Spokesperson: The major school lunch vendors recently agreed to stop

Question

Spokesperson: The major school lunch vendors recently agreed to stop selling high-calorie beverages in elementary and middle schools because studies show that children of ages 7 to 8 who substitute one low-calorie beverage for one high-calorie soft drink in their daily diets will, on average, weigh 20 pounds less than they would have by the time they reach high school. Since only low-calorie beverages will be sold in schools, within six to eight years, we can expect to see a reduction in the percentage of overweight high-school children.

The spokesperson assumes which of the following to be true?

A. All low-calorie beverages are better for children than any high-calorie beverages.

B. Elementary and middle school students who used to buy high-calorie soft drinks at school will not bring them to school or drink extra high-calorie beverages at home as a substitute.

C. The companies will resume selling high-calorie beverages to schools in eight years.

D. Those children whose parents are concerned about healthy weight maintenance already limit their children's consumption of soft drinks.

E. Many schools depend on the extra revenue generated by sales of high-calorie drinks.

Akash720 · Answer

IMO Answer is B

B. Elementary and middle school students who used to buy high-calorie soft drinks at school will not bring them to school or drink extra high-calorie beverages at home as a substitute. 
- As the conclusion states that they expect to see a reduction in overweight in 6-7 years. The officials assume that the children will not have the same high calorie food at home as substitute

Posted from my mobile device

sudarshan22 · Answer

Conclusion:  
If elementary and middle schools are to  sell only low-calorie beverages  in schools, within six to eight years, we can expect to see a  reduction in the percentage of overweight  high-school children.

B. Elementary and middle school students who used to buy high-calorie soft drinks at school will not bring them to school or drink extra high-calorie beverages at home as a substitute. -->   Correct , negate the statement and see how the conclusion fall apart

Hence,   B  .

aragonn · Answer

+1 for B. Though B is a very good answer, I was looking for a better one. Clearly with negation of B, the conclusion will fall.

GMAT0010 · Answer

We need to find one assumption or a fact that , when negated, destroys the argument and tears it down completely

The argument presented is a typical correlation - causality problem. So if we show that : yes, there is no other disruption to this plan, the plan will work. Option B is the right answer

closetooa · Answer

Sir, please explain why not option A

rosalynd · Answer

A is too extreme:

A. ALL low-calorie beverages are BETTER for children than ANY high-calorie beverages.

This statement is too extreme because it assumes that no high-calorie beverage can ever be better than any low-calorie beverage. The spokesperson does not need to assume that for the argument to hold.

Also, the spokesperson's argument is focused specifically on the calorie content of the beverages and their impact on children's weight. The argument does not make a general claim that low-calorie beverages are always better than high-calorie beverages. The spokesperson does not need to assume this either for the argument to hold.

Omgupta556656456 · Answer

The correct answer is: B. Elementary and middle school students who used to buy high-calorie soft drinks at school will not bring them to school or drink extra high-calorie beverages at home as a substitute.

Explanation:

The spokesperson argues that banning high-calorie beverages in schools will lead to a measurable drop in the number of overweight high school students in 6–8 years. This prediction relies on the assumption that removing access to these drinks in school will actually reduce overall consumption of high-calorie beverages among students.

However, that effect would not occur if students simply compensate by drinking the same high-calorie beverages elsewhere, such as at home or by bringing them from outside. So for the argument to hold, the spokesperson must be assuming that students will not substitute in that way — exactly what choice B says.

Why not the other options?

A. Too general. The argument doesn’t rely on all low-calorie drinks being better — just that substituting one for a high-calorie drink has a benefit.

C. Irrelevant speculation — the conclusion is about the next 6–8 years, not what happens afterward.

D. Doesn’t impact the main argument about the broader student population.

E. This might be a practical concern, but it’s unrelated to the logic of the argument about health outcomes.

So, the necessary assumption for the spokesperson’s argument is B.

Spokesperson: The major school lunch vendors recently agreed to stop

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

Spokesperson: The major school lunch vendors recently agreed to stop

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