Many people suffer an allergic reaction to sulfites, including those

Question

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several winemakers producing wine to which no sulfites are added, those who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink these wines without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Sulfites occur naturally in most wine.

B. The sulfites that can produce an allergic reaction are also commonly found in beverages other than wine.

C. Wines without added sulfites tend to be at least moderately expensive.

D. Apart from sulfites, there are other substances commonly present in wine that can trigger allergic reactions.

E. Wine without added sulfites sometimes becomes undrinkable even before the wine is sold to consumers

Show Spoiler

The answer is A, I thought D but after reviewing nothing fits to this Q for me...
Why is it A? Since it says, some winemakers produce wine without sulfites, so people with allergy can choose to drink this wine even sulfties contain in most wine...How does this weaken??

Note: With the similar stimulus, there is a different question (assumption question) from OG -- that is discussed in:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/many-people-s ... 25973.html

Show Answer

Official Answer

A

sonigmat · Accepted Answer

I agree with 'A'.

In fact we can use POE tool here.

Option B: Nothing to do with wine. It is related to beverages
option c:Expensive is notmatter here. Health is the matter
Option D:Though it is very close and weaken the argument but not more than A. Again this is basesd on hypothesis
Option E:Not at all as it is discussing some other thing rather than health

Option: A: It clearly says that, even wine maker produce wine without sulphaites, but sulphiates are naturally present in wine. So Claim of wine makers are not true. By this reason resonl only Option D is out as option D give the reasoning about items other that sulphiates but option A givies clear reason of sulphaiates.

VeritasPrepBrian · Answer

Yeah, good question - one things that's super important on CR is exact precision in language, especially in the conclusion. Check out this phrase from the conclusion:

...can drink  these  wines...

Your hypothetical allows for one wine that they could drink without a reaction to sulfates, but "these wines" is more general than that - "these" refers to "wines without added sulfates" and seems to encompass all wines without added sulfates, so your hypothetical doesn't quite attack that specific conclusion (if it were "can drink some wines" you have a good case).

The other portion of precision-in-language that I see as so critical here is the difference between "added sulfites" in all the premises and "an allergic reaction to sulfites" (meaning just "sulfites," not "added sulfites") in the conclusion. One thing we love to work with students on is noting that difference if there's an adjective or modifier in the premise but not in the conclusion, or vice versa - if you know that the premises and conclusion are about slightly different things, then that's almost always what the answer is about. Here I'm looking 100% for "the premises are all about added sulfates and the conclusion is just about sulfates, so show me an answer for already-existing sulfates and that attacks that specific gap." (A) nails it.

Note that with (E) you also miss the point of the conclusion, which is only about avoiding the reaction to sulfates. I'd look at (E) two ways to eliminate it:

1) It's undrinkable before it's sold, so it probably never gets sold, or

2) It's undrinkable but sulfate-sufferers buy it anyway and die of some horrific spoiled wine disease...but they DID NOT suffer an allergic reaction, and that's the only thing the conclusion cares about.

vijayvenky · Answer

Nice explanation, My two cents..

The conclusion of the stimulus mentions "risking an allergic reaction to sulfites" , so the other substances that can cause the allergies fall outside the scope of this argument.

Tricky one...

onedayill · Answer

This means sulfites are not naturally present in wine.

Its tough between A & E.
On D Day, I Must have chosen E only.

gmatJP · Answer

sonigmat, thanks for the explanation..

With your explanation I can see why A, but such tricky question on a test day is very taugh to answer plus having time limit.. ;(

seekmba · Answer

The conclusion is about allergic reaction to sulfites...any option talking about things other than sulfite allergic reaction is irrelevant.

A says that even if winemakers do not sulfite, sulfites are naturally present in wines and thus weakens.

jogorhu · Answer

Mod can you merge this topic, with the other thread that addresses why E is correct.

OA is E

E stands because we are concerned with and only with Sulfites, this renders D out of scope.

Tricky chappy isn't it...

rrsnathan · Answer

I am bit confused between A and E.

a)Sulfites occur naturally in most wine.
or
d)Apart from sulfites, there are other substances commonly present in wine that can trigger allergic reactions.

Can anyone give a good explanation for it.

Thanks in Advance,
Rrsnathan.

plumber250 · Answer

Hi - Agree this is a tricky one.

A is correct.

Here is the issue with D....

those who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites

Is quoted in the question. So you need a solution that talks directly about people allergic to sulfides.

D talks about allergies in general so is not correct....

James

Nick90 · Answer

I don't think this is a good question, In A ............. Most can mean 51% to 99% of wines, there can be this 1% of wines, which these wine makers are selling.

But, most weakens question type suggest A is best among all .

Shiv2016 · Answer

Allergic to sulfites ONLY and this is the reason D is incorrect. In fact D is a trap.

A is the correct answer. If sulfites occur naturally in MOST (yes it can be 51% or 99%) but this is best answer that weakens the conclusion.

TumbleDore · Answer

Shouldn't the answer to this question be 'E'?

If there are a total of 100 kinds of wine, and 99 kinds of wine have sulfites naturally in them there is still one type of wine people allergic to sulfite can drink, hence, this does not weaken the author's conclusion. Whereas in option E, if wine becomes without sulfite becomes undrinkable by the time it is sold, allergic people have no wine they can drink, thus rendering the argument's conclusion incorrect.

Got this as the first question in a GMATPrep CAT and got it wrong, I still can't wrap my head around why option E is wrong.

TumbleDore · Answer

This clears it up, thanks so much! Would you say that this is a medium level question in terms of difficulty?

SonalSinha803 · Answer

A. Sulfites occur naturally in most wine.

D. Apart from sulfites, there are other substances commonly present in wine that can trigger allergic reactions

B. The sulfites that can produce an allergic reaction are also commonly found in beverages other than wine. - out of context

C. Wines without added sulfites tend to be at least moderately expensive. - irrelevant.

D. Apart from sulfites, there are other substances commonly present in wine that can trigger allergic reactions. - out of context. We are not discussing about other substances. In the argument, the major focus is on sulphites. Everytime the author has included sulphites. So, we can strike this one off.

E. Wine without added sulfites sometimes becomes undrinkable even before the wine is sold to consumers - irrelevant.

Thus, A stands out.

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

lary301254M7 · Answer

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Sulfites occur naturally in most wine.

B. The sulfites that can produce an allergic reaction are also commonly found in  beverages other than wine .
We do not care about other beverages

C. Wines without added sulfites tend to be at least moderately expensive.
price is not the issue, irrelevant

D. Apart from sulfites, there are other substances commonly present in wine that can trigger allergic reactions.
we only care about sulfites allergic reaction

E. Wine without added sulfites sometimes becomes undrinkable even before the wine is sold to consumers
irrelevant, we are focusing on sulfite allergic reaction

A is correct

adkikani · Answer

VeritasKarishma   generis   DavidTutorexamPAL

I too selected D in place of A in my mocks. Is my below reasoning correct?

No supfites added to wines -> wines are safe to drink

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

The conclusion talks about PEOPLE who are already allergic to sulfites can drink wine which have no sulfites added to them.
But what if NATURALLY the sulfite is present in wine? Then winemakers adding or not adding sulfites will make no difference to the unsafe consumption of wine. 
Is D totally irrelevant to argument? We just do not care about substances (that cause allergy) other than sulfites in my conclusion.

generis · Answer

adkikani , I am not sure what you are asking. I think you are asking whether your reasoning about A is correct and whether D is irrelevant. Yes, and yes. The conclusion is about one thing only: an allergic reaction to sulfites . Conclusion: those who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink these wines added sulfites] without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites . If sulfites are in all wines, then sulfites are also in "these" wines (no added sulfites). The conclusion is wrong: people with sulfite allergies DO risk an allergic reaction when they drink wine without added sulfites. The wine has sulfites in it already. I can't tell whether these are questions or statements. The conclusion is not about allergic reaction generally. The conclusion is about allergic reaction to sulfites. Other substances do not produce a sulfite reaction. Yes, D is irrelevant to the conclusion. Other substances do not create an allergic reaction to sulfites . Hope that helps.

KarishmaB · Answer

Yes, as Brian pointed out above, precision-in-language is critical.

Premises talk about added sulfites in wine. The conclusion talks about allergic reaction to sulfites. So we care about 'sulfites' only, added or otherwise.

Think of a debate in which the topic is "Allergic Reaction to Sulfites in Wine". If someone makes a point about other substances in wine that can trigger allergic reactions, it is off topic, right? So (D) is irrelevant to the argument.

Option (A) shows that wines which have no added sulfite may still cause allergic reactions to sulfite because it is naturally occurring in most wines. This makes our wines 'no added sulfite' wines also unfit for people with sulfite allergies.

Hence option (A) is correct.

NiravUmaretiya · Answer

D vs A

D: talks about reactions (in general), the passage is talking about a specific reaction caused by sulfites. For widening the scope of discussion, D is out.

A: Expressly says that sulfites occur naturally in some vines. If a person with sulfites allergy drinks a vine without  added   sulfites, chances are he/she will still consume sulfites. So one with sulfite allergy should avoid vine altogether.

B, C, E are well explained in other replies in this thread.

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to sulfites, including those

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to sulfites, including those

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards