hard · LSAT
Research shows that people who drink at least three cups of green tea per day have significantly lower rates of heart disease than those who drink no tea. Yet when researchers ran a double-blind clinical trial giving green-tea extract to heart-disease patients, the extract showed no therapeutic effect whatsoever on their condition.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy described above?
- Green tea works only to lower the chance of developing heart disease in the first place, not to improve the condition of those who already have it.
- The people who habitually drink green tea also tend to keep up other heart-healthy habits, such as exercising regularly.
- The clinical trial ran for six months, the standard length for studies of this kind.
- Many heart-disease patients would rather rely on conventional pharmaceuticals than on herbal extracts.
- Green-tea extract has been shown to reverse heart disease more effectively than any prescription drug.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- The author's use of the word "demonstrates" most strongly suggests that the author's attit
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?