked this

    How long has the drug that helps to preserve existing bone

    Whether we say the bone-preserving drug they're currently taking has been in use for 1 year or 100 years, it makes no difference. No numerical answer here is going to suggest that patients shouldn't take this new drug on top of their old bone-preserving drug.

  5. Correct93% picked this

    To what extent does the new drug retain its efficacy when used in combination with

    Why this is right

    If we say that the new drug retains 0% of its efficacy when used in combination with the other drugs, then that gives us a strong way to argue that "patients should not take this new drug in addition to the drugs they're already taking".

    Skill tested: Evaluate · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free