medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A nutritionist argues that the city's new soda tax has succeeded in improving public health. As evidence, she notes that in the year after the tax took effect, total sales of sugary soft drinks within city limits fell by 18 percent compared with the year before.
Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the nutritionist's argument?
- During the same year, residents sharply increased their purchases of sugary drinks from stores located just outside the city's borders.
- The soda tax was approved by a wider margin of voters than any other ballot measure that year.
- Most residents reported that they found the taxed beverages less pleasant to drink than untaxed alternatives.
- Public-health officials in a neighboring city are now considering adopting a similar tax.
- Sales of sugary soft drinks had been declining slowly in the city for several years before the tax took effect.
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?