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

I vote for A as well.

C: People should avoid using artificial fat
P1: Artificial fat does not have negative effects of fat but it absorbs certain essential vitamins
P2: Artificial fat prevents essential vitamins from being used in the body

To me the argument reads, "Artificial fat prevents essential vitamins from being used in the body. Therefore, to ensure the body processes these essential vitamins, one should avoid artificial fat."

However, if we introduce an idea that would allow the body to still process the essential vitamins, that would be a weakening point.

Just my rambling...

If we see option 1 and option 2 more closely, it will quite visible to us that the option2 is trying to tell us that we can have both artificial and natural Fats at the same time!! Now the columnist is talking of effects of possible replacement of natural fats with artificial ones!! This would mean that we cant use 2 of them together, and it can be inferred that only one is used. This eliminates B. A is the only other choice which is logical.

Therefore A is correct!

Please specify the OA, and explanation if any!

Let's put it this way:
Conclusion:
People should avoid using a certain artificial fat that has been touted as a resource for those whose medical advisers have advised them to reduce their fat intake.
Premises:
Although the artificial fat, which can be used in place of fat in food preparation, has none of the negative health effects of fat, it does have a serious drawback: it absorbs certain essential vitamins, thereby preventing them from being used by the body.

So columnist tells us not to use the Arti.Fat as it doesnt damage the health but can prevent certain vitamins which can be used by the budy

Now we know that it is fine to eat Art.Fat as it doesnt affect our health negatively, but still it has drawback. Since it reduces the vitamins, we need to find out if taking vitamins along with Art.Fat containing food is fine, as we cannot stop eating Art.Fat food and cannot just loose vitamins so we need to take some vitas to keep the health.

I think A will clear that.

+ 1 A.

B: whether the vitamins are present in the food that contains the fat, does not sufficiently indicate the validity of the conclusion. The argument no where states that only the vitamins, present in the same food as the fat, are absorbed .
Vitamins of other food stuff can also be absorbed.

Hi,

Here the conclusion is People should avoid using artificial fat ,because it prevent essential vitamins to be used by the body.
So now seeing the option A ,which is the OA. But my query is Even after increasing the intake of vitamins how does it going to compensate the artificial fat intake effect, as it still going to prevent the vitamins to be used by the body as it just vitamins quantity is increased.

Please help me out.

Thanks

The health problem is that artificial fat absorbs certain essential vitamins, and hence prevent these vitamins to be used by the body.

We have to evaluate the argument and focus only on the 'absorption and utilization of vitamins' by the body.

(A) Whether increasing one's intake of the vitamins can compensate for the effects of the artificial fat. That means external intake of vitamins can compensate the poor absorption. This is certainly helping to evaluate the argument.
(B) Whether the vitamins that the artificial fat absorbs are present in foods that contain the fat. We are concerned about the absorption or availability of the vitamins to body. Presence of vitamins doesn't promise the availability.
(C) Whether having an extremely low fat intake for an extended period can endanger the health. not concerned about endangering health.
(D) Whether there are any foods that cannot be prepared using the artificial fat as a substitute for other fats. Not concerned about preparing food using artificial fat.
(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. Not concerned about the taste

Columnist: People should avoid using a certain artificial fat that has been touted as a resource for those whose medical advisers have advised them to reduce their fat intake.


Although the artificial fat, which can be used in place of fat in food preparation, has none of the negative health effects of fat, it does have a serious drawback:

it absorbs certain essential vitamins, thereby preventing them from being used by the body.

In evaluating the columnist's position, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?

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



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

the question is not that the artificial fat absorbs are present in foods or not. Even if it is not present in food, the absorption can happen in body itself. if you ingest artificial fat and it absorbs essential vitamin inside the body,reventing them from being used by the body - still the harm.

https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... t2282.html

You need to boil the columnist's position down to its essence, which is basically this:

Fat absorbs vitamins that are essential.
Therefore, body doesn't get vitamins.
Therefore, bad news.

The second 'therefore' here is unassailable (it's definitely bad news if your body doesn't get vitamins), so the only thing that might sway the argument in one direction or the other is the first 'therefore'. if we could break the connection between absorption of vitamins and robbing the body of vitamins, then we could possibly destroy the argument.

(A) It breaks the connection and introduces the possibility that the body might get the vitamins anyway, despite the absorption of some of those vitamins by the fat.

(B) Irrelevant, as it doesn't matter where the vitamins come from (only whether they're properly absorbed)

(C) Irrelevant, as the possible dangers of low-fat diets don't affect the above line of reasoning (the dangers of the artificial fat) at all

(D) Irrelevant: which foods can contain the artificial fat has nothing to do with whether it will rob the body of vitamins

(E) Irrelevant: taste has no bearing on the discussion at hand

The options that I had for this question were different, primarily option B.Probably they have revised the options. We need to reconsider the new options .

options for Gmat prep 6 :-


Columnist: People should avoid using a certain artificial fat that has been touted as a resource for those whose medical advisers have advised them to reduce their fat intake. Although the artificial fat, which can be used in place of fat in food preparation, has none of the negative health effects of fat, it does have a serious drawback: it absorbs certain essential vitamins, thereby preventing them from being used by the body.

In evaluating the columnist's position, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?

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

(B) Whether any of the vitamins that the artificial fat absorbs are destroyed by prolonged cooking
(C) Whether having an extremely low fat intake for an extended period can endanger the health

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

(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

I was confused between A & B in this one and chose B.
If cooking destroys the vitamins then the artifical fat is not having a drawback. If cooking does not destroy the vitamins, then yes the artificial fat has a drawback.

Although I notice 2 assumptions that are taken in B option.
1. It talks about only for foods that are cooked. If these foods are eaten raw then option B will not help.
2. Other one is "prolonged cooking". We don't know whethe all these foods are prolongly cooked.

I am not sure though.
Please help.

Columnist: People should avoid using a certain artificial fat that has been touted as a resource for those whose medical advisers have advised them to reduce their fat intake. Although the artificial fat, which can be used in place of fat in food preparation, has none of the negative health effects of fat, it does have a serious drawback: it absorbs certain essential vitamins, thereby preventing them from being used by the body.

In evaluating the columnist's position, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?

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

(B) Whether the vitamins that the artificial fat absorbs are present in foods that contain the fat --For people whose fat intake is restricted, the foods containing fat would also be restricted by their doctor.

(C) Whether having an extremely low fat intake for an extended period can endanger the health --Why would one eat small proportions of poison every day?

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

(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 --People can simply ask the server regarding the usage of fat

Sorry to bump into an old thread. But the issue at hand is "Does Artificial fat reduce vitamins" and not "Can vitamins be regained"
In that case A doesn't have a relevance to the issue.
I don't advocate B much although I see some point in it. Through POE, B would remain.
Correct me if I am wrong.

The columnist's position is not simply that the artificial fat reduces vitamins. The issue at hand is whether this represents a serious drawback. Sure, reducing vitamins is an issue. But if that issue can be easily addressed by taking a couple extra vitamin pills, then the reduction would not be a serious drawback.

So while (A) does not change the fact that the artificial fat reduces vitamins, it certainly suggests that this is not a serious drawback.

I hope that helps!

Hi, I don't really get why option A is correct in this question. Option A talks about compensation for the negative effects of artificial fat. If we go by this option's logic, we might as well say that cigarettes might not be harmful for health just because we can eat more fruits to compensate for the negative effects of it.

Also, I believe that option B is a better choice because if the vitamins that are absorbed by the fat are present in the food, then artificial fat would indeed absorb them leading to adverse effects, thereby strengthening the argument. However, if the vitamins are not present in the food, the artificial fat would not really absorb anything and therefore not lead to any adverse effects, thereby weakening the argument.


GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo egmat gmat1393 nightblade354 Kindly tell me whether I am missing something or whether there is a gap in my understanding. Thanks!

The columnist argues that "people should avoid using a certain artificial fat" because "it absorbs certain essential vitamins, thereby preventing them from being used by the body."

We need to find the answer choice that would be most useful in evaluating this argument.

First take a look at (B):

We know from the passage that the artificial fat prevents the body from absorbing certain essential vitamins. Is it important to determine whether these vitamins are present specifically "in foods that contain the fat," as written in answer choice (B)?

Not particularly. The vitamins could be in those exact foods, or could be in other foods that a person eats around the same time as the ones with the artificial fat. The result, according to the information in the passage, would be the same -- the artificial fat would prevent the body from absorbing the vitamins. Answer choice (B) is not important in evaluating the columnist's argument, because the conclusion could be valid whether the vitamins are in foods that contain the fat or in other foods. (B) is out.

Now take a look at (A):

The columnist's conclusion depends on the fact that the artificial fat prevents the body from absorbing essential vitamins. (A) opens up the possibility that one could compensate for this effect by increasing vitamin intake.

An analogy to smoking is not quite right, because while smoking has adverse effects, it does not have any notable positive effects that would prompt a "medical adviser" to recommend it to a patient (unless I'm missing some significant information on this topic). The artificial fat discussed in this passage, on the other hand, does negate the "negative health effects of fat." Because the artificial fat has this positive effect, it would be incredibly useful to find out whether one can simply consume more vitamins to avoid the negative effect that supports the author's conclusion.

If "increasing one's intake of the vitamins can compensate for the effects of the artificial fat," then the author's conclusion is significantly weakened because people could experience the positive effects of reducing fat intake without missing out on essential vitamins. Because of this, (A) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!

GMATNinja : Request your insights
I opted for Option C. My reasoning for the same is as follows -
C) Whether having an extremely low fat intake for an extended period can endanger a person’s health
- If having an extremely low fat intake endangers a person health then the person is bound to take artificial fat inspite of the fact that it absorbs some vitamins which might be vital for the body (given the doc has already adviced him/ her to cut on fat, artificial fat is his only option);
- If having an extremely low fat intake does not have any negative impact on a person's health then the person may stop consuming it.

Though i understand the reasoning behind option A which is the official answer, i could not get why A is better than C.

To answer this question, we need to evaluate the columnist's position that "people should avoid using a certain artificial fat." The correct answer choice will raise a question that, if answered, would help us to determine the soundness of this position.

(C) would tell us whether extremely low fat intake for an extended period of time endangers health or not. Sure, that's interesting information, but how would it effect the columnist's specific position that people should avoid consuming this particular artificial fat?

If extremely low fat consumption can endanger health, then people could replace some of their fat intake with this artificial fat, while still consuming enough non-artificial fat to avoid the dangers of "extremely low" fat consumption.

In addition, while we know that this artificial fat has "none of the negative health effects of fat," we do not know if it retains positive effects that non-artificial fats can have on health. Outside of the vitamin absorption issue, maybe using this artificial fat as a substitute does not lead to any loss of those positive effects. Maybe it does. We don't have enough information to know.

Lastly, remember WHY the columnist is taking this position: because there's a very specific drawback that the columnist is worried about when it comes to this artificial fat (absorption of vitamins that would otherwise be available for use by the body). The information provided in choice (A) addresses this concern precisely.

(C) isn't the worst of our five choices, but for all of these reasons, it's a worse choice than (A), and that's why we ultimately eliminate it.

I hope this helps!

Hello Team,

I encountered a slightly different version of this question in GMATPrep #5.

Columnist: People should completely avoid using a certain artificial fat that has been touted as an alternative for those whose medical advisers have advised them to reduce their fat intake. The artificial fat can be used in place of ordinary fats in prepared foods and 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.

In evaluating the columnist’s position, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?

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

B) Whether any of the vitamins that the artificial fat absorbs are destroyed by prolonged cooking

C) Whether having an extremely low fat intake for an extended period can endanger a person’s health

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

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

Though I chose the correct answer, during the exam I was confused between option B) and option A). My reasoning was - Option B) relates the absorption of artificial fats to prolonged cooking, but the argument talks about replacement of ordinary fats in prepared foods by artificial fats. Therefore, prolonged cooking is not relevant. GMATNinja, kindly suggest whether my reasoning is correct.