GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 16 Oct 2019, 22:29

### 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

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

# The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar free”, based on

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
Status: He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Studying for the LSAT -- Corruptus in Extremis
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 776
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar free”, based on  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 04 Feb 2019, 12:05
1
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

66% (02:16) correct 34% (02:32) wrong based on 222 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar-free”, based on the replacement of all sugar by artificial sweeteners, should be prohibited by law. Such a prohibition is indicated because many consumers who need to lose weight will interpret the label “sugar-free” as synonymous with “with low in calorie” and harm themselves by building weight-loss diets around foods labeled “sugar-free”. Manufacturers of sugar-free foods are well aware of this tendency on the part of the consumers.

Which one of the following principles, if established, most helps to justify the conclusion in the passage?

(A) Produce labels that are literally incorrect should be prohibited by law, even if reliance on those labels is not likely to cause harm

(B) Product labels that are literally incorrect, but in such an obvious manner that no rational consumer would rely on them, should nevertheless be prohibited by law

(C) Product labels that are literally correct but cannot be interpreted by the average buyer of the product without expert help should be prohibited by law

(D) Product labels that are literally correct but will predictably be misinterpreted by some buyers of the product to their own harm should be prohibited by law

(E) Product labels that are literally correct, but only on one of two equally accurate interpretations, should be prohibited by law if buyers tend to interpret the label in the way that does not match the product’s actual properties

_________________
D-Day: November 18th, 2017

My CR Guide: Here

My RC Guide: Here

Want to be a moderator? We may want you to be one! See how: Here

Originally posted by nightblade354 on 11 Oct 2018, 07:47.
Last edited by Skywalker18 on 04 Feb 2019, 12:05, edited 1 time in total.
formatted
Intern
Joined: 08 Oct 2018
Posts: 39
Location: Russian Federation
GMAT 1: 650 Q35 V44
GPA: 3.8
WE: Consulting (Education)
Re: The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar free”, based on  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Oct 2018, 09:56
The argument is about labels that are literally correct (i.e. don't tell any lies -- there's indeed no sugar in the product).

That eliminates A and B.

C is incorrect because consumers interpret the labels without any help from any experts: "many consumers who need to lose weight will interpret the label “sugar-free” as synonymous with “with low in calorie” and harm themselves"

E is wrong because it talks about "two equally correct interpretations". Well, there's only one correct interpretation of "sugar-free": "this product doesn't contain any sugar".

D is correct because it summarizes the whole thing perfectly: people see the "sugar-free" label, predictably think that "sugar-free = low-calorie", eat the stuff and harm themselves.
Manager
Joined: 26 Sep 2017
Posts: 95
Re: The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar free”, based on  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2018, 01:01
alexkozhura wrote:
The argument is about labels that are literally correct (i.e. don't tell any lies -- there's indeed no sugar in the product).

That eliminates A and B.

C is incorrect because consumers interpret the labels without any help from any experts: "many consumers who need to lose weight will interpret the label “sugar-free” as synonymous with “with low in calorie” and harm themselves"

E is wrong because it talks about "two equally correct interpretations". Well, there's only one correct interpretation of "sugar-free": "this product doesn't contain any sugar".

D is correct because it summarizes the whole thing perfectly: people see the "sugar-free" label, predictably think that "sugar-free = low-calorie", eat the stuff and harm themselves.

Posted from my mobile device

How "some buyer" makes this option correct,it must be many or average i think.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Greatness begins beyond your comfort zone
Joined: 08 Dec 2013
Posts: 2400
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Kelley '20, ISB '19
GPA: 3.2
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar free”, based on  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Feb 2019, 12:04
1
The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar free”, based on the replacement of all sugar by artificial sweeteners, should be prohibited by law. Such a prohibition is indicated because many consumers who need to lose weight will interpret the label “sugar-free” as synonymous with “with low in calorie” and harm themselves by building weight-loss diets around foods labeled “sugar-free”. Manufacturers of sugar-free foods are well aware of this tendency on the part of the consumers.

Which one of the following principles, if established, most helps to justify the conclusion in the passage?

(A) Produce labels that are literally incorrect should be prohibited by law, even if reliance on those labels is not likely to cause harm

(B) Product labels that are literally incorrect, but in such an obvious manner that no rational consumer would rely on them, should nevertheless be prohibited by law

(C) Product labels that are literally correct but cannot be interpreted by the average buyer of the product without expert help should be prohibited by law

(D) Product labels that are literally correct but will predictably be misinterpreted by some buyers of the product to their own harm should be prohibited by law

(E) Product labels that are literally correct, but only on one of two equally accurate interpretations, should be prohibited by law if buyers tend to interpret the label in the way that does not match the product’s actual properties

Powerscore official explanation-

The stimulus proposes a banning of a practice of labeling certain foods with sugar substitutes as “sugar free,” even though their other ingredients may be high-calorie. It reasons that, even though the label of “sugar free” is accurate when applied to these foods, it gives an incorrect connotation that the food as a whole is low-calorie. This incorrect connotation, even though the label itself is accurate, would lead some consumers to harm themselves by “building weight-loss diets around foods labeled 'sugar free.'” Furthermore, the manufacturers even know that people tend to misinterpret the label in this way. For these reasons, the stimulus argues, this practice should be banned.

This question asks for which principle in the answer choices, if taken to be true, would most justify (or strengthen) the conclusion. As such, first identify the conclusion; in this case, it's that the practice described above should be banned. Then, see which answer choice is 1) actually relevant to the situation described above, and 2) would provide support for the stimulus' conclusion.

Answer choices (A) and (B) are incorrect because they talk about product labels that are literally incorrect. But the product labels the stimulus describes are literally correct because they accurately describes the foods in question as sugar free—which they are.

Answer choice (C) is incorrect because even though it solves the defect in (A) and (B), it introduces a new irrelevant dimension—the expert help in interpreting the label. There is nothing in the stimulus that talks about expert help; as such, (C) is not actually relevant.

Answer choice (D) is the correct answer choice because everything mentioned in the choice is 1) relevant and 2) would help the conclusion in the stimulus. First, it mentions labels that are literally correct, which is what the stimulus talks about. Second, it mentions that these labels will be predictably misinterpreted, which the stimulus also talks about in the last sentence (“tendency on part of consumers”). Third, it mentions that the misinterpretation will harm the consumers, which the stimulus not only mentions, but is the reason why the conclusion wants the practice banned. Finally, the answer choice offers a principle—that product labels satisfying the above three conditions should be banned, which the product labels in the stimulus explicitly do. As such, if the principle is accepted, it supports the conclusion that the labels should be banned, and we have our correct answer.

Answer choice (E) is incorrect because it talks about the labels being “literally correct, but only on one of two equally accurate interpretations.” However, the stimulus never says anything about the equal accuracy of the two possible interpretations regarding the food. One interpretation, that it is high-calorie, is 100% correct. The opposite interpretation, that it is low-calorie, is 100% incorrect.
_________________
When everything seems to be going against you, remember that the airplane takes off against the wind, not with it. - Henry Ford
The Moment You Think About Giving Up, Think Of The Reason Why You Held On So Long
Re: The labeling of otherwise high-calorie food as “sugar free”, based on   [#permalink] 04 Feb 2019, 12:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by