medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A nutritionist argues that because a recent study showed that people who consume at least three servings of leafy greens daily have significantly lower blood pressure than those who do not, increasing leafy green consumption is the most effective way for any individual to manage hypertension.
Which of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the nutritionist's argument?
- It takes for granted that blood pressure is the only relevant metric for evaluating an individual's overall cardiovascular health.
- It fails to establish that three servings of leafy greens is a statistically significant amount for the general population.
- From an observed association between greens and lower blood pressure, it leaps to the unsupported verdict that greens are the single best remedy.
- It ignores the possibility that some individuals who consume leafy greens may still suffer from high blood pressure.
- It assumes that any dietary change capable of lowering blood pressure must eliminate hypertension entirely.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- 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?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?