Let us read the paragraph provided -
the first sentence is a fact (before the semicolon). the second sentence (after the semicolon) again states another fact. (the findings of the study).
Let us now look at the third sentence -
This sentence talks about the scientists' conclusion from the findings. The conclusion is -
Omega 3 fatty acids --> lower rates of kidney cancer. in the studyNote that the first part of the sentence - "
though all previous studies on the relationship between ... " provides a consideration against the main conclusion of the argument.
Note that '
though' is a contrast indicator.
The next sentence provides support to the scientists' conclusion. It suggests that lean fish have little to no omega fatty acids.
A - "The first is an opinion that is supported by the argument." - no it is not. the first part goes against the main conclusion.
"the second is one part of the information uncovered in the study." - nowhere does the paragraph tell us that this information was uncovered in the study. This information is given to as an additional information, separate from the study's findings.
B - correct answer. look at the discussion above.
C - the scientists are not trying to solve this - "All previous studies on the relationship between fatty fish and the prevalence of kidney cancer have been inconclusive"
They are trying to solve - how eating fatty fish leads to less risk for developing carcinoma.
the second boldface is not a result of the 1st boldface. It just states a fact.
D - the first does not support the conclusion. Note the usage of "though"
the second boldface does in fact support the conclusion.
E - the first goes against the argument.
the second boldface does not challenge the first boldface.
i.e. 'lean fish is rarely rich in omega fatty acids' definitely does not challenge 'All previous studies on the relationship between fatty fish and the prevalence of kidney cancer have been inconclusive'
_________________
Crackverbal Prep Team
www.crackverbal.com