Consumer advocate: In our nation, food packages must list the number

Consumer advocate: In our nation, food packages must list the number of calories per food serving. But most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small and should be updated. The serving sizes were set decades ago, when our nation's people typically ate smaller portions than they do today, and, as a result, people eating typical portions today consume more calories than the package labeling appears to indicate that they will. It is time package labeling reflected these changes.

Main point- It is time package labeling reflected these changes.

Which of the following is the main point of the consumer advocate's argument?

A. The number of calories per serving listed on most food packages in the consumer advocate's nation is misleadingly small.- incorrect, the number of calories per serving is not misleadingly small but most of the serving sizes used are and should be updated.

B. Most serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation should be increased to reflect today's typical portion sizes.- Correct

C. People eating typical portions today often consume far more calories than the number of calories per serving listed on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation.- incorrect, the argument states the change in serving portions in Advocate's nation's people from decades ago vs now

D. The serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation were set when people ate smaller portions on average than they do today.- incorrect, though this is a valid statement but it is not the main point

E. The use of misleadingly small serving sizes on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation probably leads many people to consume more calories than they otherwise would.- incorrect,

Answer B

Official Explanation

Argument Construction

Of the answer choices given, which one most accurately states the consumer advocate's main point, that is, the advocate's main conclusion?

We are told that nutritional information on food packages currently is outdated and misleading. That is, the serving sizes that these packages show tend to understate the calories people will consume because people now typically consume greater amounts than people did when the serving sizes were set decades ago.

The consumer advocate's main conclusion is to recommend that serving sizes be updated to reflect the changes in food-consumption trends.

A. The fact that serving sizes are misleadingly small is a premise of the argument rather than its conclusion.

B. Correct. This accurately expresses the consumer advocate's main conclusion.

C. The fact that people consume more calories per serving than the amount indicated on the packaging is a premise of the argument rather than its conclusion.

D. The fact that serving sizes were set during a time when people consumed smaller portions is a premise of the argument rather than its conclusion.

E. The fact that people consume more calories than they believe they consume because of misleading packaging is a premise of the argument rather than its conclusion.

The correct answer is B.

In short we need to identify the conclusion of the argument
Conclusion - Serving sizes on the packages must be updated to reflect the typical portions of food consumed by people.

A. The number of calories per serving listed on most food packages in the consumer advocate's nation is misleadingly small.
- Wrong
The number of calories is not misleadingly small.
The incorrect sizes causes the number of calories to be small. Hence, the author focuses on portions

B. Most serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation should be increased to reflect today's typical portion sizes.
-Correct

C. People eating typical portions today often consume far more calories than the number of calories per serving listed on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation.
-Wrong
We can map the argument as:
Portions are small --> people typically consume far more calories --> Hence, we need to update the portion sizes

D. The serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation were set when people ate smaller portions on average than they do today.
-Wrong
This is an evidence used to support the final conclusion

E. The use of misleadingly small serving sizes on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation probably leads many people to consume more calories than they otherwise would.
- Wrong
The argument and reason for elimination is similar to choice C

Would you please tell me how to explain this to a hypothetical 10-year-old ?
what is wrong with (E)? RonPurewal

Consumer advocate: In our nation, food packages must list the number of calories per food serving. - The author here is a consumer advocate. She says that food packages need to mention the number of calories per food serving.

But most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small and should be updated. - ‘But’ indicates some form of contrast. The author says that even though the requirement is there, the requirement doesn’t seem to be helpful since most of the serving sizes are misleadingly small. The author also recommends that the serving sizes should be updated (increased).

The serving sizes were set decades ago, when our nation’s people typically ate smaller portions than they do today, - This statement supports the previous statement. Why are most serving sizes small and should be updated? The reason is that people now eat larger portions today than when these serving sizes were set.

and, as a result, people eating typical portions today consume more calories than the package labeling appears to indicate that they will. - This statement presents a result of the previous statement (i.e. the part before ‘and’). Since the portions have increased in size, people eating typical portions today will consume more calories than the package labeling indicates that they will consume (the package labeling continues to calculate calories on the basis of the portion size set decades ago).

It is time package labeling reflected these changes - The author stresses that her recommendation should be implemented now. She says that the time has come for the labeling to reflect these changes – larger serving sizes and corresponding greater number of calories per serving.

Gist:
The author first presents a problem with the existing scenario and then makes a suggestion to rectify it. She then supports her suggestion in the third line. In the fourth statement, the author emphasizes that the time to follow her suggestion has come.


The author presents a problem with the existing scenario and makes a suggestion to correct the problem. However, she doesn’t get into the pros and cons of implementing her suggestion. For example: coming up with a new standard serving size could involve extensive research and may be expensive. Besides, consumers may already be aware that the package labeling mentions calories for a smaller portion than they typically consume and thus estimate their calorie-intake accordingly. In such a case too, the existing labeling would work fine.


The question asks us to find the main point of the argument. What is the argument trying to get at? As we discussed, the argument is trying to recommend updating the serving sizes in the package labeling. The author supports this recommendation in the third sentence. The fourth statement reiterates the recommendation.



A. The number of calories per serving listed on most food packages in the consumer advocate's nation is misleadingly small.
Incorrect. The argument says that most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small. If the serving sizes are misleadingly small, we can reasonably agree that the number of calories per serving will also be small. However, the argument doesn’t go in this direction (from ‘serving size’ to ‘calories per serving’). Rather, the argument, right after saying that the serving sizes are small, goes on to recommend updating the serving sizes. Thus, while this option can be inferred from the given passage, it is not the main point of the argument.

B. Most serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation should be increased to reflect today's typical portion sizes.
Correct. This is in line with our understanding of the argument.

C. People eating typical portions today often consume far more calories than the number of calories per serving listed on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation.
Incorrect. Even though this is mentioned in the third statement of the argument, the author brings up this point to support her recommendation. Thus, while this option is an inference, it is not the main point of the argument.

D. The serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation were set when people ate smaller portions on average than they do today.
Incorrect. Like option C, this option too is an inference but not the main point since the author uses this information to argue in favor of her recommendation. The author is not arguing for this point; the author is using this point to argue for her recommendation. Thus, the recommendation and not this option is the main point.

E. The use of misleadingly small serving sizes on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation probably leads many people to consume more calories than they otherwise would.
Incorrect. The problem with this option is that the author neither explicitly talks about it nor implicitly indicates toward it. The author just says that people currently consume more calories than the packaging indicates. Nowhere does the author say or indicate that people will start eating fewer calories once the labeling reflects the currently typical portion. The author never gets into how people react to the caloric details on food packages.


This question and the answer choices help clearly understand the difference between an ‘inference’ question and a ‘main point’ question.

SC Notes:
This question, like many other CR questions, has quite a few sentences containing comparisons. You can pay attention to the way comparisons are phrased here so that you can understand the correct ways of phrasing a comparison sentence.

If you have any doubts regarding any part of this solution, please feel free to ask.

Got confused between inference and main conclusion in this one. So, C and D are inferences, but B is the main conclusion. Important point to remember.

Consumer advocate: In our nation, food packages must list the number of calories per food serving. But most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small and should be updated. The serving sizes were set decades ago, when our nation's people typically ate smaller portions than they do today, and, as a result, people eating typical portions today consume more calories than the package labeling appears to indicate that they will. It is time package labeling reflected these changes.

Question about main point is to ask about the main conclusion of the argument. In this case, consumer advocate mentioned the conclusion twice. First is after "however", the second time is at the end of the argument. Basically, he/she want to update the package label to reflect the change in serving size

Which of the following is the main point of the consumer advocate's argument?

A. The number of calories per serving listed on most food packages in the consumer advocate's nation is misleadingly small. This information is to provide support for the main conclusion only

B. Most serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation should be increased to reflect today's typical portion sizes. Yes, this is what the conclusion is about

C. People eating typical portions today often consume far more calories than the number of calories per serving listed on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation. The argument talking about normal people eating more, not "far more"

D. The serving sizes used on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation were set when people ate smaller portions on average than they do today. This fact is to support the main conclusion. It by itself is not the conclusion

E. The use of misleadingly small serving sizes on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation probably leads many people to consume more calories than they otherwise would. No info mentioning about the usage of small serving size leads consumer to eat more than what they would


CR36441.01

Consumer Advocate argument:
- Food packages are required to list calories.
- However, calories on packages are misleading because of the small serving sizes.
- This results in people eating more because they believe that they're eating less calories.

What is the main point of the argument?

A) The number of calories on food packages is misleadingly small, but it's not the main point of the argument. The main point is that serving size should be updated.

B) Correct. Serving size should be updated to reflect today's typical portion sizes.

C) This is not the main point. This is a result of misleading food packages, but it's a premise -- not a conclusion.

D) Similar to B -- this is supporting information.

E) This is true, but it's not the main point of the argument.

Only B is actually an action to do something. All the other choices, while true, only present supporting information. Answer is B.

I've read the answers submitted here, however i still fail to understand why is E incorrect ?

Please read the discussion above. Almost every post there answers your question.

All other statements but B are stating the premises of the paragraph. Therefore Answer is B

I have few doubts about the inference . GMATIntensive, ChiranjeevSingh

A: Can we infer A. Here is how i am thinking about A that we cannot infer A. The passage says that most serving sizes used are misleadingly small. However A says that number of calories per serving sizes in most food packagesis misleadingly small. We do not know that serving size is used in most food packages. There is a difference when they say that most serving sizes used is small vs serving sizes used in most food packages.

C: People eating typical portions today often consume far more calories than the number of calories per serving listed on food packages in the consumer advocate's nation.
Assuming "often" to be same as "frequently" Can we reasonably infer that people eating frequently consume more far more calories than listed. What if the people already knows about small serving size and accordingly take their serving portion.

Let me know whether B and C can be inferred or not. If yes, where I am going wrong.

The correct answer to a “what is the author’s main point” question will describe exactly Why the author even decided to write this argument (or speak it).

Why did the author bother mentioning the premises? What was the motivation?


What makes this question trickier then most is that each answer describes something that is essentially discussed in the passage.

If not for the last sentence of the passage, it would seem that some of the other answer choices might correctly describe the author’s main point.

But it is this call to action in the last sentence that reveals the author’s intent and drives WHY the author decided to write this argument.

“It is time packaging changes reflected these changes.”

Also, in the middle of the passage:

“Most of the servings used are misleading small and SHOULD BE updated.”

The whole reason the author mentions the facts described in answer choices A, C, and D is to make this overall call to action: this is what should be changed.

B best describes the reason why the author wrote the passage. In other words, answer B best describes the main point of the author.

Posted from my mobile device

KarishmaB Can you help me out with this question? Thank you!

- Food packages must list the number of calories per food serving.
- Most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small and should be updated.
- People eat larger portions today and consume more calories than the package labeling appears to indicate that they will.

Conclusion: It is time package labeling reflected these changes.

The main point of the argument is the reason the author wrote the argument. It is the thing that he wants to say to you. Here, the author wants to say that we should update serving sizes on food packages so that they reflect the reality today. The main point is that the package labels should be updated.
This is what option (B) says.
Even if some of the other options are mentioned in the argument, they are not the main point (conclusion) of the argument.

Answer (B)

Hi KarishmaB! Thank you for getting back to me, but let me ask you a question - why A is wrong? Tks!

The advocate does not say that "number of calories per serving" listed in incorrect. He says that "amount of serving" is not updated.

So the package assumes per serving size to be say 100 gms and lists "300 calories per serving". For 100 gms, the calorie count is correct. It is not misleadingly small.
The problem is that one "serving" is not 100 gms today. It is 250 gms say. So the size of the serving needs to be updated.

That is why (A) is incorrect and (B) is correct.