Logical ReasoningDifficulty: Easy

PT154 S4 Q1 ExplanationOne reason swimming immediately after

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

TopicsMain Conclusion

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

One reason swimming immediately after eating is thought to be dangerous is that it could cause muscle cramps. But there is no reason to believe this. Muscle cramps are usually caused by muscle fatigue and dehydration, which are unrelated to eating. Reduced blood flow to muscles during digestion might also be a aid in digestion after a meal to reduce blood flow to muscles.

What this question is testing

Main Conclusion

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
1.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the overall conclusion drawn

Answer choices, explained

  1. Bad Conclusion Match Too Strong9% picked this

    Swimming immediately after eating is not

    This is tempting. However, when the conclusion states that there is "no reason to believe this," it means that there is no reason to believe that muscle cramps cause swimming immediately after eating to be dangerous. "Swimming after eating is not dangerous because of X" is not the same as saying "swimming after eating is not dangerous at all." It might still be dangerous for some reason other than X.

  2. Premise Too Strong1% picked this

    Reduced blood flow to muscles is not a cause of

    This answer resembles part of the evidence. It's not the conclusion. Also, the evidence doesn't state that reduced blood flow to muscles is not a cause of cramps. "This is disputed" only means that there is disagreement about reduced blood flow during digestion causing muscle cramps. The wording of this answer choice is too strong.

  3. Correct88% picked this

    There is no reason to believe that swimming immediately after eating

    Why this is right

    We have a winner! To see that this is correct, we need to recognize that the second sentence in the stimulus contains the conclusion. We also need to understand that the word "this" in that second sentence refers back to swimming after eating being the cause of muscle cramps.

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

  4. Premise1% picked this

    Blood going to the stomach to aid in digestion after a meal is not a

    This information is part of the evidence. It's not the conclusion.

  5. Premise Last Claim Bait1% picked this

    Blood going to the stomach to aid in digestion after a meal would not reduce blood

    This statement is given as evidence. It's not the conclusion. The final sentence or statement in an argument is often the conclusion, but not always.

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