Columnist: People should avoid using a certain artificial fat that has

Artificial fat has a drawback - it absorbs away some essential vitamins. It doesn't matter which food provides those vitamins - the food which has artificial fat or the other food taken during that time. The point is that the author is saying that don't use this artificial fat in your meals. It will absorb the essential vitamins from your meal - whichever food may carry those essential vitamins.
So whether the food with the artificial fat has the vitamins or some other food which you are consuming as part of the meal has the vitamins is irrelevant. Whichever food has the vitamins, will be stripped off of them.

KarishmaB Ma'am,

Just to rephrase
Even if we get to know whether the vitamins that the artificial fat absorbs are present in other fats too does not tell us whether we should do away with consuming the artificial fat or not?

Now am I correct in my reasoning?

Hence, this answer choice is incorrect.

I am not sure you have got it. Consider the scenario:

For a meal, Andy plans to have some roasted chicken with some vegetables.
Roasting the chicken requires some kind of fat. Currently, he uses canola oil for roasting but his doctor has told him to reduce fat intake.

In the market, there is something called an artificial fat available. It looks and tastes like canola oil but does not have its calories. So he considers buying the artificial fat.

The author of the argument tells him to not buy the artificial fat. He says that this fat will absorb some essential vitamins away from his diet so his body will not be able to absorb it. So whatever essential vitamins will be there in his meal (which includes chicken roasted in artificial oil and vegetables), they will become unavailable to his body.

Now, think about it, does it matter whether the chicken has the vitamins or the vegetables? No. Whatever food has the vitamins, they will be absorbed away when consumed with artificial oil (present in the roasted chicken). When ingested together, the artificial oil will strip away those vitamins from the meal.

(B) Whether the vitamins that the artificial fat absorbs are present in foods that contain the fat

(B) asks whether it is useful to evaluate whether the food that contains the fat ( i.e. the food that contains the artificial fat i.e. our roasted chicken) is the one which has vitamins in it. Is it useful to evaluate? No. It doesn't matter whether the chicken has the vitamins or the vegetables. When consumed together, the artificial fat will absorb the vitamins.

Hence (B) is incorrect.

Here the conclusion is that people should completely avoid using a certain artificial fat, and the reason given is that it absorbs essential vitamins. So, if we have to go with the conclusion and validate its grounds of reasoning, isn't it also important to check whether having low fat (when the body is devoid of both artificial fat and the other fat that doctor has asked to reduce) is dangerous in the longer run? Please explain which is more necessary. A or C

Great question!

In this passage, the columnist addresses people "whose medical advisers have advised them to reduct their fat intake." So we know these people are trying to reduce their fat intake, but we can't necessarily conclude from this they'll have extremely low fat intake, as (C) says. Maybe they will only reduce their fat intake from high to medium? Based on the passage, we have no basis to conclude these people will use the artificial fat to achieve extremely low fat intake.

In fact, if the people are following the advice of medical advisers, they presumably would not be advised to reduce fat to dangerously low levels. For all these reasons, we can eliminate (C).

Now here's (A):

The columnist's position is based on the idea that the artificial fat "absorbs certain essential vitamins, thereby preventing them from being used by the body." But is this really a problem? Well, if you could increase your intake of vitamins to compensate for this negative effect, it wouldn't really be a problem. And if that were the case, the columnist's position would fall apart. So (A) would definitely be important to determine.

I hope that helps!

All options are irrelevant and would eventually lead to a selection between A and B.

Since the question asks about what must be evaluated to ascertain the validity an Yes or No answer that can definitely validate or invalidate the reasoning would help us arrive at the correct option.

A. Can we negate the effect of artificial fat by taking excess vitamins ?
Yes - Well there is no need to worry about the effect of artificial fat then
No - If not then we should stop taking the artificial fat

B. Does the food that goes along with the artificial fat have the Vitamins ?
Yes - then it will not only absorb the vitamins this food contains , but it will also affect other food taken along with this one
No - even then it's also possible other food containing the same vitamins will be affected by the action of this artificial fat

­
Context:

An artificial fat has been touted as a resource for those whose medical advisers have advised them to reduce their fat intake.

Premises:

It has none of the negative health effects of fat, but it does have a serious drawback: it absorbs certain essential vitamins, thereby preventing them from being used by the body.

Conclusion:

People should avoid using this artificial fat.

We need to evaluate the conclusion. Should people avoid using this artificial fat? That depends on many factors that work in favour of or against the overall health of people. Can fats be reduced without using artificial fats? Are there any other artificial fats available that are better? What is worse – fat consumption or blocking vitamins? Can vitamins be compensated in another way? etc.

(A) Whether increasing one's intake of the vitamins can compensate for the effects of the artificial fat

This is within the scope of our argument. If we answer

“Yes” – Then the artificial fat seems to be fine for consumption. We can compensate the vitamins loss by increasing intake of vitamins. People needn’t avoid using this artificial fat.

“No” – Then the consumption of this artificial fat certainly seems to be a problem. It could lead to vitamin deficiency. People should avoid using this artificial fat.

The two answers affect the conclusion differently. Hence, this is the correct option.

(B) Whether the vitamins that the artificial fat absorbs are present in foods that contain the fat

Foods containing fat are outside the scope of our argument. Our argument talks about which fat to use for ‘preparation of food’. What food is used, we don’t know. Whether food containing fat is consumed or not, we don’t know. Hence, whether they have those vitamins or not, doesn’t impact us.

(C) Whether having an extremely low fat intake for an extended period can endanger the health

We are comparing natural fat with artificial fat. We are discussing how to follow doctor’s orders, whatever they may be.

(D) Whether there are any foods that cannot be prepared using the artificial fat as a substitute for other fats

It is within the scope of our argument but doesn’t help us. Let’s answer the question in different ways:
“Yes” – There are some foods that cannot be prepared using the artificial fat. It doesn’t matter because other foods can be prepared in it and that will reduce the consumption of fat.
“No” – Then all foods can be prepared in it and that will reduce the consumption of fat.
Both cases have the same effect.

(E) Whether people are generally able to detect differences in taste between foods prepared using the artificial fat and foods that are similar except for the use of other fats

Irrelevant to our argument.

Answer (A)

Discussion on Useful to Evaluate Questions: https://youtu.be/1JtHjH1lWZc