Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 00:46 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 00:46
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,379
Own Kudos:
778,156
 [7]
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,379
Kudos: 778,156
 [7]
Kudos
Add Kudos
7
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,379
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,379
Kudos: 778,156
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
A_Nishith
Joined: 29 Aug 2023
Last visit: 12 Nov 2025
Posts: 455
Own Kudos:
199
 [1]
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 455
Kudos: 199
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
siddhantvarma
Joined: 12 May 2024
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 539
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 196
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q87 V82 DI75
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q87 V82 DI75
Posts: 539
Kudos: 715
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
New regulations introduced to improve school meals with lower-calorie options.
Goal: reduce childhood obesity.
Observed result: no noticeable decrease in obesity rates.
Question:


(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time.
This only speaks to prior conditions => Irrelevant.

(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards.
This directly explains the discrepancy: even if school meals are healthier, children may still consume unhealthy foods outside of school, which counteracts the impact of the improved school meals.
Keep for now.

(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages.
Irrelevant to the issue of obesity or the discrepancy.

(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations.
While this may indicate resistance to change, it does not explain why obesity rates have not decreased. There is no indication that the regulations were not implemented because of these objections. Eliminate

(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.
This suggests that despite the availability of healthier options, students might not consistently select them, which could hinder the regulations’ intended effect. While this might be a factor, the passage mentions "robust demand" which means students do prefer these healthier meals.

Correct Answer: (B)
User avatar
MKeerthu
Joined: 12 Mar 2024
Last visit: 02 Apr 2025
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 22
Posts: 53
Kudos: 59
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The answer is option B.

This is a resolve the paradox question and we need to find why the obesity among children hasn't reduced even after implementing nutritional meals.

(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time. --> We are not concerned about the meals provided before the regulations were mandated.

(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards. --> This tells us why the children are obese even after implementing the nutritional school meals. Keep

(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages. --> out of scope

(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations.--> We have the regulations mandated, so no use of this option

(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options. --> This option is tricky but again this option does not explain why the children are still obese, it talks only about their choice.
User avatar
Mantrix
Joined: 13 May 2023
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 162
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 34
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 595 Q87 V75 DI77
GMAT Focus 2: 625 Q81 V82 DI80
GPA: 9
GMAT Focus 2: 625 Q81 V82 DI80
Posts: 162
Kudos: 121
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
P1: New Regulations Passed for increasing the Nutrients standards for school meals with the motive to Increase the health and Reducing the Obesity.
P2: But students not showing any Decrease in Obesity

Which of the following would, if true, best explain the discrepancy outlined above?

(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time. (Not Relevent)
(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards. (Yes, That the Answer) As school can't control this outside meal

(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages. (Not Relevant)

(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations. (So what they have implemented even after objection) (Reject)

(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options. (It's making harder but it's not making impossible, and whole food is actually is nutritional)
Reject
User avatar
GraCoder
Joined: 15 Dec 2024
Last visit: 15 Jun 2025
Posts: 65
Own Kudos:
70
 [1]
Given Kudos: 19
Posts: 65
Kudos: 70
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes

Public Health Official: New regulations mandating higher nutrition standards for school meals were introduced with the dual goals of improving children's overall health and reducing obesity rates. These regulations required that the meals offer a greater variety of foods, including options with lower calorie content, with the ultimate aim of reducing childhood obesity. However, despite implementing these changes, and robust demand for school meals, there has not been a noticeable decrease in obesity rates among school-aged children.

Which of the following would, if true, best explain the discrepancy outlined above?

(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time.
(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards.
(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages.
(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations.
(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

(A) If this was the case, then it would public health official made the regulations without any reason... which doesn't really make sense.
(B) Probably true... but can't be directly inferred from the passage.
(C) Out of scope, not mentioned anywhere.
(D) Out of scope, not mentioned anywhere.
(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.
It does mention in the passage that there is a increase in choice of food, which could include un-healthy options too, and children are most likely to be distracted by it.

Answer (E)
User avatar
HansikaSachdeva
Joined: 17 May 2024
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 60
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 143
Location: India
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, Sustainability
Products:
Posts: 60
Kudos: 64
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(A) This talks about the nutrition guidelines followed before the new rules were implemented, and does not discuss the obesity rates - Incorrect

(B) Parents would have been sending similar unhealthy snacks even before the new regulations were implemented, which cannot explain the constant obesity rate - Incorrect

(C) This detail about language options is irrelevant - Incorrect

(D) It is stated that the regulations were implemented, even if the schools were objecting to this change - Incorrect

(E) A complex menu could confuse students and unintentionally deter them from eating healthy, explaining the constant obesity rate - Correct
User avatar
RahulPMT
Joined: 20 Dec 2024
Last visit: 05 Jul 2025
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
42
 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 34
Kudos: 42
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Correct ans is option E. it is NOT option C

Paradox: greater variety of foods, including options with lower calorie content BUT still obesity

Prethinking: Giving it a quick thought that why in real life would something like this happen:
1. even if low calorie children eating more quantity
2. (Notice the language used) Variety of foods 'including' low calorie options. So maybe students are not picking up the low calorie options.

Using these when I check options clearly option E is corrrect.

Now Why option C is wrong?
Whenever solving CR questions my rule is more direct the connection b/w option and the passage the better.
We do not want any "suppose chains" or "unwanted assumptions" that we rely on to make the option correct.

Option C is doing just that. Here we will have to assume that the snacks and food items parents are providing are unhealthy (which might not be true and hence wont explain the paradox)
User avatar
Elite097
Joined: 20 Apr 2022
Last visit: 08 Oct 2025
Posts: 771
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 346
Location: India
GPA: 3.64
Posts: 771
Kudos: 553
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
he public health official highlights a discrepancy: despite the implementation of higher nutrition standards in school meals, there has been no noticeable decrease in childhood obesity rates. The aim of the question is to identify a reason why the new regulations might not have had the intended effect.

(B) explains that children are consuming additional snacks and meals provided by parents and guardians that fall outside the purview of the school nutrition standards. This undermines the effectiveness of the regulations because these additional foods may negate the benefits of healthier school meals.
This directly addresses the discrepancy by showing that external factors (unregulated snacks/meals) could prevent a reduction in obesity rates, even if school meals have improved.

Why Not the Other Options?
(A) While this suggests that previous school meals were already relatively nutritious, it does not explain why the introduction of higher standards failed to reduce obesity rates. It merely implies that the regulations might have had less room for impact.

(C) The implementation of menus in multiple languages is unrelated to the nutritional impact of the meals or obesity rates. This option is irrelevant.

(D) Schools objecting to the regulations does not explain why obesity rates have not decreased. Objections do not necessarily affect the implementation or impact of the new standards.

(E) While the increase in food variety might complicate healthy choices, this option does not address the broader issue of overall caloric intake or consumption outside of school, which could be a significant factor in obesity rates.

Ans B
User avatar
Ayeka
Joined: 26 May 2024
Last visit: 13 Nov 2025
Posts: 439
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 158
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q82 V83 DI80
GPA: 4.2
Schools: ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q82 V83 DI80
Posts: 439
Kudos: 317
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
meals offer a greater variety of foods, including options with lower calorie content

The greater variety of foods might include all foods with lower calorie content & higher calorie content. If students chose to eat less healthier or food with higher calorie count. Then this could explain why the obesity rates have not decreased despite mandating the new regulations.

E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.

Answer: E
User avatar
sushanth21
Joined: 09 Nov 2024
Last visit: 05 Oct 2025
Posts: 82
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 82
Kudos: 68
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
we need to identify a factor that offsets the intended benefits of the new school meal regulations.
Correct Answer:
(B)Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards.

(A)Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time.
  • This suggests that the change in standards might not have been significant enough to make a difference. While plausible, it doesn’t directly address why obesity rates haven’t decreased.
  • Does not fully explain the discrepancy.
(B)Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards.
  • This explains how children might be consuming additional calories outside of school, negating the impact of healthier school meals. This is a direct and reasonable explanation for the observed discrepancy.
  • Strongly explains the discrepancy.
(C)The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages.
  • This detail is unrelated to nutrition or calorie intake.
  • Irrelevant.
(D)Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations.
  • While schools' objections might pose challenges to implementation, the question states that the changes were implemented, and demand for school meals remains robust.
  • Does not explain the discrepancy.
(E)The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.
  • This suggests that students may not always select the healthier options, which could reduce the effectiveness of the new regulations. While plausible, this explanation is weaker than (B), which directly highlights additional calorie intake outside of school.
  • Weaker explanation than (B).


Bunuel
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes

Public Health Official: New regulations mandating higher nutrition standards for school meals were introduced with the dual goals of improving children's overall health and reducing obesity rates. These regulations required that the meals offer a greater variety of foods, including options with lower calorie content, with the ultimate aim of reducing childhood obesity. However, despite implementing these changes, and robust demand for school meals, there has not been a noticeable decrease in obesity rates among school-aged children.

Which of the following would, if true, best explain the discrepancy outlined above?

(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time.
(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards.
(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages.
(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations.
(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

User avatar
Heix
Joined: 21 Feb 2024
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 361
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 63
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT Focus 1: 485 Q76 V74 DI77
GPA: 3.4
WE:Accounting (Finance)
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 485 Q76 V74 DI77
Posts: 361
Kudos: 153
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The paradox: Despite the new regulation improving school meal nutrition standards and robust demand for these meals, there hasn't been a noticeable decrease in obesity rates among school-aged children

Lets evaluate each option:

A) This option doesn't explain the paradox. If meals were already meeting nutritional guidelines, it might explain why there wasn't much change but it doesn't address why improved standards didn't lead to decrease obesity rates

B) This option provides a strong explanation for the paradox. Even if school meals are healthier, if children are consuming additional unhealthy snacks and meals outside of school, it could offset the benefits of improved school nutrition standards . This explains why obesity rates haven't decreased despite better meals.

C) Implementing menus in multiple languages doesn't address the core issue of nutrition and obesity rates. This option is irrelevant to the paradox

D) School objecting to the regulations doesn't explains why the regulations which were implemented ,didn't have the desired effect. This doesn't resolve the paradox

E) while this might contribute slightly to the problem, it doesn't fully explain why obesity rates haven't decreased. the regulations specifically included in options with lower calorie content, so even with more variety, healthier options should still be available

The best answer is (B). It provide a clear explanation for why improved school meal nutrition standard might not lead to decreased obesity rates: the influence of food consumed outside of school. This external factor could counteract the positive effects of the school meal regulations, thus resolving the paradox
User avatar
twinkle2311
Joined: 05 Nov 2021
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 150
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 10
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GPA: 9.041
Posts: 150
Kudos: 167
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Here’s how I would assess the situation:

The discrepancy:
  1. New regulations aimed at improving children's health and reducing obesity by offering healthier meals in schools.
  2. However, the obesity rates haven't decreased, even with these changes.

Now, let's think of a few possible reasons:

  • Maybe the regulations themselves weren’t effective enough
  • Perhaps there are external factors, like things outside the control of these regulations, that are still contributing to obesity.
  • Another possibility is that while the school meals are healthier, they might not be the main contributor to children's overall nutrition and health.

Let’s break down the options:

(A) doesn't help explain why the new regulations haven’t made a difference. The fact that many schools met previous guidelines doesn't address whether the new ones are better or have a bigger impact. Maybe the previous guidelines were ineffective, and the new ones could still make a difference for other schools. So, this doesn’t quite explain the discrepancy. Eliminate

(B) directly addresses the discrepancy. If children are eating extra unregulated snacks, their total calorie intake might still be too high, which could be the reason obesity rates haven't decreased despite healthier school meals. This external factor is beyond the scope of the regulations. So, this option seems like a good fit.

(C) doesn't help explain the discrepancy. In fact, it seems to increase accessibility, not contribute to the obesity issue. If anything, it would likely improve the situation, not make it worse. Eliminate

(D) is not helpful because it doesn’t clarify whether the schools that did implement the regulations saw any impact on obesity rates. Even if some schools objected, others could have complied, and we still haven’t seen a decrease in obesity rates. Eliminate

(E) If this were the case, we'd expect obesity to have slightly or even significantly increased, but the rates have remained the same, so this doesn’t explain the situation. Eliminate

So, the most likely explanation for the discrepancy is (B)
User avatar
aviraj1703
Joined: 27 May 2024
Last visit: 10 Mar 2025
Posts: 98
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 98
Kudos: 122
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A) Old rules being followed before doesn't explain why new, stricter rules aren't working now. - Incorrect
B) Kids eating unhealthy food outside school totally undermines what schools are doing. If parents give junk food, school healthy meals won't matter much. - Correct
C) Menu languages have nothing to do with obesity rates. Not relevant to the problem. - Incorrect
D) Schools objecting doesn't explain why rates haven't changed, especially since we know the rules were actually implemented. - Incorrect
E) More variety could make choices harder, but we know there's "robust demand" so kids are eating the meals. Doesn't explain why they're not working. - Incorrect
User avatar
hr1212
User avatar
GMAT Forum Director
Joined: 18 Apr 2019
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 621
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,483
GMAT Focus 1: 775 Q90 V85 DI90
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 775 Q90 V85 DI90
Posts: 621
Kudos: 924
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Which of the following would, if true, best explain the discrepancy outlined above?

(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time. This might be true but doesn't seem to address the discrepancy in the argument, because if school meals are already healthy that there should be decrease in obesity level, so there's some external factor which is missing here.
(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards. This seems promising as this is an extra fact which in spite of schools following strict nutritional practice if guardians are providing students with non-regulated foods, there's a high chance that the leading cause of the obesity would be their home meals rather than the school meals. Often is a subtle but promising keyword in this argument.
(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages. Irrelevant
(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations. Irrelevant
(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options. This might be true, but even after the difficult selection phase students should be able to consume nutritional food resulting in the decrease of obesity level. So still there seems to be some gap which is not addressed by the information in this statement.

Answer: B
User avatar
HarshaBujji
Joined: 29 Jun 2020
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 695
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 247
Location: India
Products:
Posts: 695
Kudos: 885
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
We are looking for the explanation of the discrepancy

(A): Possible, but doesn’t address external factors (like home meals).
(B): Best answer, explains external influence (extra food from home).
(C): Eliminate, irrelevant to nutrition or obesity.
(D): Eliminate, does not directly address the discrepancy.
(E): Possible, but less direct than (B).

Best option is B, IMO B
User avatar
nikiki
Joined: 07 May 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 56
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 89
Location: India
Posts: 56
Kudos: 57
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A : This doesn't explain the discrepancy because it suggests that the meals were already healthy, meaning the change in regulations may not have been enough to make a significant impact on obesity.
B : This option explains that even though school meals have improved, the issue of childhood obesity may not be fully addressed because children are consuming other, potentially unhealthy meals or snacks at home, which the school regulations do not control.
C : This is unrelated to the health or nutritional impact of the meals, so it doesn't help explain why obesity rates aren't decreasing.
D : While objections might delay or hinder implementation, this doesn't explain why the regulations, when implemented, haven't had the desired effect on obesity rates.
E : This could be a factor, but it doesn’t directly address the discrepancy caused by external factors like home meals and snacks, which might be a bigger issue in contributing to the lack of improvement in obesity rates.
Bunuel
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes

Public Health Official: New regulations mandating higher nutrition standards for school meals were introduced with the dual goals of improving children's overall health and reducing obesity rates. These regulations required that the meals offer a greater variety of foods, including options with lower calorie content, with the ultimate aim of reducing childhood obesity. However, despite implementing these changes, and robust demand for school meals, there has not been a noticeable decrease in obesity rates among school-aged children.

Which of the following would, if true, best explain the discrepancy outlined above?

(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time.
(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards.
(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages.
(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations.
(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

User avatar
maddscientistt
Joined: 09 Mar 2023
Last visit: 17 Jul 2025
Posts: 41
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 64
Posts: 41
Kudos: 47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(A) This doesn't help explain the issue because it suggests the meals were already healthy, so the new rules may not have been enough to reduce obesity.
(B) This makes sense because it highlights that children might still be eating unhealthy foods at home, which the school rules can't control, preventing obesity from decreasing.
(C) This is irrelevant to the problem because it talks about language menus, not the impact on health or obesity rates.
(D) Although objections could slow things down, they don't explain why the regulations haven't worked to reduce obesity once they were implemented.
(E) While variety may complicate healthy choices, it doesn't focus on the bigger issue of external factors like home meals that contribute more to obesity.

B is the answer

Bunuel
12 Days of Christmas 2024 - 2025 Competition with $40,000 of Prizes

Public Health Official: New regulations mandating higher nutrition standards for school meals were introduced with the dual goals of improving children's overall health and reducing obesity rates. These regulations required that the meals offer a greater variety of foods, including options with lower calorie content, with the ultimate aim of reducing childhood obesity. However, despite implementing these changes, and robust demand for school meals, there has not been a noticeable decrease in obesity rates among school-aged children.

Which of the following would, if true, best explain the discrepancy outlined above?

(A) Before the new regulations were implemented, most school meals met the nutritional guidelines that were in place at that time.
(B) Parents and guardians often provide children with additional snacks and meals that are not regulated by the school nutrition standards.
(C) The new regulations mandate that all school cafeterias implement menus in multiple languages.
(D) Many schools have objected to the introduction of new regulations.
(E) The increase in food variety makes it harder for students to consistently choose healthier options.

 


This question was provided by GMAT Club
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

User avatar
adityaprateek15
Joined: 26 May 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 268
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 309
Location: India
GPA: 2.7
Products:
Posts: 268
Kudos: 104
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Option B clearly explains the paradox stating that the decrease in obesity rates didn't take place since children had access to additional food provided by their parents apart from the healthy meals.
 1   2   3   4   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts