It is currently 20 Sep 2017, 06:13

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

4 KUDOS received
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1403

Kudos [?]: 423 [4], given: 1

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Feb 2009, 13:21
4
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

51% (01:16) correct 49% (01:50) wrong based on 391 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since ___________.

(A) many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life

(B) it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has

(C) cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods

(D) certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is

(E) for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by broall on 10 Sep 2017, 03:15, edited 1 time in total.
Reformatted question

Kudos [?]: 423 [4], given: 1

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 730

Kudos [?]: 821 [1], given: 99

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Feb 2009, 13:30
1
This post received
KUDOS
tough one ... not able to draw anything quick ... but I go with C ...

Kudos [?]: 821 [1], given: 99

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 17 Dec 2008
Posts: 172

Kudos [?]: 163 [0], given: 0

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Feb 2009, 13:48
Proponents of irradiation => irradiation similar to cooking.
Conclusion: has to say something different about these 2 in terms of quality/nutritional value/etc.

E. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated
with either process individually is compounded

So E works since irradiation => more Vitamins to be lost compared to cooking.

Kudos [?]: 163 [0], given: 0

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 803

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Feb 2009, 19:16
E for me

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 428

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 4

Schools: Kellogg Class of 2012
Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Feb 2009, 09:29
I think both D and E are close. I'll go with D

IMO, E is wrong. The author wants to prove the proponents of irradiation wrong. The proponents of irradiation say that 'in relation to the reduction in vitamin B1 irradiation is no worse than cooking' - which means cooking also reduces B1 percentage.

This is clearly described in D. E wrongly says that irradiating + cooking individually compound the reduction of B1

Cheers,
Unplugged

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 4

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Jul 2007
Posts: 275

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 0

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Feb 2009, 12:53
unplugged wrote:
I think both D and E are close. I'll go with D

IMO, E is wrong. The author wants to prove the proponents of irradiation wrong. The proponents of irradiation say that 'in relation to the reduction in vitamin B1 irradiation is no worse than cooking' - which means cooking also reduces B1 percentage.

This is clearly described in D. E wrongly says that irradiating + cooking individually compound the reduction of B1

Cheers,
Unplugged


doesn't D reiterate what the stimulus says?

"irradiation is no worse than cooking" . This means that the extent of loss of B1 during cooking is more or equal to that during irradiation. This is exactly what D says, isn't it?

I think E is the best option here.

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 Apr 2008
Posts: 487

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 13

Schools: Kellogg, MIT, Michigan, Berkeley, Marshall, Mellon
Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Feb 2009, 13:54
Hi mates,

IMO C

since we have to look for an argument that says that cooking is not worse than irradiation...

OA and Source?

Cheers
_________________

mates, please visit my profile and leave comments
http://gmatclub.com/forum/johnlewis1980-s-profile-feedback-is-more-than-welcome-80538.html

I'm not linked to GMAT questions anymore, so, if you need something, please PM me

I'm already focused on my application package :)

My experience in my second attempt
http://gmatclub.com/forum/p544312#p544312
My experience in my third attempt
http://gmatclub.com/forum/630-q-47-v-28-engineer-non-native-speaker-my-experience-78215.html#p588275

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 13

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 414

Kudos [?]: 454 [0], given: 14

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2009, 02:12
I'll go with C

Kudos [?]: 454 [0], given: 14

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 01 Dec 2008
Posts: 61

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 2

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2009, 02:54
A tough question to crack, thanks for this

IMO D, since this is the only option which weakens the stimulus.

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 2

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 01 Nov 2007
Posts: 103

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 0

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2009, 04:04
Conclusion: this fact (namely that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking) is either beside the point or else misleading.

A. description of proponents is out of scope
B. other efects are out of scope, conclusion of the argument is about one effect - lowering the nutritional value of many foods
C.description of cooking and irradiation in the mentiond respect does not refer to issue of conclusion
D. out of scope
E. correct one - because it shows the case when effect of cooking does nor equal to effect of irradiation.

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 0

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1403

Kudos [?]: 423 [0], given: 1

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2009, 09:40
OA given is E.

Kudos [?]: 423 [0], given: 1

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 26 May 2008
Posts: 428

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 4

Schools: Kellogg Class of 2012
Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2009, 20:07
What is the source?

Do you have OE?

Cheers,
Unplugged

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 4

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 964

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 5

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Feb 2009, 07:29
Isn't this an OG question? This one sounds familiar...

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 5

3 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Oct 2006
Posts: 639

Kudos [?]: 621 [3], given: 6

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 May 2009, 00:58
3
This post received
KUDOS
Nice question. Here is my understanding...

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?
The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers
the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant
percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point
out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking
. However, this fact is either
beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since
_______.
Proponents say: irradiation = cooking
But fact is:-
above statement is
1) beside the point - WHY?
because: much irradiated food is eaten raw - Ok, so if we are consuming RAW, there will be no point to do such comparison. Hence, indeed beside the point.
2) misleading - WHY?
because:
A. many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life
- Not talking why misleading
B. it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
- Not talking why misleading
C. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
- Not talking why misleading, rather going too far and stating some other aspect
D. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is
- Not talking why misleading. Certain kinds of cooking are horrible but how can that extrapolate the comparison.
E. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded
- E misleads people who cook foods after irradiation. E says that people actually get no nutrition (B1) from those food...
_________________

If You're Not Living On The Edge, You're Taking Up Too Much Space

Kudos [?]: 621 [3], given: 6

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 May 2009, 07:46
Thanks Saha for your explanation

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

1 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 250

Kudos [?]: 184 [1], given: 1

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 May 2009, 04:37
1
This post received
KUDOS
IMO E

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?
The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers
the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant
percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point
out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this fact is either
beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since
_______.
A. many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s
having a longer shelf life --> irrelevant
B. it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect
that irradiation has --> out of scope
C. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas
irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods --> irrelevant to the respect of reducing vitamin B1 of each individual process
D. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than
carefully controlled irradiation is --> weaken the counter-argument of proponent of irradiation
E. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated
with either process individually is compounded -->best choice. The intention of the proponent is that irradiation reduces no more Vitamin B1 than cooking does, or they cause a similar outcome of reducing Vit B1. So, if we want to show that the proponents are misleading, we must show that they may observe a misleading fact to reach to unfair conclusion. The fact that the reduction of vitamin B1 of a food both irradiated and cooked is similar in each process to the other does not mean that the 2 reduce the same amount of Vitamin B1 if taken individually, but means that such reduction is of a mixed combination from irradiation to cooking. Therefore, because it is of a combination from the two processes, we must take each process individually to reach to the most exact outcome: whether irradiation individually causes higher reduction of vitamin B1 than cooking does

Kudos [?]: 184 [1], given: 1

10 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Feb 2006
Posts: 96

Kudos [?]: 128 [10], given: 0

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Aug 2009, 15:04
10
This post received
KUDOS
90
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since _______.

(A) many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from food’s having a longer shelf life

(B) it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has

(C) cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods

(D) certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is

(E) for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

Kudos [?]: 128 [10], given: 0

Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 31

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 65

Location: India
Schools: ISB '17 (A), IIMA (A)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Aug 2009, 01:42
IMO D

Not A becuase the paragraph is about irradiation and not proponents.

Not B because the last statement is trying to underline the fact that irradiation doesn't really matter whereas, B brings forth more negative aspects of irradiation.

Not C - Same as above but in this case, C mentions a positive fact about irradiation

D because this point states the irradiation is the lesser of two evils.

Not E bacause it's not about both irrdiation and cooking together but about either irradiation or cooking

Hope I'm not wrong :)

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 65

9 KUDOS received
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 815

Kudos [?]: 358 [9], given: 106

WE 1: 7years (Financial Services - Consultant, BA)
Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Aug 2009, 03:53
9
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
here there is a need to prove that argument "irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking" is misleading.

3 foods: (there could be more but that would be out of scope)

radiated + not cooked(raw) - covered in "this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw"
only cooked - (not relevant I think in this context, as effect of radiation can't be estimated or compared.
radiated + cooking - This is the one we need to look into as in option E.
_________________

Consider kudos for the good post ... :beer
My debrief : http://gmatclub.com/forum/journey-670-to-720-q50-v36-long-85083.html

Kudos [?]: 358 [9], given: 106

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Jun 2009
Posts: 48

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Aug 2009, 07:45
IMO C

It completes the argument because it shows why the statement is misleading. Cooking and irradiation are separate processes that are not used for the same purpose.

Any OA for this?

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe   [#permalink] 24 Aug 2009, 07:45

Go to page    1   2   3   4   5   6    Next  [ 113 posts ] 

    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
9 Recent dental research shows that bacteria around the gum vmdce129907 10 09 May 2017, 03:07
2 Bernand: For which language, and thus which frequency bigtreezl 11 27 Dec 2016, 23:04
5 Bacteria from food can survive for several days on the surface of plas Gmat1008 5 15 Feb 2017, 10:32
3 EXPERTS_POSTS_IN_THIS_TOPIC Proponent: Irradiation of food by gamma rays would keep it from mkrishnabdrr 2 11 Aug 2017, 20:46
13 Activist: Food producers irradiate food in order to prolong its shelf BrainLab 7 24 Apr 2017, 06:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. Howe

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.