Maize contains the vitamin niacin, but not in a form the

I think it's between (B) and (C)

(C)

Americans subsisted on Maize, still Pellagra was not common.
Europeans subsisted on Maize, but Pellagra was common.

Stem also says..
Maize contains the vitamin niacin, but not in a form the body can absorb.

Definitely there was something different in the way they were eating/preparing Maize.

(C) corectly fills this gap.

I think (C) brings in the difference between the two countries.
This difference probably explains the end result.

I go with C.

The paradox is that in the Americas maize is a primary staple and although the niacin is supposedly not absorbed by the body they do not develop Pellagra which results from a deficiency of niacin. When maize is introduced to Europe as a primary staple they do develop Pellagra.

So to resolve the paradox we must figure a way in which people in the Americas are somehow getting a sufficient amount of niacin.

Answer C solves this by stating that the way maize is cooked in the Americas allows the niacin to be usefull.

C.

The only difference btwn Americas and Europe must be the way maize is prepared for consumption. C clearly states this.

A. Once introduced into southern Europe, maize became popular with landowners
because of its high yields relative to other cereal crops. - Conclusion has to do with the contrast between Europe and the Americas - Eliminated
B. Maize grown in the Americas contained more niacin than maize grown in Europe
did. - Conclusion has to do with niacin absorption difference - Eliminated
C. Traditional ways of preparing maize in the Americas convert maize's niacin into a
nutritionally useful form. - One of the logical reasons for the difference in niacin absorption - Keep
D. In southern Europe many of the people who consumed maize also ate niacin-rich
foods. - Contradictory with conclusion - Eliminated
E. Before the discovery of pellagra's link with niacin, it was widely believed that the
disease was an infection that could be transmitted from person to person. - Irrelevant to conclusion, conclusion is not about how pellagra is transmitted - Eliminated

Given:Maize contains vitamin niacin, whose deficiency results in Pellagra. Even after taking the dietary supplements, Europeans developed this disease and Americans not. The best way to explain this discrepancy is introduce information that shows inability of Europeans food to absorb Maize.

A. Once introduced into southern Europe, maize became popular with landowners
because of its high yields relative to other cereal crops.[But this has no clue to the discrepancy – eliminate it]

B. Maize grown in the Americas contained more niacin than maize grown in Europe
did.[But this won’t explain disease discrepancy – eliminate it]

C. Traditional ways of preparing maize in the Americas convert maize's niacin into a
nutritionally useful form. [Hold it]

D. In southern Europe many of the people who consumed maize also ate niacin-rich
foods.[If this were true, Europeans wouldn't have issue – eliminate it]

E. Before the discovery of pellagra's link with niacin, it was widely believed that the
disease was an infection that could be transmitted from person to person.[Has no information that explains discrepancy – eliminate it]

Answer: C

Maize contains the vitamin niacin, but not in a form the body can absorb.Pellagra is a disease that results from niacin deficiency.When maize was introduced into southern Europe from the Americas in the eighteenth century, it quickly became a dietary
staple, and many Europeans who came to subsist primarily on maize developed pellagra.Pellagra was virtually unknown at that time in the Americas, however, even among people who subsisted primarily on maize. Which of the following, if true, best resolves the paradox in thea argument above ?

A. Once introduced into southern Europe, maize became popular with landowners because of its high yields relative to other cereal crops.

B.Maize grown in the Americas contained more niacin than maize grown in Europe did.

C.Traditional ways of preparing maize in the Americas convert maize’s niacin into a nutritionally useful form.

D.In southern Europe many of the people who consumed maize also ate niacin-rich foods.

E.Before the discovery of pellagra’s link with niacin, it was widely believed that the disease was an infection that could be transmitted from person to person.

Only C resolve the paradox. Rest are irrelevant.

It is much easier to analyze the paradox once you consider each sentence of the argument one-by-one.

"Maize contains the vitamin niacin, but not in a form the body can absorb."
If you map this out... Maize --> Niacin (that cannot be absorbed by humans)

"Pellagra is a disease that results from niacin deficiency."
Pellagra --> Not enough Niacin in the body
If you think about this sentence in the context of the preceding sentence, you can think probably come to the conclusion that people who eat Maize may not prevent the onset of Pellagra because Niacin cannot be absorbed by the human body.

"When maize was introduced into southern Europe from the Americas in the eighteenth century, it quickly became a dietary staple, and many Europeans who came to subsist primarily on maize developed Pellagra."
This sentence tells us that many Southern Europeans started to eat maize widely from the 18th century, and started to develop Pellagra! This means that even though Southern Europeans were ingesting more Niacin, it did nothing to prevent Pellagra.

"Pellagra was virtually unknown at that time in the Americas, however, even among people who subsisted primarily on maize."
This sentence contains our paradox. Americans have been eating maize all the time but did not know about Pellagra (i.e., they did not develop the disease). This leads us to wonder what possibly the Americans did with their maize so that they were able to absorb more Niacin. Once we figure this out, we can see how they were able to prevent contracting Pellagra.


Now, lets look at the answer choices:

A. Once introduced into southern Europe, maize became popular with landowners because of its high yields relative to other cereal crops.
This helps explain why maize became popular but really does not explain how Americans were able to not develop Pellagra even though they consumed maize for quite some time.

B. Maize grown in the Americas contained more niacin than maize grown in Europe did.
One may think how this can help resolve the paradox (i.e., more niacin --> more chances to prevent Pellagra). However, B cannot be the answer because it does nothing to show how the relationship set up in the first sentence of the argument (i.e., the niacin in maize cannot be absorbed by humans) is not true for the Americans.

C. Traditional ways of preparing maize in the Americas convert maize’s niacin into a nutritionally useful form.
This definitely helps explain how Americans are able to absorb niacin unlike the Southern Europeans. Traditional maize is converted into a form where niacin is useful for the body.

D. In southern Europe many of the people who consumed maize also ate niacin-rich foods.
This answer choice goes against what the argument states. If Southern Europeans ate other niacin-rich foods, they should have been able to prevent some developments of Pellagra.

E. Before the discovery of pellagra’s link with niacin, it was widely believed that the disease was an infection that could be transmitted from person to person.
This answer choice is irrelevant to assessing the argument (how does Pellagra transferring from one person to person help explain why Americans did not develop Pellagra?).

Please let me know if you need additional help
Cheers

A. Once introduced into southern Europe, maize became popular with landowners
because of its high yields relative to other cereal crops.popularity not result in consumption of Maize(incorrect)

B. Maize grown in the Americas contained more niacin than maize grown in Europe
did.irrelevant comparison(incorrect)

C. Traditional ways of preparing maize in the Americas convert maize's niacin into a
nutritionally useful form.right answer

D. In southern Europe many of the people who consumed maize also ate niacin-rich
foods.only say about europe(incorrect)

E. Before the discovery of pellagra's link with niacin, it was widely believed that the
disease was an infection that could be transmitted from person to person.irrelevant(incorrect)

Hello!
We like to call these questions "resolve the paradox" questions.
Typically the stimulus will discuss an apparent paradox (a scenario where the X causes / leads to the converse of what SHOULD have happened). You are expected to pick an option that explains how this inconsistency could have happened.

In this questions the inconsistency is that In Europe when Maize became staple - Pellagra was caused.
But in Americas, in which Maize is also a staple - pellagra is unknown (no cases of pellagra).

We also know that Maize doesn't have niacin in a form that the body can absorb.
The correct answer will explain why pellagra wasn't caused in Americas while it was caused in Europe.

Let's look at the options:

A. Talks about why Maize became popular in Europe - doesn't help explain the inconsistency. - ELIMINATE
B. We know that niacin in Maize is in a form that cannot be absorbed by the body, that there is more niacin has no relevance. - ELIMINATE
C. YES - this could explain why americas could have avoided niacin deficiency.
D. This doesn't help - if Europeans ate niacin rich food apart from Maize - why then did they get pellagra? ELIMINATE
E. Early BELIEF of what caused pellagra has no bearing on why the inconsistency exists - ELIMINATE


Hope that helps!

Ajeeth Peo
Verbal Trainer - CrackVerbal

Premise 1 : Maize contains the vitamin niacin, but not in a form the body can absorb. Pellagra is a disease that results from niacin deficiency
Premise 2 : For Europeans , Pellagra became a dietary staple, and many Europeans who came to subsist primarily on maize developed pellagra.
Premise 3 : Pellagra was virtually unknown at that time in the Americas, however, even among people who subsisted primarily on maize.


C. Traditional ways of preparing maize in the Americas convert maize’s niacin into a nutritionally useful form.
For me C is too generic i.e it is converted to nutritionally useful form.There are many ways a particular thing can be called nutritional such as high protien,low cholestrol etc. Assuming that nutritional means it helps in absorbing vitamin is not

E. Before the discovery of pellagra’s link with niacin, it was widely believed that the disease was an infection that could be transmitted from person to person
This in fact gives an alternative that the disease was present but in fact it was not considered to be related to pellagraa

Can somebody please give me any thoughts on this ?

Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!

Could someone pease explain the question? I did not understand 'the contrasting incidence of Pellagra' part.

Thanks in advance!

The answer choices can be narrowed down to B and C. On further thought, B is incorrect. Even if Maize grown in Americas contained more niacin, was it enough to prevent pellagra if consumed? Clearly, C is the correct answer.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.