GMAT Club Forum :: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including : Critical Reasoning (CR)

vivek123 wrote:

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine.

(B) Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction.

(C) Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added.

(D) Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.

(E) Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.

Verbal Question of The Day: Day 257: Critical Reasoning

Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS
For All QOTD Questions Click Here

Show Spoiler

Note:
1. There is another question, which is almost same to this one, has only last two options interchanged. This particular question here is from OG and the official one. Other one, where option D and E are interchanged, might be from MGMAT.

2. Some people discussed on the OG question and some people discussed on the MGMAT question. Please observe the reference while reading through the thread.

For OG, answer is E and for MGMAT answer is D -- text content of these two are the same though.

3. With the similar stimulus, there is a different question (weaken question) from GMAT Prep -- that is discussed in:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/many-people-s ... 96563.html

Hi mikemcgarry

Could you please tell why option A is not necessary assumption?
If wines produced by new winemakers are not giving taste as actual due to absence of preservatives,will people drink these wines? I have a confusion regarding this

Start with the conclusion: "people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by [one of the several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce] without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites."

Whoa, that conclusion takes up most of the passage. So let's make sure we understand the argument:

Sulfites are commonly added to wine as preservatives.
Many people suffer an allergic reaction to those sulfites.
If a winemaker adds sulfites to his/her wines, then a person with a sulfite allergy would want to avoid those wines (to avoid risking an allergic reaction to the sulfites).
But several winemakers do NOT add sulfites to any of the wines they produce. So, according to the author, people with sulfite allergies can drink these wines without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites.

But notice the little word "add" in that last bullet. Just because the winemakers did not add any sulfites, does that necessarily mean that the wines are sulfite-free? Which of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument depends?

Quote:

(A) These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine.

We don't care about other allergenic substances. We only care about whether people who drink these wines could suffer an allergic reaction to sulfities. (A) is irrelevant, so eliminate this one.

Quote:

(B) Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction.

This is not a required assumption. Maybe some forms tend to produce allergic reactions more than others. So what? If we don't add any sulfites to our wines, can people with sulfite allergies safely drink our wines? (B) has no impact on the argument, so eliminate this one.

Quote:

Other beverages might have sulfites. This argument is only concerned with wines to which no sulfites have been added. (C) is irrelevant and can be eliminated.

Quote:

(D) Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction.

As with (A), we don't care about other possible sources of allergic reactions. As long as the wine drinkers cannot suffer from an allergic reaction to sulfites, then the author's reasoning is sound. This is true regardless of whether the wines contain other substances that cause allergic reactions. Eliminate (D).

Quote:

(E) Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.

Ah ha. The winemakers did not ADD any sulfites, but what if sulfites are naturally present in their wines? In that case, their wines would have sulfites even though the winemakers did not ADD any sulfites. If the naturally-occurring sulfite amounts are large enough to produce an allergic reaction, then wine drinkers with the allergy WILL run the risk of suffering an allergic reaction when they drink these wines.

In order for the argument to hold, we have to assume (E) is true. Thus, (E) is the best answer.

hey GMATNinja I got your idea in option E. But i have a question related to option D. Hope you will be able to help me out.
Let's assume that there is another chemical in the wine called Chemical X which causes allergy . Even though sulfites are gone , chemical X will cause allergy . So people who thought since wine is sulfite free , Chemical X will cause the allergy. Isn't it a correct assumption ?

Author:	MBAB123 [ 22 May 2021, 02:21 ]
Post subject:	Re: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
AkhilAggarwal wrote: vivek123 wrote: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. (B) Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. (C) Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. (D) Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. (E) Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. Verbal Question of The Day: Day 257: Critical Reasoning Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail \| RSS For All QOTD Questions Click Here Show Spoiler Note: 1. There is another question, which is almost same to this one, has only last two options interchanged. This particular question here is from OG and the official one. Other one, where option D and E are interchanged, might be from MGMAT. 2. Some people discussed on the OG question and some people discussed on the MGMAT question. Please observe the reference while reading through the thread. For OG, answer is E and for MGMAT answer is D -- text content of these two are the same though. 3. With the similar stimulus, there is a different question (weaken question) from GMAT Prep -- that is discussed in: https://gmatclub.com/forum/many-people-s ... 96563.html Hi mikemcgarry Could you please tell why option A is not necessary assumption? If wines produced by new winemakers are not giving taste as actual due to absence of preservatives,will people drink these wines? I have a confusion regarding this Hey AkhilAggarwal, You have to realise exactly what conclusion is. See the bold portion of the last sentence. The point is if they can drink these wines without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. It's okay if the people stop drinking the wine due to the change in taste as you've mentioned. The point is what can happen. We're looking to cement the following question - Do they have the possibility of drinking such wines without risking the allergic reaction to sulfites? We really, really don't care if they actually consume these wines and we definitely do not care if the taste is altered.

Author:	maqallaf [ 07 Jun 2021, 07:25 ]
Post subject:	Re: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
Using the Negation Technique - (A) These winemakers have NOT been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. Doesn't matter if they were able to duplicate it or not. The conclusion specifically states sulfites. (B) All forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. This doesn't affect the conclusion because it states that the mentioned winemakers add no sulfites. (C) Wine is NOT the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. Again, doesn't matter what other beverages have sulfites added to them. (D) Apart from sulfites, there are substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. The conclusion specifically talks about an allergic reaction from sulfites (E) Sulfites are naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. This destroys the conclusion, thus is definitely the right answer. If sulfites already exist in large amounts, the winemakers not adding it to their wine would do nothing to stop someone from getting an allergic reaction.

Author:	CrackverbalGMAT [ 05 Oct 2021, 01:15 ]
Post subject:	Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. However, since there are several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? Question type: Assumption Conclusion: People who are allergic to sulphites can safely drink the wine made by these specific winemakers. Task at hand: Figure out what has definitely been assumed by the author to come to the conclusion. A. These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. Irrelevant. We do not need to assume anything about other allergenic substances. The argument is only interested in whether people who drink these wines could suffer an allergic reaction to sulfides. Further, this is something that you could probably infer. One could say that if sulfites are usually used as a preservative and these winemakers are not using sulfites, then one could infer that something else was being used as a preservative. If we negate: These winemakers have not been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites. This does not affect the conclusion in any way. B. Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. Irrelevant. We do not need to assume anything about different forms of sulfites. If we negate: All forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. This does not affect the conclusion in any way. C. Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. Irrelevant. If we negate: Wine is not the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. We do not need to assume anything about other kinds of beverages. D. Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. If we negate: Apart from sulfites, there are substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. The conclusion says that you will not suffer any allergic reaction from sulfites. It doesn’t say that you will not suffer any allergic reaction at all. So we do not need to make any assumptions about other allergenic substance. E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. The author has concluded that people with sulfite allergy will not suffer an allergic reaction to sulfites because sulfites have not been added to wine made by these winemakers. To draw this conclusion, he has to assume that sulfites are not naturally present in wine. If we negate: Sulfites are naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. In this case, the conclusion that has been drawn will fall. - Nitha Jay

Author:	AnishPassi [ 25 Jan 2022, 06:38 ]
Post subject:	Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
The Story Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. – Many people are allergic to certain sulfites. Some of these sulfites are commonly added to wine. However, since there are several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. – Several winemakers do not add sulfites to their wines. People can consume wines made by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. Author’s logic: Since several winemakers do not add sulfites to their wines (basis), people can consume these wines without the risk of an allergic reaction to sulfites (main point). Gap(s) in logic: So, these winemakers do not add sulfites to their wines. But, what if some of the allergy-inducing sulfites occur naturally in one of the ingredients of the wines? Question Stem Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? A standard assumptions question. A prediction in line with the above gap analysis: If the winemakers do not add them, sulfites will not be present in their wines. i.e., Allergy-inducing sulfites do not occur naturally in the ingredients of wines made by these winemakers. Answer choice analysis A. These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. Incorrect. So these winemakers were able to achieve the objective of adding sulfites by some other means. The main point of the argument deals with allergic reactions to sulfites. Whether the sulfite-replacement process added other potential allergenic substances is irrelevant to the argument. Further, is it necessary for the argument that the replacements do not come with allergies? It isn’t. The argument, as mentioned before too, focuses only on sulfites-related allergies – whether consumers would risk allergic reaction to sulfites by drinking wines made by these specific winemakers. Other allergenic substances are irrelevant. B. Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. Incorrect.Irrelevant. So some forms of sulfites are more likely to produce allergic reactions than others. What about wines in which winemakers do not add wines? Will people have an allergic reaction to sulfites through those wines as well? We do not learn anything along those lines. Also, even if all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce an allergic reaction (negation), the argument’s logic remains intact. C. Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. Incorrect What if there are other beverages to which sulfites are commonly added (negation)? Even so, there’s no impact on the argument. This statement is not even relevant to, let alone necessary for, the argument. D. Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. Incorrect. This answer choice could seem attractive – If we are not precise. The conclusion of the argument says that people would be able to consume wines made by these specific winemakers (those who do not add sulfites) without any risk of an allergic reaction to sulfites. So not any allergic reaction at all, but specifically, allergic reactions to sulfites. Even if there are other substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction (negation), the argument’s logic is not impacted at all E. Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines.. Correct. Bang on! This one is in line with our initial thinking. If sulfites are naturally present in the wines produces by these winemakers, and that too in enough quantity to produce an allergic reaction (negation), the author’s logic falls completely flat. The negation breaks the argument down. This answer choice strengthens the argument and is necessary for the argument.

Author:	EtaCarnia [ 02 Jun 2022, 08:22 ]
Post subject:	Re: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
GMATNinja wrote: Start with the conclusion: "people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by [one of the several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce] without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites." Whoa, that conclusion takes up most of the passage. So let's make sure we understand the argument: Sulfites are commonly added to wine as preservatives. Many people suffer an allergic reaction to those sulfites. If a winemaker adds sulfites to his/her wines, then a person with a sulfite allergy would want to avoid those wines (to avoid risking an allergic reaction to the sulfites). But several winemakers do NOT add sulfites to any of the wines they produce. So, according to the author, people with sulfite allergies can drink these wines without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. But notice the little word "add" in that last bullet. Just because the winemakers did not add any sulfites, does that necessarily mean that the wines are sulfite-free? Which of the following is an assumption on which the author's argument depends? Quote: (A) These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. We don't care about other allergenic substances. We only care about whether people who drink these wines could suffer an allergic reaction to sulfities. (A) is irrelevant, so eliminate this one. Quote: (B) Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. This is not a required assumption. Maybe some forms tend to produce allergic reactions more than others. So what? If we don't add any sulfites to our wines, can people with sulfite allergies safely drink our wines? (B) has no impact on the argument, so eliminate this one. Quote: (C) Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. Other beverages might have sulfites. This argument is only concerned with wines to which no sulfites have been added. (C) is irrelevant and can be eliminated. Quote: (D) Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. As with (A), we don't care about other possible sources of allergic reactions. As long as the wine drinkers cannot suffer from an allergic reaction to sulfites, then the author's reasoning is sound. This is true regardless of whether the wines contain other substances that cause allergic reactions. Eliminate (D). Quote: (E) Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. Ah ha. The winemakers did not ADD any sulfites, but what if sulfites are naturally present in their wines? In that case, their wines would have sulfites even though the winemakers did not ADD any sulfites. If the naturally-occurring sulfite amounts are large enough to produce an allergic reaction, then wine drinkers with the allergy WILL run the risk of suffering an allergic reaction when they drink these wines. In order for the argument to hold, we have to assume (E) is true. Thus, (E) is the best answer. hey GMATNinja I got your idea in option E. But i have a question related to option D. Hope you will be able to help me out. Let's assume that there is another chemical in the wine called Chemical X which causes allergy . Even though sulfites are gone , chemical X will cause allergy . So people who thought since wine is sulfite free , Chemical X will cause the allergy. Isn't it a correct assumption ?

GMAT Club Forum https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/

Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including https://gmatclub.com/forum/many-people-suffer-an-allergic-reaction-to-certain-sulfites-including-25973-20.html	Page 2 of 2

Author:	GMATNinja [ 08 Jun 2022, 10:55 ]
Post subject:	Re: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
EtaCarnia wrote: hey GMATNinja I got your idea in option E. But i have a question related to option D. Hope you will be able to help me out. Let's assume that there is another chemical in the wine called Chemical X which causes allergy . Even though sulfites are gone , chemical X will cause allergy . So people who thought since wine is sulfite free , Chemical X will cause the allergy. Isn't it a correct assumption ? The author (perhaps callously) doesn't care if people have an allergic reaction to Chemical X, or any other non-sulfite substance. The author specifically concludes that people can drink certain wines "without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites." So long as this particular allergic reaction doesn't occur, the author is happy. So, we don't need to assume anything about other allergens. Wine could be chock-full of other allergens, and the author's argument about sulfites would be unaffected. That's why (D) isn't an assumption on which the argument depends. I hope that helps!

Author:	krndatta [ 02 Sep 2022, 03:33 ]
Post subject:	Re: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
KarishmaB Ma'am, Can you share your reasoning for option A? Thanks

Author:	ritzu [ 24 Sep 2022, 00:46 ]
Post subject:	Re: Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including
Many people suffer an allergic reaction to certain sulfites, including those that are commonly added to wine as preservatives. --> Sulphites are added to wine & some people are allergic to these sulphites. However, since there are several winemakers who add sulfites to none of the wines they produce, --> this is such a weird way to say that winemakers dont add sulphite to their wines. there are several winemakers who add sulphites to non of their wines --> seems so off. people who would like to drink wine but are allergic to sulfites can drink wines produced by these winemakers without risking an allergic reaction to sulfites. --> because there are no added sulphites, the risk of allergic reaction is low/ zero. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) These winemakers have been able to duplicate the preservative effect produced by adding sulfites by means that do not involve adding any potentially allergenic substances to their wine. --> does it matter? we dont care about the preservative effect, we care about the allergic reaction. (B) Not all forms of sulfite are equally likely to produce the allergic reaction. --> this is irrelevant, we dont care about the forms of sulphites but about whether the ones added to wine are going to produce allergic reactions. (C) Wine is the only beverage to which sulfites are commonly added. --> does this matter? no. we dont care about whether other beverages have sulphites added to them or not. what we care about is--> if wine w/o sulphites can cause an allergic reaction (D) Apart from sulfites, there are no substances commonly present in wine that give rise to an allergic reaction. --> hmm, compelling answer. since sulphite ares not added, the risk of allergy is low. and this statement is saying no other substances are found in the wine that could cause an allergic reaction. but do we care about the other substances? not really. (but we can keep this for now) (E) Sulfites are not naturally present in the wines produced by these winemakers in amounts large enough to produce an allergic reaction in someone who drinks these wines. --> again speaking about sulphites. Further, it mentions the ones which are naturally occurring. and confirms that naturally occurring sulphites won't produce any allergic reactions. so this ties things up and makes the argument 100% bullet proof. (E) is the winner!

Page 2 of 2	All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/