Which of the following most logically completes the

Question

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a significant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food may contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking. However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading, since _______.

A. many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from foodâ€™s having a longer shelf life
B. it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that irradiation has
C. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
D. certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully controlled irradiation is 
E. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded
 Answer:

E, I guess. but what is wrong with A?
and "misleading" is really confusing...

gmatmba · Answer

Why not C

laxieqv · Answer

The question is "which....most logically....." , that's the key to eliminate A, i think.
While A provides the reason for " misleading" , it doesn't derive from the logical flow of the argument.

alexiswhy · Answer

C. cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods 

but "usually the final step " is contradicted with the fact that "vegies are usually eaten raw"...

the point is "Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is  no worse in this respect than cooking " then to logically complete the sentence, you have to refute the proponent's argument.

jaynayak · Answer

Will go with C.

We have to show a striking dissimilarility between cooking and irradiation.

foolz_rulz · Answer

I shall go with E

it is misleading that irradiation is no worse because it compounds the effect of loss of Vit B1.

option C says that cooking is the last step but irradiation is done to preserve the foods. and this point is favour of the proponents of Irradiation. The sentence following this uses " However, this fact is either beside the point, since " and "else misleading, since" which implies that these points must weaken the the claim of the proponents of irradiation
E does this effectively because it explains why the claim that irradiation is good is not true.

OA and OE please

u2lover · Answer

I am going for E logically completes the argument needs something that has been stated before and no NEW INFO! on that basis anything to do with shelves needs to be eliminated, so A and C are out now, B is the same idea... we were never told about other effects of this irradiation D: "certain types of cooking..." don't read further... the argument is talking about cooking in general E holds: you irradite veggies, then cook those -> double trouble...

Which of the following most logically completes the

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