Organic chemist: Streptomycin and oxytetracycline are two anti-bacterial agents used in commercial farming
(premise), and may pose a serious public health risk down the line
(Chemist's conclusion). These anti-bacterial agents are liberally applied to crops grown for animal feed
(cause) and, as a result, it is common to find livestock with a build up of the chemicals in their bodies
(effect of applying antibacterial agents to crops). In fact, levels of the antibiotics in livestock have been found to be up to 100 times what is needed to break down the natural bacterial eco-system of the animal
(cause), an outcome that leads to poor health outcomes for the animal and increases the risk of anti-biotic resistant bacterial strains evolving within them
(effect of antibiotics into animals).
Here chemist mentions the disadvantage of usage of antibiotics (Streptomycin and oxytetracycline) into commercial farming by mentioning the causal reasoning with respect to plants and animals.A disease specialist intends to use the chemist’s observations to argue that vancomycin, a compound that breaks down much faster than streptomycin and oxytetracycline, should replace them in the production of livestock feed, reducing the build-up of anti-biotic agents in livestock.
Disease specialist extends the chemists reasoning by stating to replace of Streptomycin and oxytetracycline with another antibiotic, vancomycin (that breakdown quicker than other two antibiotics) in production of livestock feed so that it will reduce building up of antibiotic in livestock.Select the information that, if true, would most strengthen the disease specialists’ position, and that which, if true would most weaken it. Make only two selections, one in each column. -
We need to evaluate disease specialist's argument.1) A high number of crop failures are attributed to bacterial infections each year. -
Crop failure because of bacterial infections is not relevant to the disease specialist's argument. Out of scope.2) Streptomycin and oxytetracycline are fairly cheap to produce. -
Cost of these two antibiotics does neither strengthen nor weaken the disease specialist's argument.3) Streptomycin and oxytetracycline runoff can damage water bodies. -
Again as per 1) & 2) this option is also neither weakens nor reinforces the reasoning of disease specialist. So wrong.4) Vancomycin is effective against a narrower range of bacteria than streptomycin and oxytetracycline are. -
If vancomycin is effective for lesser no. of bacteria, then there is no meaning of usage of vancomycin than streptomycin and oxytetracycline as it fails to protect plants and livestock effectively. This option strongly weakens the disease specialist's argument regarding usage of vancomycin. 5) Streptomycin and oxytetracycline present in livestock further accumulate in humans who consume animal products.-
This option states further risk to humans who consume livestock product containing Streptomycin and oxytetracycline. Hence it supports disease specialist's argument regarding usage of vancomycin instead of other two. So, 4) weakener and 5) strengthener.