Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 May 2017, 20:13

### 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: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

04 Mar 2008, 19:29
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 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 food’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
Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 943
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 302 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

05 Mar 2008, 08:54
I will go with A. Last 4 options goes much beyond what is stated so can be ignored safely.
VP
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 1438
Schools: Chicago Booth '11
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 192 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

05 Mar 2008, 09:23
E.

A is out of scope
Intern
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2008, 18:30
OA is E, but I'm really confusing why not C.

I think the two parts connected by “either…or…” are close related, and therefore can be put together(integrated) to strengthen the author’s point. For example, we can say:

… However, this fact is both beside the point and misleading, since irradiated food is eaten raw, and irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods while cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption.

Maybe it’s a bit awkward and not so convincing. Let me try again.

Using C, we can switch the two parties following “either” and “or” without changing the meaning and the flow of the argument—

… However, this fact is either misleading, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else beside the point, since “cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods”.

Using E in the place of C in above sentences, on the other hand, would seem to be either intrusive ( coming out of nowhere) or too far-reaching.

Open to discussion...
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 285
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 42 [0], given: 3

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2008, 21:10
Hello,

I was also bit confused abt the answer choice but after some careful observation i realised the answer to be E.
Here goes my explanation.

the author is trying to disprove the point that irradiation does the same damage as cooking does to the food.

the fist point he says is Most of the irradiated is raw. hence, cooking doesnt come into picture here and we cannot say that irradiation does the same damage as cooking does to the food.

and now the second point also needs to prove similar point.
Option C says that " for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either process individually is compounded" i.e the loss more vitamins by cooking the irradiated food than by cooking food thats normal.

So, the point that both the processes do the same damage is misleading here as irradiation causes the loss to multiply when cooked.

get back to me if any futher doubts..

regds,
Kiran
Intern
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2008, 02:10
THX, Kiran, thx for ur explaination. But, I'm sorry, I have to argue against your reasoning.

I agree the author's ponit is to refute that irradiation and cooking do same damage to foods. But, I think, in the last sentence, the author just want to attact the proponent's line of reasoning in the sentence: "Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking."

I do agree with you about your explaination to the first part of the last sentence. The author point out irradiated food can be eaten withou cooking. Then, the proponents can not say irradiation is no worse than cooking. Here, I think the author point out the first logic flaw in the proponents' reasoning.

Option C is: "cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods".In this option, I think the author found the second logic flaw in the proponent's reasoning. The proponent simply differentiate two steps of making food, while illogically assert that irradiation is no worse than cooking. However, different step dosent necessary bring out different degree. Then, it's misleading...

I think it's a very funny question, although it is somewhat puzzling.

Anyway, OA is the boss and OA is E...
Manager
Joined: 16 Jan 2007
Posts: 73
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2008, 14:01
Option E is merely stating a fact or inferring the argument.
Irradiation +cooking compounds the elimination of vitamins in the food.
I do not see how the above sentence misleads the arg's point.
The answer should be C .
Re: CR: WHICH ONE IS MISLEADING - complete the argument   [#permalink] 07 Mar 2008, 14:01
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Which of the following most logically completes the 9 01 Oct 2007, 02:53
Which of the following most logically completes the 3 29 Sep 2007, 23:36
Which of the following is the most logical completion of the 18 21 Jul 2007, 11:39
Which of the following most logically completes the 8 10 Jul 2007, 17:17
Which of the following most logically completes the 3 14 Jun 2007, 20:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by