rohitgoel15 wrote:
Already disccused at the below thread:
cr-cancer-2636.htmlThe incidence in japan of most types of cancer is remarkably low compared to that in North America , especially considering that japan has a modern life style, industrial pollution included. The cancer rates, however, for japanese people who immigrate to north america and adopt the diet of north americans approximate the higher cancer rates prevalent in north america
If the statements above are true, they provide the most support for which one of the following?
A. the greater the level of industrial pollution in a country, the higher that country's cancer rate will tend to be.
B. the stress of life in north american is greater than that of life in japan and predisposes to cancer.
C. the staple foods of the japanese diet contain elements that cure cancer.
D. the relatively low rate of cancer among people in japan does not result from a high frequency of a protective genetic trait among japanese people
E. The higher cancer rates of japanese immigrants to north america are cused by fats in the north american diet.
I am torn between B and D. Can someone please help why and how to negate B?
straight D.
it is not the genetics that is responsible for low rate of cancer.
A - no, as we are told that in Japan pollution exists as well
B - stress is not discussed here. it might be true, but might not. 2 possible outcomes. no
C - we can't know for sure whether the food cures cancer. what if the food in NA gets you cancer? and by not eating it, you don't have cancer. if such, then C doesn't work.
D - aha, so it's not genetics that help japanese people.
E - it says that japanese people got cancer because of the fats - but what if it's not fats that gave those people cancer?
D it is.