A local bakery has decided to stop selling its popular chocolate-chip

Question

1 A local bakery has decided to stop selling its popular chocolate-chip cookies. The bakery's decision was based on a recent study that showed a strong correlation between the consumption of sugar and weight gain in the local population. The bakery's owner has argued that by stopping the sale of these cookies, which contain high levels of sugar, they would be contributing to the reduction of weight gain among their customers.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the bakery owner's argument?

A. The study also showed that regular exercise can offset the effects of sugar consumption and weight gain.

B. Many customers have stated that they would buy chocolate-chip cookies from other stores if the bakery stops selling them.

C. The bakery's chocolate-chip cookies are made with a special type of sugar that is not as closely associated with weight gain as other sugars.

D. The bakery plans to introduce a new line of sugar-free desserts, which are expected to be as popular as the chocolate-chip cookies.

E. Other products sold by the bakery have been found to have even higher levels of sugar than the chocolate-chip cookies.

RobbinMehla · Accepted Answer

How are we so sure that chocolate chip cookies from other stores are made of sugar, may be they are sugar free !

parthwagh · Answer

The argument here is that by not selling chocolate-chip cookies, the bakery will contribute to the reduction of weight gain among their customers.

Option A does not directly weaken the argument since it talks about exercise being a factor, but it doesn’t negate the effect of the bakery's action on reducing sugar consumption.

Option B  directly weakens the argument by suggesting that the bakery's decision may not have the intended effect because customers will simply purchase the cookies elsewhere, thus continuing to consume sugar at the same rate.

Option C does weaken the argument but is not as strong as option B, because even if the special sugar is not as closely associated with weight gain, it does not necessarily mean that it will not contribute to weight gain at all.

Option D introduces a new factor (sugar-free desserts), but it doesn't directly address whether stopping the sale of chocolate-chip cookies will reduce weight gain among the bakery's customers.

Option E does weaken the argument, but it does not address the direct relationship between stopping the sale of the cookies and the reduction of weight gain; it only suggests that there are other high-sugar products still being sold.

Therefore, the most direct and damaging information to the bakery owner's argument is contained in option B. If customers simply buy their cookies elsewhere, the bakery's decision will not have the intended impact on weight gain, which means the decision to stop selling chocolate-chip cookies would not contribute to the reduction of weight gain among customers as the owner claims.

So, the correct answer is B.

Madhvendrasinh · Answer

I think  Option E  weakens it better.

Option B   states that the customers will buy cookies from somewhere else but it still proves that the bakery did it's job (does not weaken), they could only stop selling cookies to help this movement and they did contribute towards that cause. Look at it this way, the bakery wanted to reduce the total amount of sugar provided to  customer by discontinuing cookies,  their goal was to  TRY  not to  SUCCEED  ,  if their   goal was to actually redue the weight of their customers  then B would've been a better choice but their   goal is to offer them less sugar.

While   Option E   states that 'other products' that are sold at the bakery contain higher amount of sugar than cookies. This proves that even if the bakery stops selling cookies it would be meaningless because despite of them reducing the sugar provided to customers there would be no effect in weight gain reduction because they themselves will be providing sweet products containing more sugar than they reduced in cookies. And it  fails thier plan  to reduce sugar offered by the bakery.

sherlocked221B · Answer

b_sudharsan   MartyMurray   KarishmaB   GMATNinja

Could you please tell what's the right answer for this?

It should either be C or E.

bronaugust · Answer

To answer this question, let us deploy    IMS's four-step technique   .

STEP #1  ->   IDENTIFY THE QUESTION TYPE

Let us read the question stem to identify the question type. The stem states, 'Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the bakery owner's argument?' What we have is a  weakening  question.

Now that the question type is identified, let us proceed to the second step.

STEP #2  ->   DECONSTRUCT THE ARGUMENT

In a weakening question, it is a must to deconstruct the argument by figuring out the conclusion and the premise. Let us therefore read the argument and deconstruct it.

CONCLUSION:   By stopping the sale of chocolate-chip cookies, which contain high levels of sugar, the bakery would be contributing to the reduction of weight gain among its customers.
  PREMISE:   A strong correlation exists between the consumption of sugar and weight gain in the local population.

Now that the argument is deconstructed, let us proceed to the next step.

STEP #3  ->   FRAME A SHADOW ANSWER

To frame a shadow answer, we need to know what the right answer is supposed to do. In this question, the right answer must weaken the conclusion that stopping the sale of these cookies would contribute to the reduction of weight gain among their customers.

SHADOW ANSWER:   Any situation that leads us to believe that the bakery's stopping the sale of chocolate-chip cookies containing high levels of sugar will not necessarily contribute to the reduction of weight gain among the bakery's customers.

Now that a shadow answer is framed, let us proceed to the final step.

STEP #4  ->   PROCESS OF ELIMINATION

Let us eliminate all answer options that do not match the shadow answer.

A. The study also showed that regular exercise can offset the effects of sugar consumption and weight gain. -   NOT A MATCH   -  If the study also showed that regular exercise can offset the effects of sugar consumption and weight gain, we do not have anything that leads us to believe that stopping the sale of cookies containing high levels of sugar may not necessarily contribute to the reduction of weight gain among the bakery's customers.  -   ELIMINATE

B. Many customers have stated that they would buy chocolate-chip cookies from other stores if the bakery stops selling them. -   MATCHES THE SHADOW ANSWER   -  If the bakery stops the sale of chocolate-chip cookies, and if many customers, as they have stated, end up buying chocolate-chip cookies from other stores, the bakery's stopping the sale of chocolate-chip cookies will obviously not contribute to the reduction of weight gain among the customers.  -   KEEP

C. The bakery's chocolate-chip cookies are made with a special type of sugar that is not as closely associated with weight gain as other sugars. -   NOT A MATCH   -  The comparison with other sugars is irrelevant as the argument already states that the chocolate-chip cookies contain high levels of sugar.   In fact, this option reiterates that chocolate-chip cookies are associated with weight gain (not as closely as other sugars, but still, associated!)  -   ELIMINATE

D. The bakery plans to introduce a new line of sugar-free desserts, which are expected to be as popular as the chocolate-chip cookies. -   NOT A MATCH   -  Not worried about what the bakery plans to introduce.  -   ELIMINATE

E. Other products sold by the bakery have been found to have even higher levels of sugar than the chocolate-chip cookies. -   NOT A MATCH   -  If other products sold by the bakery have been found to have even higher levels of sugar than the chocolate-chip cookies, we still do not have anything that leads us to believe that stopping the sale of chocolate-chip cookies containing high levels of sugar will not necessarily contribute to the reduction of weight gain among the bakery's customers. Remember, we do not know if the customers will opt for the other products or not; it is risky to assume that the customers will opt for the other products just based on the fact that other products sold by the bakery have been found to have even higher levels of sugar.  -   ELIMINATE

Hence, (B) is the correct answer.

ishaanp2799 · Answer

With option B: Is it not the customers problem that they are eating the chocolate chip cookies at a different store.

The store, mentioned in the text here, has contributed their part to the reduction in weight gain of their customers by removing a sugar based cookie.

So, technically, B should not weaken the argument right?

bronaugust · Answer

Let us say the principal of a school decides to stop issuing a particular book at the school library because the book promotes violence. The principal argues that stopping the sale of the book will lead to less violent thoughts amongst students. What she does not know is that the students have said they will borrow the book from a library near the school if they are not allowed to read the book in the school library. So, if the principal gets copies of the book removed from the shelves of the library, her argument that not issuing the book will lead to less violent thoughts falls flat as the students are anyway going to buy the very same book from outside. She might in fact be surprised that her getting the books removed did not have the impact she had anticipated until, of course, she gets to know the students were borrowing the same book from outside. And this realisation would tell her how weak the argument and the decision were!

If there is any other way you look at it, do let me know!

bronaugust · Answer

The answer to your question is in the question itself. We are sure because the option does not say 'sugar-free' chocolate-chip cookies. So, to assume that they may be free of sugar is a solecism. A cookie almost always contains flour, sugar, and egg. And if it is of a particular type, it gets specified. For instance, in the argument, we are dealing with chocolate-chip cookies. Also, the answer option says many customers have stated that they would buy chocolate-chip cookies from other stores if the bakery stops selling   them .  What this means is that they would buy the same type of cookies.

Let us say you have a friend who says, 'I will not give you these fountain pens since they will ruin your handwriting.'
You say, 'If you do not give me these pens, I will buy them from elsewhere.'

Now, based on your response, it is crystal clear that you are going to buy the same type of fountain pens that you have not been given by your friend. Is there any other way of looking at it?

Sarthakdua3 · Answer

I am confused between B and E.

What B says is these customers shift to different stores. While shifting to new stores, these aren't my customers anymore. So it doesn't weaken my conclusion that the bakery would be contributing to the reduction of weight gain  among their customers . For that to be true, the remaining customers ought to be consuming less sugar. The question gives me no idea about that. Maybe I can assume that the remaining customers shift to less sugary items?

However, E on the other hand clearly says that the bakery has options with more sugar. So it is possible that the customers move to these options whilst remaining the bakery's customer?

It seems in both A & E - I have to assume something for the statement to weaken the conclusion. Still E seems much better to me.

MickV · Answer

The reason E does not really weaken it better than B is because E does not mention whether the other products that contain sugar are as popular as the chocolate chip cookies, nor does E explain whether customers would simply switch to more sugary options if it would stop selling the chocolate chip cookies. If this would have been the case, it would actually weaken the argument, though you can not just make that assumption.

MickV · Answer

Even if you cannot be sure about this, the mere possibility that people will go to other bakeries to eat sugar-laden chocolate cookies weakens the argument.

A local bakery has decided to stop selling its popular chocolate-chip

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

A local bakery has decided to stop selling its popular chocolate-chip

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