Akela
Prolonged exposure to sulfur fumes permanently damages one's sense of smell. In one important study, 100 workers from sulfur-emitting factories and a control group of 100 workers from other occupations were asked to identify a variety of chemically reproduced scents, including those of foods, spices, and flowers. On average, the factory workers successfully identified 10 percent of the scents compared to 50 percent for the control group.
Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:
(A) The chemicals used in the study closely but not perfectly reproduced the corresponding natural scents.
(B) The subjects in the study were tested in the environments where they usually work.
(C) Most members of the control group had participated in several earlier studies that involved the identification of scents.
(D) Every sulfur-emitting factory with workers participating in the study also emits other noxious fumes.
(E) Because of the factories’ locations, the factory workers were less likely than those in the control group to have been exposed to many of the scents used in the study.
LSAT
- 100 workers from sulfur-emitting factories and a control group of 100 workers from other occupations were asked to identify a variety of chemically reproduced scents, including those of foods, spices, and flowers.
- On average, the factory workers successfully identified 10 percent of the scents compared to 50 percent for the control group.
Conclusion: Prolonged exposure to sulfur fumes permanently damages one's sense of smell.
The conclusion says that sulphur fumes damage sense of smell.
(A) The chemicals used in the study closely but not perfectly reproduced the corresponding natural scents.
Whether they were exact replicas or slightly off, doesn't matter. Both groups got the same scents. If 50% of the control group was able to identify, but only 10% of sulphur group was able to identify then there seems to be some loss of smell in the sulphur group.
Option (A) doesn't impact the conclusion.
(B) The subjects in the study were tested in the environments where they usually work.
If the subjects were tested where they work, sulphur factory workers were tested in sulphur factories. So the sulphur fumes could have distorted the smells. We cannot conclude that the sulphur factory workers sense of smell is permanently damaged then. This weakens our conclusion.
(C) Most members of the control group had participated in several earlier studies that involved the identification of scents.
The control group people were experienced in identifying smells. It could account for their superior performance. IT weakens our argument.
(D) Every sulfur-emitting factory with workers participating in the study also emits other noxious fumes.
The loss of smell could be because of something other than sulphur. But our conclusion says that sulphur is the cause. It weakens our conclusion.
(E) Because of the factories’ locations, the factory workers were less likely than those in the control group to have been exposed to many of the scents used in the study.
If the sulphur factory workers do not know what many things smell like, that could be the reason they could not identify the smell. Weakens our conclusion.
Answer (A)