Understanding the Passage
Health advocate: The government’s current farm-subsidy system primarily rewards large farms for planting monocultures of corn, soybeans, wheat, and rice.- Health Advocate (HA) is the author here.
- The government has a farm-subsidy program
- The program primarily rewards LARGE farms for planing certain crops.
Most of the crops produced in this way go to feed livestock in factory farms, which results in a glut of fatty meats in the marketplace.- MOST crops produced this way (this way likely means monocultures of the four crops) are used as feed for livestock in factory farms.
- This results in an abundance of fatty meats in the marketplace.
- This statement presents a problem with the crops produced with the help of the government’s subsidy program. The problem is the presence of excess fat in the meats of livestock fed on such crops.
A large proportion of such crops that are not used to feed livestock are used to make sugary processed foods.- Out of the remaining crops, a large proportion is used to make sugary processed foods.
- This seems to be another problem related to the crops produced with the help of the government's subsidy program. (I am calling it a problem because I know, from common knowledge, that sugary processed foods are not good for health. Besides, the context so far supports this interpretation. As I read the next statement, I see that the next statement makes this connection clear. Thus, one doesn’t need to have this common knowledge to understand this text.)
These subsidies promote unhealthy diets by making sugary foods and fatty meats artificially cheap.- Using the above two statements, HA makes a claim that the subsidies promote unhealthy diets by
- making sugary foods artificially cheap
- making fatty meats artificially cheap
- How do subsidies make these things artificially cheap?
- By providing subsidies, the government brings down the costs of the producers. Thus, these products become ‘artificially’ cheap. (Against something that is naturally cheap because of being abundant in nature or inexpensive to produce)
Obviously, it is important for the government to avoid these effects.- Avoiding these effects is important for the government. Which effects?
- The last statement talks about the promotion of unhealthy diets because of artificially cheap sugary foods and fatty meats. However, this is one effect, not multiple effects.
- The other effects could be referring to the second and third statements of the passage.
Overall, this passage by HA says that the government’s farm-subsidy program leads to certain outcomes whose avoidance is important to the government.
Understanding the Question Stem
On the basis of the information above, select Recommends for the option that describes the government action that the health advocate most likely recommends,- We’re looking for an option that tells us what government action that HA most likely recommends. (Given our understanding of the passage, one recommendation could be changing the existing farm-subsidy program so that it doesn’t lead to the stated problems)
and select Intended for the option that describes what the health advocate likely hopes will be the result of that action. Make only two selections, one in each column.- We’re looking for an option that is hoped to be the likely result of the action
As I evaluate the options, I will first look for the recommended action and then, based on that, will look for the intended result of that action.
Evaluating the Options
A. Improve the overall quality of livestock feed.- The existing livestock feed is identified as a problem since it leads to fatty meats in the market and thus negatively impacts people's health.
- Thus, it makes sense to recommend improving the overall quality of livestock feed.
- However, improving the quality of livestock can be a GOAL but cannot be an ACTION.
- Thus, this can be the answer to the second part but not the first part.
B. Improve the overall quality of people's diets.- Unhealthy diet is identified as a problem
- Thus, it makes sense to recommend this option.
- However, like A, B can be a GOAL but cannot be an ACTION.
- Between A and B, B is more likely to be the goal since B will include A. In other words, improving the quality of people’s diets will include improving the overall quality of livestock feed since the existing livestock feed leads to fatty meats (low-quality people's diet).
- Besides, HA uses the quality of livestock feed to discuss its impact on people’s diets. Thus, the quality of people’s diets is the main concern of HA.
- I’ll keep this option on hold for “Intended Result.”
C. Reduce the overall financial cost of people's diets.- This option is incorrect.
- HA suggests that the existing diet is cheap and unhealthy and suggests a path that may increase the cost of people’s diets.
D. Prevent the manufacture of sugary processed food.- This option is incorrect.
- While the crops produced with the help of the farm subsidy program help manufacture sugary processed food, we’re not told that these crops are the ONLY raw material for such food.
- Thus, the passage is not about “preventing” the manufacture of sugary processed food. (preventing the manufacture means no manufacturing anymore)
E. Change the farm-subsidy system.- This option seems most suitable to be the recommended action.
- Given the flow of the passage, farm-subsidy leads to two outcomes - fatty meats and sugary processed foods. These things then harm people’s diets.
- Thus, changing the farm-subsidy program will solve the problems discussed in the passage.
- Also, this is an ACTION that the government can take.
- Given our evaluation of the remaining option, we can see that option B fits perfectly as the intended result of option E.
13 Jul 2020, 10:33
35%
(medium)
24%
(02:08)
wrong 
close
