chloreton
https://gmatclub.com/forum/one-of-the-effects-of-lead-poisoning-is-an-inflammation-of-the-optic-n-126675.html Can someone explain A using negation and tell me how its weaking?
The flow of the question is : lead poisoning leads to inflammation of optic nerve —-> bright halo around light sources.
Sunflower painting used Naples yellow, which contains lead. Van Gough ingested it. Lead poisoning as a reason is put forth.
Later paintings - Van gough painted bright haloes around sun and stars. So, it’s highly likely (greater probability) that the paint must have been ingested by Van Gough.
The last italics part demonstrates the conclusion.
We cannot change the premise. So, if Van Gough has painted haloes around light sources. Then he must have ingested the paints, leading to lead poisoning.
What if, the conclusion is false. So, no paint ingestion by Van Gough. But, still van gough paints picture with bright haloes. May be he draws what he sees. He is gifted to see what others don’t see. Or may be the vision is distorted post accident or birth defects. Then the conclusion fails. So, the entire narrative of paint ingestion and lead poisoning falls apart.