Average hours of television viewing per American have rapidly increase

Question

Average hours of television viewing per American have rapidly increased for more than three decades. To fight the rise in obesity, Americans must limit their hours of television viewing.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author’s conclusion?

(A) A person burns more calories while watching television than while sleeping.
(B) Over the last 30 years, there has been an increase in the number of fast food restaurants in America.
(C) Americans spend most of their television time watching sports events rather than cooking shows.
(D) Television viewing in Japan has also increased over the past three decades.
(E) Studies show that the number of television commercials that promote junk food has risen over the past ten years.

This is a  Data Sufficiency Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects: 
 
   Data Sufficiency Butler 
   Problem Solving Butler  
   Sentence Correction Butler  
   Reading Comprehension Butler  
   Integrated Reasoning Butler

Purnank · Answer

Conclusion -  "To fight the rise in obesity, Americans must limit their hours of television viewing." 
To weaken this we need to attack the correlation between increased television viewing and rising obesity rates by providing alternative explanation for obesity.
I think B is an good option.

Shwarma · Answer

Option B

Statement: drawing obesity conclusion from television viewing stat.-- Causal relation
To weaken. bring in a new premise that might have impacted the conclusion.

Option B fits in great.
Nothing other is weakening the conclusion.

ribbons · Answer

Why cant it be option d- (D) Television viewing in Japan has also increased over the past three decades.

This attacks the assumption that tv watching is related to obesity. Or is this out of scope because we are not given the trends about Japan in the question?

PranavVyas · Answer

IMO B

Only option weaken the conclusion, as resturant food reason for obesity.

(B) Over the last 30 years, there has been an increase in the number of fast food restaurants in America.

Posted from my mobile device

diasdexter766 · Answer

Option - B fits the bill perfectly as it supplied the information / brings in new information to discredit the conclusion!

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

To tackle this question, first identify the conclusion you’re supposed to weaken and the premises the author states or implies to reach that conclusion. The conclusion is pretty easy to spot. The last thought of the argument is that Americans must limit their hours of television viewing to curb the rise in obesity. The author makes this judgment using the following evidence:

» The author directly states that the number of television viewing hours has increased over the last 30 years.
» According to the author, the number of obese Americans has also increased.
» The author implies that television viewing causes obesity.

To weaken the argument that Americans have to reduce their television watching, you have to find the answer choice that shows that there’s another cause for the rise in obesity.

You may have been tempted to select Choice (A) because it shows that television watching may be less fat-producing than another activity, sleeping. But it doesn’t give you another reason for the rise in obesity. Choice (A) could be correct only if it showed that Americans were sleeping more than they were 30 years ago. It doesn’t, so move on.

On the other hand, stating that during the same time period, the number of fast-food restaurants also increased introduces another possible cause of obesity and weakens the conclusion that Americans have to stop watching so much TV to get slimmer. Maybe it’s the popularity of fast food that’s the culprit! Choice (B) is a better answer than Choice (A), but read through all the possibilities before you commit. Choice (C) is wrong because there’s nothing in the argument that suggests that the type of television Americans watch affects their obesity; nor does Choice (C) show that viewing patterns have changed over the last three decades. Choice (D) is also out because it doesn’t correlate what’s happening in Japan with what’s happening in America. You don’t know whether Japanese citizens weigh more now than they did 30 years ago, so the information in Choice (D) is useless.

If the question had asked you to strengthen the conclusion, Choice (E) would be a good option. It shows a reason that increased television watching could cause obesity. But the question asks you to weaken the conclusion, so Choice (B) is the best answer. It’s the only one that shows that another cause could be to blame for the rise in obesity.

EnglishAgast · Answer

This is a Weaken question categorised under Strengthen.. pls can this be changed, thank you!

Bunuel · Answer

_________________
Done. Thank you!

Average hours of television viewing per American have rapidly increase

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

Average hours of television viewing per American have rapidly increase

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