MGMAT CR - Calorie restriction

[recklest123]

I could not find a thread for this question; Therefore, I am posting the question here.

Calorie restriction, a diet high in nutrients but low in calories, is known to prolong the life of rats and mice by preventing heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other diseases. A six-month study of 48 moderately overweight people, who each reduced their calorie intake by at least 25 percent, demonstrated decreases in insulin levels and body temperature, with the greatest decrease observed in individuals with the greatest percentage change in their calorie intake. Low insulin level and body temperature are both considered signs of longevity, partly because an earlier study by other researchers found both traits in long-lived people.

If the above statements are true, they support which of the following inferences?

a. Calorie restriction produces similar results in humans as it does in rats and mice.
b. Humans who reduce their calorie intake by at least 25 percent on a long-term basis will live longer than they would have had they not done so.
c. Calorie intake is directly correlated to insulin level in moderately overweight individuals.
d. Individuals with low insulin levels are healthier than individuals with high insulin levels.
e. Some individuals in the study reduced their calorie intake by more than 25 percent.

OA is E, My doubt is that the argument states that "who each reduced their calorie intake by at least 25 percent" - There could be a case where all the participants reduced the intake by 25 percent exactly (i.e no one over 25 percent; this situation would satisfy the "at least 25 percent restriction) - In this case however, E would not hold...

[gokul_nair1984]

Calorie restriction, a diet high in nutrients but low in calories, is known to prolong the life of rats and mice by preventing heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other diseases. A six-month study of 48 moderately overweight people, who each reduced their calorie intake by at least 25 percent, demonstrated decreases in insulin levels and body temperature, with the greatest decrease observed in individuals with the greatest percentage change in their calorie intake. Low insulin level and body temperature are both considered signs of longevity, partly because an earlier study by other researchers found both traits in long-lived people.

There could be a case where all the participants reduced the intake by 25 percent exactly (i.e no one over 25 percent; this situation would satisfy the "at least 25 percent restriction) - In this case however, E would not hold

This case cannot happen.

If you read the portion in the stem that I've coloured, you'll see that there the greatest decrease was observed in individuals with the greatest percentage change in their calorie intake. This simply implies that there are a few people who's reduction in calorie consumption has been greater than 25%, else there would be no variation (greatest decrease).

Does this help?

[tim]

good explanation, Gokul..

[divyataro]

but don't you think E is an assumption derive the conclusion

i felt C should be the answer
can some help me through this

[tim]

That's pretty much what you're looking for. If one of the answers seems so obvious that it basically restates the premises, that is the appropriate answer for a conclusion question..

[divineacclivity]

That's pretty much what you're looking for. If one of the answers seems so obvious that it basically restates the premises, that is the appropriate answer for a conclusion question..

Hi,

I think the answer is E for the question is an inference question.

Had this been a "conclusion" question (something like "what conclusion is author trying to draw" or "what does the info in paragraph revolve around"), would you go for C because an author can't be trying to conclude what E states? Do i make sense here?

Would there be a case (a question on gmat) on which the correct answer would differ based on the inference or the conclusion it draws?

thanks in advance

[RonPurewal]

Had this been a "conclusion" question (something like "what conclusion is author trying to draw" or "what does the info in paragraph revolves around")

when we say "conclusion question" here, we aren't normally talking about the question type you have mentioned here (which is in fact vanishingly rare).

when we say "conclusion question", we are normally talking about something that says "which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the passage?" -- which is, in essence, the same as this "inference" question type.

the type of question you are discussing here, which is more like a RC main-idea question than like anything that normally shows up on CR, is a totally different animal. if that question were asked here, then none of these answers would make sense. (if you were asked where the author was headed with these statements, you would probably say something like "he/she is trying to collect evidence for the idea that calorie restriction will prolong the lives of humans, as it has done in the case of other animals".)

[divineacclivity]

Had this been a "conclusion" question (something like "what conclusion is author trying to draw" or "what does the info in paragraph revolves around")

when we say "conclusion question" here, we aren't normally talking about the question type you have mentioned here (which is in fact vanishingly rare).

when we say "conclusion question", we are normally talking about something that says "which of the following conclusions can be drawn from the passage?" -- which is, in essence, the same as this "inference" question type.

the type of question you are discussing here, which is more like a RC main-idea question than like anything that normally shows up on CR, is a totally different animal. if that question were asked here, then none of these answers would make sense. (if you were asked where the author was headed with these statements, you would probably say something like "he/she is trying to collect evidence for the idea that calorie restriction will prolong the lives of humans, as it has done in the case of other animals".)

I got your point. I was subconsciously mixing RC conclusions and CR conclusions/Inferences :)
Even I couldn't have interpreted & summarized my thoughts so well. Ron, you totally awe people. Thank you very much.

[tim]

:)

[kelly.yan]

Calorie restriction, a diet high in nutrients but low in calories, is known to prolong the life of rats and mice by preventing heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and other diseases. A six-month study of 48 moderately overweight people, who each reduced their calorie intake by at least 25 percent, demonstrated decreases in insulin levels and body temperature, with the greatest decrease observed in individuals with the greatest percentage change in their calorie intake. Low insulin level and body temperature are both considered signs of longevity, partly because an earlier study by other researchers found both traits in long-lived people.

There could be a case where all the participants reduced the intake by 25 percent exactly (i.e no one over 25 percent; this situation would satisfy the "at least 25 percent restriction) - In this case however, E would not hold

This case cannot happen.

If you read the portion in the stem that I've coloured, you'll see that there the greatest decrease was observed in individuals with the greatest percentage change in their calorie intake. This simply implies that there are a few people who's reduction in calorie consumption has been greater than 25%, else there would be no variation (greatest decrease).

Does this help?

Thanks for the explanation! I wanted to just follow up on this. I had some issues with the term "Some individuals..." in answer choice E as related to "A six-month study of 48 moderately overweight people, who each reduced their calorie intake by at least 25 percent, demonstrated decreases in insulin levels and body temperature, with the greatest decrease observed in individuals with the greatest percentage change in their calorie intake".

I translated the question stem to mean that the study included 48 individuals who each (i.e. all of them) reduced calorie intake by greater than 25%. So some could be 25%, others 50% and still others by 75%. If this can be assumed, we cannot say that "Some individuals in the study reduced their calorie intake by more than 25 percent", as all of them reduced their calorie intake by more than 25%.

Therefore, I also selected C as my answer.

I was trying to find something in the question stem to refute my assumption, I was unable to find it.

Instructors please advise where my assumption has gone wrong!

Thanks so much.

[tim]

first, it is NOT given that everyone reduced their calorie intake by more than 25%. we are only told that everyone hit AT LEAST 25%. there is a huge difference here, particularly given how picky the test seems to be on the language on this one. however, even if they had told us that ALL of the participants were above 25%, it would still be true that SOME of them were. think about it: what if i told you that some countries are inhabited (i'm assuming you are aware that all countries are in fact inhabited). would i somehow be wrong in my assertion?

[kelly.yan]

Gotcha. Makes total sense. Great example at the end! Thanks Tim!

[tim]

glad i could help!

[harika.apu]

glad i could help!

Hello Tim ,
what are reasons to eliminate option C.
Is it because based on this study , we cannot generalize about all moderately-overweight people?
Is correlation shown here not sufficient?

Thanks:)

[Arul BharathiA956]

Why cant C be the answer ?
It clearly explains the fact that is mentioned in the premise.
"..., demonstrated decreases in insulin levels and body temperature, with the greatest decrease observed in individuals with the greatest percentage change in their calorie intake" === >
"Calorie intake is directly correlated to insulin level in moderately overweight individuals"

Ron or Tim please explain.

Why C is wrong here ?