It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 17:14

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3

Kudos [?]: 34 [2], given: 0

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 May 2008, 20:54
2
KUDOS
33
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

46% (01:20) correct 54% (01:27) wrong based on 4155 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Edit: This discussion has retired. Find the new thread HERE

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is good for cardiac health.

A. wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is
B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be
C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be
D. total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be
E. total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 34 [2], given: 0

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 303

Kudos [?]: 1227 [4], given: 2

Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2012, 17:25
4
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The answer to this question is definitely (B) and not (C). The question itself is fine; somebody just made a minor typo and put (C) instead of (B).

In (C) we have the pronoun 'that': 'wild animals have less total fat than that of....' What exactly does the 'that' refer to? If the 'that' referred to the fat of livestock, then we would be comparing 'wild animals' to 'the fat of livestock' which is indeed a bizarre comparison. (B) maintains a logical comparison between 'wild animals' and 'livestock.'
_________________

Christopher Lele
Magoosh Test Prep

Kudos [?]: 1227 [4], given: 2

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4289

Kudos [?]: 7911 [3], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2015, 08:33
3
KUDOS
A. wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is --- they has no proper antecedent

B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be ------ the correct choice with proper comparison and with no pronoun problems

C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be --- comparison between wild animals and that of meaning ‘total fat’ is wrong

D. total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be -- comparison between total fat and livestock is wrong.

E. total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is --They has no referent.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Kudos [?]: 7911 [3], given: 364

Manager
Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Posts: 143

Kudos [?]: 17 [2], given: 0

Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2010, 04:16
2
KUDOS
WashingtonGMAT wrote:
daagh wrote:
I am afraid that this is a weird question. No choice seems satisfying.

B looks apparently better than others, because, in gist, it maintains the comparison between wild animals and domestic animals, although it is also meaning to say that wild animals have less total fat than they have livestock, which is indeed absurd

The right answer is B which is surprising. This is kind of interesting question.

Going by the same logic that you have used, I picked B.

But does the sentence imply that "wild animals have less total fat than they have livestock"?

Let's consider some examples:

Japan has more money than China (has).
Japan's economy is better than that of China.
Japan's economy is better than China.

In the first example, you are comparing two countries. In the second, you are comparing economies. So both the sentences are correct. The third example is wrong because the comparison is wrong.

Please correct me if I'm mistaken but I think that you are attributing the mistake in the third example to the question when in fact it has a structure similar to the first example.

Kudos [?]: 17 [2], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Posts: 176

Kudos [?]: 358 [2], given: 73

Concentration: Sustainability, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
WE: Business Development (Internet and New Media)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2013, 01:08
2
KUDOS
I think B and C are both incorrect... The correct one would read something like this....

wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain do and more of a kind of fat thought to be
_________________

You've been walking the ocean's edge, holding up your robes to keep them dry. You must dive naked under, and deeper under, a thousand times deeper! - Rumi

http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index.php/author/cbermanmanhattanprep-com/ - This is worth its weight in gold

Economist GMAT Test - 730, Q50, V41 Aug 9th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 670, Q45, V36 Aug 11th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 680, Q47, V36 Aug 17th, 2013
GmatPrep CAT 1 - 770, Q50, V44 Aug 24th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 690, Q45, V39 Aug 30th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 710, Q48, V39 Sep 13th, 2013
GmatPrep CAT 2 - 740, Q49, V41 Oct 6th, 2013

GMAT - 770, Q50, V44, Oct 7th, 2013
My Debrief - http://gmatclub.com/forum/from-the-ashes-thou-shall-rise-770-q-50-v-44-awa-5-ir-162299.html#p1284542

Kudos [?]: 358 [2], given: 73

Current Student
Joined: 24 Nov 2012
Posts: 176

Kudos [?]: 358 [2], given: 73

Concentration: Sustainability, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V44
WE: Business Development (Internet and New Media)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2013, 02:40
2
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be
- C is correct as that of implies fat of live stock..

Lets break this down...

Wild animals have less total fat than "that" of livestock fed on grain

What does that refer to? If it is fat as is claimed...

Wild animals have less total fat than fat of livestock fed on grain - Thats an incorrect comparison because it compares Wild Animals with Fat of Livestock fed on grain
_________________

You've been walking the ocean's edge, holding up your robes to keep them dry. You must dive naked under, and deeper under, a thousand times deeper! - Rumi

http://www.manhattangmat.com/blog/index.php/author/cbermanmanhattanprep-com/ - This is worth its weight in gold

Economist GMAT Test - 730, Q50, V41 Aug 9th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 670, Q45, V36 Aug 11th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 680, Q47, V36 Aug 17th, 2013
GmatPrep CAT 1 - 770, Q50, V44 Aug 24th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 690, Q45, V39 Aug 30th, 2013
Manhattan GMAT Test - 710, Q48, V39 Sep 13th, 2013
GmatPrep CAT 2 - 740, Q49, V41 Oct 6th, 2013

GMAT - 770, Q50, V44, Oct 7th, 2013
My Debrief - http://gmatclub.com/forum/from-the-ashes-thou-shall-rise-770-q-50-v-44-awa-5-ir-162299.html#p1284542

Kudos [?]: 358 [2], given: 73

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3157

Kudos [?]: 3306 [2], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 May 2016, 13:14
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
5
This post was
BOOKMARKED
robu wrote:
dave785 wrote:
Compare wild animals to livestock,

C. compares wild animals (themselves) to the fat (of livestock) and is therefore wrong.

I got B. is that correct?

but I think in B , the comparison seems between the total fat and live stock.

It is allowed to omit the repeated part from the second element of comparison,even verbs, if the meaning is clear.

Wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain (have).

However on certain occasions this dropping of repeated element is not correct:

I love sweets more than Jina.

The above sentence can have two meanings:

I love sweets. I love Jina. But I love sweets more than I love Jina.
I love sweets. Jina love sweets. But I love sweets more than Jina does.

However such ambiguity is not there in option B, and hence the verb can be dropped since the alternative " Wild animals have less total fat than (they have) livestock fed on grain" would be senseless.

Kudos [?]: 3306 [2], given: 22

Director
Joined: 05 Jan 2008
Posts: 685

Kudos [?]: 604 [1], given: 0

Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 May 2008, 23:25
1
KUDOS
I went for C. I strongly believe C is correct.

it was between B vs C.

B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be -> changes the meaning.

C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be -> correct proper comparison
_________________

Persistence+Patience+Persistence+Patience=G...O...A...L

Kudos [?]: 604 [1], given: 0

CEO
Joined: 17 May 2007
Posts: 2947

Kudos [?]: 667 [1], given: 210

Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Jun 2008, 03:01
1
KUDOS
Look at the following 3 comparisons

"wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock"
-- this comparison is clearly wrong. does this statement less fat than fat of livestock ? would that be a proper english sentence ?

"wild animals have less total fat than livestock have"
-- This makes much more sense. Sometimes the have at the end is not written (since its obvious). This phenomenon is termed ellipsis, and it is used in this statement.

"wild animals have less total fat than do livestock"
-- I am not sure whether this option is correct. Someone else may have to explain it.

Kudos [?]: 667 [1], given: 210

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4289

Kudos [?]: 7911 [1], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2010, 10:41
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
I am afraid that this is a weird question. No choice seems satisfying.

A and E are out because, we don’t have a proper reference for the pronoun they.

B looks apparently better than others, because, in gist, it maintains the comparison between wild animals and domestic animals, although it is also meaning to say that wild animals have less total fat than they have livestock, which is indeed absurd

C compares the total fat of these two kinds of animals rather than comparing the animals themselves.

D is comparing total fat with livestock.

B is the best of the bad boys.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Kudos [?]: 7911 [1], given: 364

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4289

Kudos [?]: 7911 [1], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2010, 06:42
1
KUDOS
The problem with the choice B is its ambiguity. IMO, though weird as it may look, it does imply a possibility that the wild animals have less total fat than they have livestock.

Japan has more money than China (has).
Japan's economy is better than that of China.
Japan's economy is better than China.

In the first one, which seems to have no problem, the saving grace is the elliptical verb “has.” If you had not indicated it, the meaning may distort that Japan has more money than Japan has China.( absurd though)

Let me give you a couple of examples, where it may not be so absurd

I Jack loves Jill more than Tom.

Basically two interpretations are possible,

1. Jack loves Jill more than he loves Tom,
2. Jack loves Jill more that Tom loves Jill

II Nobody knows the baby better than the mother

1 nobody knows the baby better than the mother knows the baby
2. Nobody knows the baby better than he or she knows the mother

In order to remove this ambiguity only, we have to provide a necessary verb in the second arm of the comparison. In the given text, B would have been better, if it had stated “wild animals have less total fat than have livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

Is it of any help?
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Kudos [?]: 7911 [1], given: 364

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 May 2010
Posts: 319

Kudos [?]: 59 [1], given: 32

Location: United States
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Schools: CBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 590 Q47 V25
GMAT 2: 560 Q47 V20
GMAT 3: 600 Q47 V25
GMAT 4: 680 Q49 V34
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2010, 21:11
1
KUDOS
raghavs wrote:
According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals
and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than do livestock
fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is
good for cardiac health.
A. wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind
of fat they think is
B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of
fat thought to be
C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more
fat of a kind thought to be
D. total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat
of a kind thought to be
E. total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of
their fat is of a kind they think is

I reached to answer B only by POE. A and E are out due to ambiguity over 'they'. C & D are out due to incorrect comparisons.
Can some explain how phrase 'According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat..' is referring to wild animals? I thought some answer choice will have 'meat' as a subject rather than 'animals'.
_________________

"Whether You Think You Can or Can't, You're Right"--Henry Ford
680 Debrief
600 Debrief
590 Debrief
My GMAT Journey

Kudos [?]: 59 [1], given: 32

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4289

Kudos [?]: 7911 [1], given: 364

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Feb 2011, 11:12
1
KUDOS
1. If this is an OG or GPRP question, I will agree with the OA.
2. Grammatically A and E are out because both choices use an irrelevant pronoun ‘they’.
3. In D also, ‘they’ is ambiguous and no one knows whether it refers to wild animals or livestock or studies.
4. In C, the comparison is between the total fat in wild animals with that in livestock fed on grains; Considering that the studies compare the nutritional values of two types of meat rather than the two meats themselves or the two types of animals , the comparison seems to be fairly good in C.

5.On the contrary, B straight compares wild animals with livestock, which is prima facie wrong as it alters the intent of the original. In addition, the structure of the sentence gives a slant that the wild animals have less total fat than the wild animals have livestock fed on ……

6.This is not to say that C is rather the most elegant; it also its own flaws. The ‘have’ with less total fat and the ‘have’ with more fat of a kind are both redundant; It would be parallel to cut off the second ‘have’.

In spite of all this reasoning, B is claimed to be the right answer? Any reason?
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Kudos [?]: 7911 [1], given: 364

Director
Status: Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 17 Apr 2013
Posts: 603

Kudos [?]: 621 [1], given: 298

Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q50 V36
GMAT 2: 750 Q51 V41
GMAT 3: 790 Q51 V49
GPA: 3.3
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Oct 2013, 04:10
1
KUDOS
B. It correctly compares wild animals to livestock fed on grain and constructs the "less X and more Y" idiom correctly.

C compares wild animals to "that of" livestock... what is "that of" referring to? It also says "have less X and have more Y" - we don't need the second have. The first have can apply to both parts of the idiom.
_________________

Like my post Send me a Kudos It is a Good manner.
My Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/how-to-score-750-and-750-i-moved-from-710-to-189016.html

Kudos [?]: 621 [1], given: 298

Manager
Status: Please do not forget to give kudos if you like my post
Joined: 19 Sep 2008
Posts: 121

Kudos [?]: 102 [1], given: 257

Location: United States (CA)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Nov 2013, 20:13
1
KUDOS
This is interesting...choose B and C flashed green? this set me off.

C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be

We don't need that since its logical that we comparing less total fat of wild animals with livestock who are fed on grain. Also that is X and Y structure here, and we do not need to repeat 'have'. wild animals have....and have.... this becomes to wordy.

I went with C. I looked at it closely and found that its a sentence structure problem. The way i concluded on C is as follows.

D&E are clearly out since we need a modifier after comma which should be animals.

"wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain" we need to compare fat of wild animals with fat of livestock. We need THAT after than. Its present only in C.

also look at the marker AND.
"wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be"

its a [X] and [Y] which describes wild animals fat so on either side it should begin with HAVE. This is present in only C.

wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be

wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be

hope that help.
_________________

[Reveal] Spoiler:

Kudos [?]: 102 [1], given: 257

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 May 2013
Posts: 354

Kudos [?]: 149 [1], given: 70

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Feb 2014, 00:55
1
KUDOS
According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is good for cardiac health.
lets compare the contenders..."B" and "c".....

B. wild animals have less total fat thanlivestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be.....LIVESTOCK FED ON GRAIN COMPARED TO WILD ANIMALS......

C. wild animals have less total fat thanthat oflivestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be...."THAT OF" is undefined....

Kudos [?]: 149 [1], given: 70

Current Student
Status: Everyone is a leader. Just stop listening to others.
Joined: 22 Mar 2013
Posts: 958

Kudos [?]: 1847 [1], given: 229

Location: India
GPA: 3.51
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Feb 2014, 08:12
1
KUDOS
For such questions it is always good to cut the crap and make your own simple small sentences to predict the balance of comparison.

I have more chocolates than you (have).

B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock (have) : thus a noun + verb is expected to balance the comparison.
_________________

Piyush K
-----------------------
Our greatest weakness lies in giving up. The most certain way to succeed is to try just one more time. ― Thomas A. Edison
Don't forget to press--> Kudos
My Articles: 1. WOULD: when to use? | 2. All GMATPrep RCs (New)
Tip: Before exam a week earlier don't forget to exhaust all gmatprep problems specially for "sentence correction".

Kudos [?]: 1847 [1], given: 229

Manager
Joined: 11 Sep 2013
Posts: 149

Kudos [?]: 144 [1], given: 156

Concentration: Finance, Finance
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2015, 20:06
1
KUDOS
Pags wrote:
Isn't B ambiguous?
I mean, it could both mean:
wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain have
or
wild animals have less total fat than wild animals livestock fed on grain

Logically, we know that the first one is correct, but it is still ambiguous.

wild animals have less total fat than wild animals livestock fed on grain

In the above sentence, do you get any logical meaning? What are you comparing with?

A comparison becomes ambiguous only if it gives two logical meaning.

Example- Farhan has more fascination to money than his wife

Two meaning-- 1. Farhan has more fascination to money than his wife has fascination to money
2. Farhan has more fascination to money than he has fascination to his wife
In the example both the sentences give logical meaning. So, the main sentence is ambiguous.

But--- If we say -- Farhan eats more fruits than his wife
1. Farhan eats more fruits than his wife eats fruits
2. Farhan eats more fruits than he eats his wife---- Illogical.
So this sentence is not ambiguous.

For the same reason B is not incorrect.

Kudos [?]: 144 [1], given: 156

Manager
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 30 [1], given: 148

Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Feb 2016, 05:38
1
KUDOS
robu wrote:
dave785 wrote:
Compare wild animals to livestock,

C. compares wild animals (themselves) to the fat (of livestock) and is therefore wrong.

I got B. is that correct?

I think the interpretation of B is as:

Wild animal has X and Y

X= total fat & Y = livestock fed on grains.

Hence B say : Wild animals has less total fat than livestock fed grain. in this case , B is wrong.

please throw some light on it.

Wild animal has less fat than Domestic animals - Comparison between wild and domestic animal. Which is correct.
The fat of wild animal is less than Domestic animal - Wrong comparison. Here the fat is compared with the Domestic animal.
The fat of wild animal is less than that of Domestic animal - Correct comparison. Here the fat of Wild animal compared with fat of domestic animal.

Option 'C' can be treated as redundant.

Rosy is more tall than that of Nancy ---> Rosy is more tall than tall of nancy --(Doesn't make sense.) Here the object that we are comparing falls inside the comparison statement "MORE.. THAN". Hence its clear and there is no ambiguity in comparison. But the right comparison is "Rosy is more tall than nancy is" . If both the verbs are going to be the same we can ignore. Hence we can say " Rosy is more tall than Nancy".

Laos has a land area about the same as Great Britain --> Here if you saw the object of the sentence "THE LAND AREA" is not presented inside any comparison term. In that case we can say that the OBJECT is compared with the SUBJECT. Here the LAND AREA is compared with the GREAT BRITAIN which is wrong. Here the usage of that makes sense. [http://gmatclub.com/forum/laos-has-a-land-area-about-the-same-as-great-britain-but-107156.html]

If the same has been stated as "Laos has more land area than Great Britain" - Correct comparison.

Kudos [?]: 30 [1], given: 148

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3157

Kudos [?]: 3306 [1], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2016, 11:23
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
bitanrc wrote:
This is just for learning purpose:

Apart from the "they" in A the comparison in A looks correct to me.

wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed.... This looks parallel.

Can the the experts confirm this.

Thanks.

Vyshak wrote:
bitanrc wrote:
This is just for learning purpose:

Apart from the "they" in A the comparison in A looks correct to me.

wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed.... This looks parallel.

Can the the experts confirm this.

Thanks.

No, It is not correct.

Rearrange: Wild animals have less total fat than livestock do. --> You can't substitute 'have' with 'do' as each has a different meaning.

Without do: Wild animals have fat. Livestock have fat. --> You can compare here by saying fat of wild animals > fat of livestock.
With do: Wild animals have fat. Livestock do have fat. --> Here rather than comparing the fat of wild animals with that of livestock, you are stressing more on the fact that Livestock have fat.

Vyshak, in my opinion, in a parallel structure it is alright to replace the second instance of a verb with "do". Here "have" is verb and it can be replaced with "do". However the "do" can be omitted because there would not be any ambiguity (as explained in my post above).

I eat more than you eat... correct.
I eat more than you do.... correct. ("eat" replaced with "do")
I eat more than you... correct. ("do" omitted).

I like chocolate more than you like chocolate.... correct
I like chocolate more than you like... correct ( chocolate omitted)
I like chocolate more than you do.... correct ("like" replaced" with "do")
I like chocolate more than you.. INcorrect ( ambiguous - can have 2 meanings)

Kudos [?]: 3306 [1], given: 22

Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value   [#permalink] 10 Nov 2016, 11:23

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 50 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by