Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Apr 2014, 19:33

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

engineered foods

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Manager
Manager
Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 157
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

engineered foods [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 08:08
So called "engineered foods" usually in powder or liquid form, consist of protein that is distilled from natural sources and supplemented with vitamins and minerals. Although amino acids contained in such products stimulate the production of growth hormones, these hormones produce growth in connective tissue rather than in muscle mass; this does not improve muscle strength. Hence, athletes, who need to improve muscular strength, should not consume engineered foods.

The argument depends on assumption that:
(a) An increase in muscle mass produces an increase in strength
(b) Pple who are not athletes require neither connective tissue nor muscle strength
(c) If an engineered food does not improved muscle strength, there is no other substantial advantage to athletes in consuming it
(d) Consuming engineered foods that provide nutrients that can be provided more easily elsewhere is unhealthy
(e) Growth of muscle mass enhances muscle strength only when accompanied by growth of connective tissue
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 486
Location: Chicago
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 08:39
IMO C
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

Manager
Manager
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 219
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 09:01
Agree with C
If an engineered food does not improved muscle strength, there is no other substantial advantage to athletes in consuming it
Director
Director
Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Posts: 726
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 09:05
C it is..
Manager
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Posts: 86
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 11:49
i'll go with A...if I am right I will explain, but i got it down to A or C. But C seems too absolute.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1737
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: engineered foods [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 17:12
agree with C.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 257
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: engineered foods [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 20:40
ronybtl wrote:
So called "engineered foods" usually in powder or liquid form, consist of protein that is distilled from natural sources and supplemented with vitamins and minerals. Although amino acids contained in such products stimulate the production of growth hormones, these hormones produce growth in connective tissue rather than in muscle mass; this does not improve muscle strength. Hence, athletes, who need to improve muscular strength, should not consume engineered foods.

The argument depends on assumption that:
(a) An increase in muscle mass produces an increase in strength
(b) Pple who are not athletes require neither connective tissue nor muscle strength
(c) If an engineered food does not improved muscle strength, there is no other substantial advantage to athletes in consuming it
(d) Consuming engineered foods that provide nutrients that can be provided more easily elsewhere is unhealthy
(e) Growth of muscle mass enhances muscle strength only when accompanied by growth of connective tissue


I'd go with A.

The author's conclusion is that athletes who want to gain muscular strength should not eat engineered food. His evidence is that engineered food causes growth hormones to be made which in turn builds more connective tissue. This connective tissue doesn't result in an increase in strength. Muscular mass is mentioned here as important to muscular strength.

C sounds out of scope. The author's conclusion is on muscular strength and engineered foods, not the other benefits of engineered food.

I've been wrong many times before though...
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 207
Location: Ghana
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 22 Aug 2005, 23:51
Wow :!: this is a tricky one. How i wish both A and C are correct.

I will go with A and wait for OA.
_________________

It's not over until it's OVER!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 331
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 23 Aug 2005, 09:27
A. Since the conclusion states that athletes who want to improve their muscle strength I would choose A over C.

GA
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 403
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 24 Aug 2005, 11:44
Agree on A.
Not C, cause, the argument says that it is of no use for athletes who need to improve the strength
Director
Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 562
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 25 Aug 2005, 02:55
(A) for too.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1818
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 25 Aug 2005, 09:48
I could not connect A with conclusion. C makes more sense to me.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 23 Apr 2005
Posts: 209
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 25 Aug 2005, 10:21
A for me!

We have the premise that these hormones produce growth in connective tissue rather than in muscle mass and a conclusion that consuming engineered foods does not improve the muscle strength.

these hormones produce growth in connective tissue rather than in muscle mass ---> consuming engineered foods does not improve the muscle strength. Not clear because the premise talks about muscle and the conclusion talks about muscle strength: diffirent things. So we need a relationship between muscle mass and muscle strength.

A states that.

Must be A
Manager
Manager
Joined: 22 Apr 2004
Posts: 157
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 26 Aug 2005, 08:25
The OA is C.

Does anyone want to try again to rationalise why C and not A?

A: Is A incorrect because the answer never specified what kind of strength?
B: Out of context. Nothing in stimulus refers to non-athletes
D: Stimulus mentioned. To assume D is to assume growth hormones are intrinsically unhealthy, which then is not sppted by stimulus.
E: Not sppted by stimulus.
  [#permalink] 26 Aug 2005, 08:25
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
New posts Natural foods singh_satya 9 11 Jun 2004, 12:23
New posts ps - food christoph 4 26 Dec 2005, 10:55
New posts Fast-food ggarr 8 21 Dec 2006, 11:04
Popular new posts So called "engineered foods", usually in powder or Jamesk486 16 30 May 2007, 06:27
Popular new posts “organic” foods noboru 10 12 Jun 2010, 03:28
Display posts from previous: Sort by

engineered foods

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.