Three years ago, Ron gave up eating anything with wheat in it. In that

Question

Three years ago, Ron gave up eating anything with wheat in it. In that time, he lowered his cholesterol by 100 points and lost nearly 85 pounds. He says he feels better than he has in years. As a result, he is writing a book which says that everyone should stop eating wheat products. He says people are not made to eat wheat and that giving it up is the key to losing weight and being healthier.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument above?

A Wheat is found in nearly all processed foods.

B Ron has a family history of celiac disease, which is an extreme sensitivity to wheat gluten.

C Some studies have shown that a lower carbohydrate diet can help people lose weight and feel better.

D Ron runs three miles every morning.

E Ron used to be a vegetarian but has resumed eating meat.

akshata19 · Answer

Definitely B and D are contenders
But B says he is gluten sensitive hence omitted wheat but then why did he lose weight?

If we take D, it clearly clarifies that giving up wheat will not result in weight loss

May be I missing something to see B as the final choice

Posted from my mobile device

SonalSinha803 · Answer

Hi !!

What I feel is that since celiac disease leads to obesity, Ron would have given up wheat that promotes the disease and now has lost weight. But, he misinterprets the fact that since he has lost weight by giving up wheat, wheat is is the key factor that causes obesity. Thus, to weaken the argument, option B gives an alternative reason as to why giving up wheat has worked for him but that doesn't mean that wheat is the 'key' cause of obesity and that by giving it up everyone can lose weight.

However, option D being a close contender still conveys the possibility that running plus giving up wheat together could work and it doesn't directly weaken the argument that "giving up wheat leads to weight loss".
The attack is not direct.

Thus, I believe B is the best option and it more strongly weakens the argument.

Thanks !! ?

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

ballest127 · Answer

How b is correct?

Without outside knowledge about " celiac disease", one cannot know whether the disease lead to weight gain.

IMO, D is correct because it explains other possibility that might lead to weight loss.

Expert please shed some light on this question.

Thank you.

MartyTargetTestPrep · Answer

Hi ballest127.

Your reasoning makes complete sense. Without bringing in knowledge related to so called celiac disease, which knowledge is not common, there is no way clearly define why (B) weakens the argument. So, (B) is not a good OA.

At the same time, since we don't know when he started running three miles every morning, (D) is not a great weakener either, as he could have been running all along for all we know, even when he was less healthy.

(C) is actually a contender, as it could be that wheat was not the factor making Ron less healthy, but rather the carbohydrates in wheat. Even that choice is not a clear weakener though, as we don't know that he didn't swap wheat for another carb laden food.

So, really there doesn't seem to be a good answer to this question. You can see it for what it is and learn from it what there is to learn.

KabxW · Answer

So, in my opinion, even I chose D at first, but in reality the key role is played by the major word "sensitivity to.."
This is a causality based CR Question and therefore, it can be weakened if there is an alternate cause or reverse causality or not an alone cause.
We can rule out reverse causality but D actually is a shell game or trap option. It gives an alternate cause but when we choose it, we inherently assume that running is actually a cause of weight loss. (Trust me, it's so common that's why we assume it, IT IS NOT STATED IN QUESTION THAT RUNNING LEADS TO WEIGHT LOSS)

Now with B, it states sensitivity to wheat gluten. This shows that Ron was sensitive but not everyone who is reading his book. This destroys the conclusion because it breaks the assumption that all readers will be same as Ron. This assumption is clearly needed so as to prove that reduced wheat consumption will cause lower weight. 
Therefore, B is better than D.

For A,C,E:

A is out because it's out of scope. We do not know if processed food is being talked about.
C is a close contender but again we assume that carbs are part of wheat or something. We can't ourselves assume unless stated so out.
E has nothing to do with the question. So out of scope.

Cheers!

Paras96 · Answer

The argument claims that giving up wheat is the key to losing weight and being healthier based on Ron's personal experience of lowering his cholesterol and losing weight after avoiding wheat for three years. To weaken this argument, we need to find information that suggests Ron's improvements might be due to factors other than simply eliminating wheat.

(B) Ron has a family history of celiac disease, which is an extreme sensitivity to wheat gluten.

This weakens the argument because it introduces the possibility that Ron's improvements are not due to eliminating wheat in general but rather because he has a genetic condition (celiac disease) that makes him extremely sensitive to wheat gluten. This sensitivity may not be applicable to the general population.

Option (B) suggests an alternative explanation for Ron's improvements and weakens the argument's assertion that everyone should stop eating wheat products based solely on Ron's experience.

naveengmat15 · Answer

Here the point is need to weaken the argument's conclusion
or find another alternative cause for the result 
D is tempting because it feels as a alternate cause but doesn't specify the time 
Thus only answer left with is B by POE

Posted from my mobile device

Sidhartha226469 · Answer

The action of a weakner is to reduce the believe on a conclusion not necessarily break it. Here in this question the thought process is how to reduce the believe that Ron was able to lose weight only by not eating wheat items. So, it can be done in two ways:
1) Either Ron might have done something else that has contributed to the weight loss along with not eating wheat items
2) This process might have worked only with Ron, not necessarily with others
Now options (D) & (E) can be supportive of (1) idea but there is no way we can tell when those processes started i.e. the running or eating meat. So, we can't conclusively tell that these two things helped Ron along the way of weight reduction. In option (B) it's clear that Ron has celiac disease which is sensitive to wheat glutean. Hence reducing the in take of wheat items can have direct impact on the body which is in this case is weight loss. Not necessarily this will work for other folks which is the actual weakner for the question.

Three years ago, Ron gave up eating anything with wheat in it. In that

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Three years ago, Ron gave up eating anything with wheat in it. In that

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards