We have conducted a recent study with mice that indicates that Virus

2. For each statement, indicate whether it provides an assumption necessary to the conclusion of the blog post.

Statement 1: Since this information mentions the blog entry, refer to Tab 2. The blog author's assertion is: Thus, attempts by the health industry to educate the citizenry via the Internet and newsfeeds result in less public security, not more. This is a causal assumption, tipped off by the use of the word result: not only does the author assume that the quick spread of information provided by the Internet sets the stage for panic, but that the result, panic, is an inevitable consequence of the medium. This is a complement to the "no other cause" assumption: "no other result" or "result is inevitable." Basically, the author assumes that nothing disrupts the causal link between information via the Internet and less public security or "panic." Just as in the critical reasoning section, "assumption" answer choices should be evaluated by scope (which should be narrow), and using the negation test.

This statement is not an assumption of the argument, because the author is not concerned with discussing or proving whether responses should be anticipated; rather, the author is only concerned with establishing the causal link. Use the negation test. What if public health announcements need not be anticipated by the leaders of the health industry? If that were true, would the conclusion not follow? Not necessarily. When the negated answer choice, if true, does not destroy the conclusion, it's not an assumption. Further, the anticipation of the health leaders is outside the scope of this argument.

Answer: No

Statement 2:

This is not an assumption of the argument, because the author is not concerned with comparing and contrasting different segments of the public (consumers and workers). Also, this statement does not reference the causal link. Use the negation test. What if is not more important to provide health alerts to the workers? Does the argument collapse? No, it doesn’t. When the negated answer choice, if true, does not destroy the conclusion, it's not an assumption. Further, what is or isn't important to society is outside this argument's scope.

Answer: No

Statement 3:

This statement is one expression of the underlying assumption of a causal argument: "there is no other cause," "there is no other result," or "there is no disruption of the causal link" (i.e., the link is definitely established). This statement fits the third structure. By asserting that there is nothing about the medium of the Internet that would counteract the "panic" trend, the statement confirms the causal link upon which the author's conclusion is based. (As with several answers to Argument questions, the correct answer is stated in the negative, making it harder to recognize.) The negation test makes these answer choices that are stated in the negative easier to recognize. What if the public does quickly receive balanced and correct information via internet? Then the conclusion that the public is thereby less informed is destroyed. This answer choice, therefore, is a necessary assumption to the argument.

Answer: Yes