Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Brushing your teeth regularly, no matter which toothpaste [#permalink]
21 Feb 2006, 19:38
0% (00:00) correct
100% (01:48) wrong based on 3 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
Brushing your teeth regularly, no matter which toothpaste you use, will reduce your chances of tooth decay. Scientists have concluded that, when you brush, you reduce tooth decay by removing the film of plaque that forms on teeth and gums. So, you can forget about fluorides: brush your teeth carefully and say goodbye to cavities.
Which one of the following is a criticism of the reasoning in the argument?
(A) Brushing with fluoride toothpaste has been shown to reduce tooth decay.
(B) The fact that brushing will reduce tooth decay does not show that fluorides are of no value.
(C) Few people adequately remove plaque by brushing.
(D) People have plaque on their teeth most of the time.
(E) Scientists have been wrong about fluorides.
Please answer with explanation
OA after discussion...
1) Burshing teeth regularly will reduce chance of decay
2) Scientist conclude -> brushing reduce tooth decay by removing film of plague
3) Choice of toothpaste does not matter
4) Just brush carefully and forget about flourides
B is the best choice. We need to attack the conclusion here. The writer concludes that
brushing alone will reduce chances of tooth decay because it removes the film of plague that forms on teeth and gum. It has failed to provide evidence that flouride might be nescessary to complement the brushing or fluoride is completely redundant.
Fact 1: Brushing your teeth regularly, no matter which toothpaste you use, will reduce your chances of tooth decay. Fact 2: Scientists have concluded that, when you brush, you reduce tooth decay by removing the film of plaque that forms on teeth and gums.
Conclusion: So, you can forget about fluorides: brush your teeth carefully and say goodbye to cavities.
Point to be noted : No flouride in Facts, still conclusion says irrelavently that flourides are useless. So, there is no justification for that. If you get it, you strike the nail on forehead. Clear B.
Moreover, only A/B/E only discuss flourides in conclusion, thus only qualify for being contenders. E is out of scope. So fight is basically between A and B here.
Check out this awesome article about Anderson on Poets Quants, http://poetsandquants.com/2015/01/02/uclas-anderson-school-morphs-into-a-friendly-tech-hub/ . Anderson is a great place! Sorry for the lack of updates recently. I...