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 far wider margin of city voters than any other public-health measure that appeared on that year's ballot.
- In anonymous surveys, most city residents reported finding the newly taxed beverages noticeably less pleasant to drink than untaxed substitutes.
- Public-health officials in two neighboring cities are now seriously weighing whether to adopt a comparable per-ounce tax of their own.
- Sales of sugary soft drinks had already been declining slowly across the city for several consecutive years before the new tax ever took effect.
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