Statistics show that although consumption of low-calorie,

Question

Statistics show that although consumption of low-calorie, alternative sweeteners has gone up in each of the past five years, so has the percentage of the population that is obese. According to sugar manufacturers, this shows that low-calorie, alternative sweeteners are not effective weight loss aids.

Which of the following assertions if true, would most weaken the sugar manufacturers conclusion ?

A) Many people who use low-calorie , alternatives sweeteners eat some foods that are not low-calorie. 
B) Some low - claorie , alternative sweeteners can Increase the appetite , making a person eat more than he or she normally would eat. 
C) Many people use low-calorie, alternative sweeteners to accompany a wel- balanced low-calorie diet 
D) Obesity has declined among people who have consistently used low-calorie alternative sweeteners 
E) The rise in the consumption of low-calorie alternative sweeteners is primarily due to an increase in the number of users rather than an increase in the amount each user consumes.

D . I chose "A". Solution says: "A" ALSO weakens by giving the another possible cause for the weight gain, BUT "D" weakens MORE! I agree with that. But I have never see a CR, before this, that makes me choose between 2 right answers. Does that happen in real GMAT?

fluke · Answer

Eating some food that are not-low calorie may not cause obesity. Not low-calorie doesn't mean high-calorie. It may just mean enough moderate calorie to maintain weight.

D says: Obesity has declined among people who have consistently used low-calorie alternative sweeteners 
This is also not strong. It could be coincidental. D appears to suggest a cause-effect relation.

However, this is the best among the choices.

Chetangupta · Answer

I think D is the best among the choices available. Clearly shows that low calorie helps reducing weight.

In contrast, A leaves room for further assumptions. Many people eat  some  food that are not low calories- how much? 1 or more than that?? This too weakens but not as much as D.

abhicoolmax · Answer

Thanks fluke. A quick question: Seems like this question had the typical Number-Percentage trap?

Stimulus:-
Premise: increased "total" low-cal consumption AND increased "%age" of obesity. 
Conclusion: increased "total" low-cal consumption DOES NOT CAUSE total decreased obesity.

D weakens this causality perfect.

If one identified this trap, he or she could have prephrase by thinking: What if population of the obese people decreased even though the %age increased? And even better if the population of obese people who consumed most of the low-calorie sweetener decreased even of the total number of obese people increased.

zuberahmed · Answer

I think D is the only option that weakens the conclusion.

micr0c0sm · Answer

D.

For those who are interested in understanding why A is not the answer, let's review the conclusion:
 
Answer A reads:
 
This actually strengthens the argument. If true, this clearly means they're  not effective aids  because they are offset with what is implicitly described to be a tendency to eat higher calorie foods.

bharatemail · Answer

for me also , its D

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Statistics show that although consumption of low-calorie,

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