Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 03:55 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 03:55
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
User avatar
chesstitans
User avatar
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Last visit: 20 Nov 2019
Posts: 987
Own Kudos:
1,923
 [55]
Given Kudos: 2,562
Location: United States
Schools: Stanford '19 Carroll '19 LBS '19
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Schools: Stanford '19 Carroll '19 LBS '19
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
Posts: 987
Kudos: 1,923
 [55]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 15 Jan 2018, 02:26
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
53
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

44% (01:59) correct 56% (02:07) wrong based on 1734 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
B
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
broall
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Last visit: 07 Apr 2021
Posts: 1,138
Own Kudos:
7,149
 [8]
Given Kudos: 65
Status:Long way to go!
Location: Viet Nam
Posts: 1,138
Kudos: 7,149
 [8]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 15 Jan 2018, 02:45
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chesstitans
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
Show more
Nutritionist: Too much copper => prevent users from absorbing Vit C.
Manufacturer: Copper is useful for the health.

We could easily see that the Manufacturer's answer is irrelevant since it didn't prove that the copper is at sufficient amount not to negative all Vit C in its product.
avatar
blazeowlss
avatar
Joined: 12 Dec 2017
Last visit: 12 Mar 2018
Posts: 3
Own Kudos:
10
 [6]
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 3
Kudos: 10
 [6]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 19 Jan 2018, 03:06
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chesstitans
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
Show more

Ans: B

Nutritionist's argument: Your product has copper --> Copper is bad for Vit C absorption --> Your ad is wrong for saying your product is good source of Vit C

Manufacturer's argument: Some people lack copper --> My product has copper --> My product is good even though it has copper

Now by comparing the last part of the above, you can see that nutritionist is emphasizing that the advertising claims of "good source of vit C"are wrong, whereas the manufacturer is focused on saying his product is good even though it has copper.

The manufacturer did not address the invalidation claim towards its advertisements raised by the nutritionist --> Ans B
General Discussion
User avatar
sunny91
User avatar
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Last visit: 04 May 2020
Posts: 176
Own Kudos:
64
Given Kudos: 289
Location: India
Schools: AIM Manila '20 Fisher '19 Rotman '20 Sauder '20 Schulich Jan 18 Intake Queen's 19 Ivey '19 Kelley '20 IIM-A"19 ESSEC '20 Insead Sept'18 Ross '20 IIMU PGPX
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
GPA: 3.54
Schools: AIM Manila '20 Fisher '19 Rotman '20 Sauder '20 Schulich Jan 18 Intake Queen's 19 Ivey '19 Kelley '20 IIM-A"19 ESSEC '20 Insead Sept'18 Ross '20 IIMU PGPX
GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31
Posts: 176
Kudos: 64
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 16 Jan 2018, 23:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
broall
chesstitans
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
Nutritionist: Too much copper => prevent users from absorbing Vit C.
Manufacturer: Copper is useful for the health.

We could easily see that the Manufacturer's answer is irrelevant since it didn't prove that the copper is at sufficient amount not to negative all Vit C in its product.
Show more

Hi Broall,
Can you kindly explain why not option C, but option B?
The manufacturer's argument is flawed as he/she does not address the issue on vitamin C.
In option B, we know that copper blocks vitamin C, but may be we have other ingredients in the product that can nullify the copper's effect on blocking vitamin C.
User avatar
broall
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Last visit: 07 Apr 2021
Posts: 1,138
Own Kudos:
7,149
Given Kudos: 65
Status:Long way to go!
Location: Viet Nam
Posts: 1,138
Kudos: 7,149
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 17 Jan 2018, 02:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sunny91
broall
chesstitans
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
Nutritionist: Too much copper => prevent users from absorbing Vit C.
Manufacturer: Copper is useful for the health.

We could easily see that the Manufacturer's answer is irrelevant since it didn't prove that the copper is at sufficient amount not to negative all Vit C in its product.

Hi Broall,
Can you kindly explain why not option C, but option B?
The manufacturer's argument is flawed as he/she does not address the issue on vitamin C.
In option B, we know that copper blocks vitamin C, but may be we have other ingredients in the product that can nullify the copper's effect on blocking vitamin C.
Show more

Hi, the nutritionist's main concern here is about the copper and its effect, not about the vitamin C and the amount of vit C in the product.
avatar
PrabhaMithila
avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2017
Last visit: 12 Aug 2018
Posts: 8
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 2
Posts: 8
Kudos: 2
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 20 Jan 2018, 06:36
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi,

Please explain why C has been ruled out??
avatar
Missyy
avatar
Joined: 30 Jan 2018
Last visit: 13 Mar 2018
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 73
Posts: 10
Kudos: 2
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 31 Jan 2018, 10:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
broall
chesstitans
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
Nutritionist: Too much copper => prevent users from absorbing Vit C.
Manufacturer: Copper is useful for the health.

We could easily see that the Manufacturer's answer is irrelevant since it didn't prove that the copper is at sufficient amount not to negative all Vit C in its product.
Show more

I have the same question here, why option C is ruled out?
User avatar
kkrrsshh
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2015
Last visit: 26 Jul 2020
Posts: 45
Own Kudos:
14
Given Kudos: 77
Location: India
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Posts: 45
Kudos: 14
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 01 Feb 2018, 19:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
broall
chesstitans
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
Nutritionist: Too much copper => prevent users from absorbing Vit C.
Manufacturer: Copper is useful for the health.

We could easily see that the Manufacturer's answer is irrelevant since it didn't prove that the copper is at sufficient amount not to negative all Vit C in its product.
Show more

Hi broall,
Can you please explain why C is dropped?
If the manufacturer mentioned how much Vit C is blocked and how much is left for absorption, then also he can refute nutritionist.
User avatar
broall
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Last visit: 07 Apr 2021
Posts: 1,138
Own Kudos:
7,149
 [4]
Given Kudos: 65
Status:Long way to go!
Location: Viet Nam
Posts: 1,138
Kudos: 7,149
 [4]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 02 Feb 2018, 00:45
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
kkrrsshh

Hi broall,
Can you please explain why C is dropped?
If the manufacturer mentioned how much Vit C is blocked and how much is left for absorption, then also he can refute nutritionist.
Show more

Missyy

I have the same question here, why option C is ruled out?
Show more

Hi, I have explained in a reply above

Choice B & choice C are really close.

First, choice B directly describes the problem that the nutritionist raised. Choice C expressed that problem in indirect way.

Second, I think the question makes a trap: Vit C is positive; copper is negative and we simply calculate the total to estimate the overall effect. It's not true. What if this case occur? If copper appears in out body with a amount larger than a certain point, the body can't absorb any Vit C. This case points out that answer C is wrong.
avatar
davezhcoet
avatar
Joined: 27 May 2015
Last visit: 03 Jul 2019
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
15
 [2]
Given Kudos: 143
Schools: ISB '18
Schools: ISB '18
Posts: 5
Kudos: 15
 [2]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 18 Mar 2018, 23:13
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Correct Answer: Option B.

Option C is wrong because even if they describe the amount amount of vitamin C added by the company as stated in advertising campaign and the amount of copper added, we can not validate or invalidate the claim that the juice is a good source of Vitamin C.
avatar
Swarna11
avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2017
Last visit: 27 Feb 2019
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
3
Given Kudos: 48
Posts: 6
Kudos: 3
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 17 Apr 2018, 18:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
broall
Hi,
i found B and E close and it was only advertising claims that makes it better choice
Could you please explain how E is incorrect
User avatar
broall
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 10 Oct 2016
Last visit: 07 Apr 2021
Posts: 1,138
Own Kudos:
7,149
 [1]
Given Kudos: 65
Status:Long way to go!
Location: Viet Nam
Posts: 1,138
Kudos: 7,149
 [1]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 18 Apr 2018, 02:18
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Swarna11
broall
Hi,
i found B and E close and it was only advertising claims that makes it better choice
Could you please explain how E is incorrect
Show more

No, options B and E aren't close. We could eliminate choice E easily because Juice Manufacturer didn't try to prove that Nutritionist's evidence is irrelevant.
User avatar
aragonn
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Last visit: 30 Sep 2019
Posts: 1,231
Own Kudos:
5,890
Given Kudos: 416
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 1,231
Kudos: 5,890
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 08 May 2018, 19:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
OE:

The nutritionist’s argument is that the juice made by this manufacturer is not as good a source of Vitamin C as its ads claim. The evidence that the nutritionist provides is that the process by which the company makes its juice adds copper, which blocks the absorption of Vitamin C. The manufacturer claims that the benefits of copper outweigh the costs of blocking Vitamin C absorption. This does not address the main argument made by the nutritionist, about the blocking of Vitamin C absorption being reason to remove the ad campaign, making (B) the correct answer choice.

(A) may be true, but it is not the reason that the manufacturer’s argument against the nutritionists is flawed. The manufacturer never addresses the issue of advertising, which (A) does not describe.

Similarly, (C) misidentifies the criticism leveled against the company as being related to the amount of the compounds, rather than the removal of the advertising campaign.

(D) erroneously claims that the manufacturer has addressed the main argument that the nutritionist has raised against the company, which it has not. Furthermore, the nutritionist’s argument is not about individuals, but rather about advertising.

Finally, (E) is incorrect; the manufacturer seems to think that copper is relevant and Vitamin C is not. This choice also ignores the centrality of advertising to the nutritionist’s argument.

Answer = (B)
User avatar
GDT
User avatar
Joined: 02 Jan 2020
Last visit: 18 Sep 2020
Posts: 246
Own Kudos:
117
Given Kudos: 477
Posts: 246
Kudos: 117
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 04 Aug 2020, 04:04
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma

Can you pls hep me with such questions

I've seen that among 700 level questions of flaw in reasoning questions, I'm able to do the ones with difficulty level of 55% but not the ones of 95%. What should be my way of going about such questions

Thanks in advance!
avatar
elavendan1
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2014
Last visit: 20 Feb 2022
Posts: 88
Own Kudos:
108
 [2]
Given Kudos: 232
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
Posts: 88
Kudos: 108
 [2]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 04 Aug 2020, 08:10
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GDT
VeritasKarishma

Can you pls hep me with such questions

I've seen that among 700 level questions of flaw in reasoning questions, I'm able to do the ones with difficulty level of 55% but not the ones of 95%. What should be my way of going about such questions

Thanks in advance!
Show more

Not an expert here, but trying to address the question in broader terms.
In CR questions, the devil lies in the detail. You have to carefully read and comprehend the entire question word by word.
Assuming you choose C rather than B, I will try to chime in.

What is actually the question?
Is it just The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed?
or
Is it The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument

Nutrionist's Argument : You cannot advertise that your juice is the source of Vitamin C because the copper present in your juice blocks the Vitamin C.

Option B : Correctly says that Manufacturer's argument did not address this particular issue. i.e, whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to block Vitamin C.
Option C : Not always weaken the argument. Let's consider two scenarios:
1. Vitamin C content overcomes the Copper added to the juice. Manufacturer wins. Strengthens Manufacturer's argument.
2. Vitamin C content does not overcome the Copper added to the juice. Nutritionist wins.

Does option C serve as refutation of nutritionist's argument? 50% Yes, 50% No.
So, option B it is.

Does this help you?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
 [4]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
 [4]
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 06 Aug 2020, 03:23
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chesstitans
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unacceptable amounts of copper to the orange juice you sell. Because copper blocks the absorption of Vitamin C, your advertising campaign claiming that your juice is a good source of Vitamin C is faulty and should be removed.

Juice Manufacturer: Some amount of copper is necessary for optimal health. Recent studies have shown that as many as 25 percent of Americans do not get enough copper in their diets; therefore, the benefits of the copper that our process adds to the juice outweigh the costs of any Vitamin C that it may block.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it

A relies on the unfounded assumption that copper may be as good for health as Vitamin C.
B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
C fails to describe how much Vitamin C the juice company adds to each bottle, as stated in the advertising campaign, and how much is blocked from absorption by copper.
D addresses the nutritionist’s argument in general terms, rather than in terms of the health of individuals.
E shows that the nutritionist’s evidence about copper is irrelevant but fails to demonstrate any flaws in the nutritionist’s assumptions.
Show more

Nutritionist: Your OJ has too much copper. Vit C is not absorbed then. Your advertising that your juice is a good source of Vit C is false then.

Juice Manufacturer: We need copper. The advantages of copper outweigh disadvantages (loss of Vit C absorption)

Now before you move on, think - the nutritionist says that your advertisement is inaccurate. Your OJ doesn't provide Vit C because of blah blah. The OJ manufacturer says we need copper and its benefits outweigh.
This is odd, right? The nutritionist is talking about false advertising abt Vit C. The manufacturer ignored that and starts talking about copper and its benefits.

The juice manufacturer’s response is flawed as a refutation of the nutritionist’s argument because it ...
So why is the manufacturer's response as a refutation to nutritionist's argument flawed? Because it ignores the main point of the nutritionist's argument and just takes a tangent. Now all we have to do is find an option that says essentially this.

B does not address the issue of whether sufficient amounts of copper are present to invalidate its advertising claims.
Correct. The manufacturer does not address the issue of whether its advertising claims are invalid.

Answer (B)
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,832
Own Kudos:
986
Posts: 18,832
Kudos: 986
Nutritionist: Your company’s fruit-processing technologies add unaccep 25 May 2025, 06:02
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts