Inference Question
Deconstructing the argument:
- Athletes. inhale pure O2 after exercises to incr. mscle O2 absorption (1st point)
- BUT O2 inhalation process does not impct blood lactate lvls
- Lower lact.. = higher mscle reabsorption
(A) Athletes’ muscular re-absorption of oxygen is not increased when they inhale pure oxygen instead of normal air. - This conclusion is backed up accurately by the content of the passage (inhaled pure O2 does not impact blood lactate lvls which in turn are the driver of muscle reabsorption) -
Right(B) High blood lactate levels cannot be reduced. - This cannot be deduced from the information provided. High blood lactate levels are not mentioned in the argument and it is too much of a stretch to assume this from the information provided. -
Wrong(C) Blood lactate levels are a poor measure of oxygen re-absorption by muscles. - This actually contests the information in the passage, which states that lower blood lactate levels = higher muscular reabsorption. -
Wrong(D) The amount of oxygen reabsorbed by an athlete’s muscles always remains constant. - If an athlete's muscular O2 absorption was always constant (even post exercise), then there would be no need for pure O2 absorption and this passage would be irrelevant. -
Wrong(E) The inhaling of pure oxygen has no legitimate role in athletics. - This is too general of a statement and cannot be inferred from the passage. Even though inhaling pure O2 may enhance the muscular reabsorption of O2, it may have other benefits/roles for athletes. -
Wrong