It is currently 20 Nov 2017, 18:07

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Which of the following most logically completes the

Author Message
Intern
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Which of the following most logically completes the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2006, 08:40
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (02:08) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 2 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

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

E, I guess. but what is wrong with A?

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 937

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 0

Location: France

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2006, 08:49
Why not C
_________________

I believe its yogurt!

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1883

Kudos [?]: 386 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2006, 09:13
alexiswhy wrote:
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

E. for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded

E, I guess. but what is wrong with A?

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.

Kudos [?]: 386 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 6

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2006, 09:48
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.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1728

Kudos [?]: 102 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Jun 2006, 11:22
Will go with C.

We have to show a striking dissimilarility between cooking and irradiation.

Kudos [?]: 102 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 15 May 2006
Posts: 109

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Location: Louvain, Belgium

### Show Tags

23 Jun 2006, 10:44
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.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 1399

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Jun 2006, 15:48
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...

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 0

23 Jun 2006, 15:48
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Which of the following most logically completes the

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.