medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Nutritionist: To maintain optimal energy levels throughout the day, a person must consume at least 60 grams of protein. Recent surveys show that most professional athletes consume over 100 grams of protein daily. Therefore, most professional athletes maintain optimal energy levels throughout the day.
The nutritionist's argument is flawed because it
- treats a requirement for an outcome as though meeting it were enough to bring the outcome about
- draws its general conclusion from a sample of athletes unlikely to represent the wider population
- presumes that professional athletes are the only people who ever need to keep up optimal energy levels
- confuses a mere relative rise in protein intake with the crossing of a fixed absolute energy threshold
- overlooks the chance that consuming far more than sixty grams of protein might itself prove quite harmful
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- 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