LSAT - Logical Reasoning Section Example Question

Question

In the 1920s, surveys of factory workers who painted watch dials with luminous paint found an alarming incidence of anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures and death from cancer. This paint contained radium, a radioactive element. As a result, the industrial use of radioactive luminous paint was completely stopped by 1960. However, radium stays active for hundreds of years. Therefore, those watch-collectors who own watches that have luminous dials and were made before 1960 should either bury these watches in the ground or store them in thick lead boxes to protect themselves and the people around them from anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures and death from cancer.

Which one of the following, if true, LEAST strengthens the argument above?

1. A) The surveys also found that the incidence of anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures and death from cancer among factory workers who painted watch dials with non-luminous paint was not greater than that among the general population.

1. B) The surveys also found that factory workers who painted watch dials with luminous paint, the extent of their health problems was directly proportional to the cumulative number of hours for which they had worked with luminous paint till then.

1. C) Barriers of lead or earth provide adequate protection to human beings from harmful radioactive substances.

1. D) People who wear watches that have luminous dials and were made before 1960 for more than a decade have an alarming incidence of anemia.

1. E) Most chemists and laboratory workers who worked with radium for more than a year in the first decade after its discovery in 1898 did not have, for the rest of their lives, a greater incidence of anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures and death from cancer than the general population.

Answer 1

The prompt asks you to find the claim that "least strengthens" the argument. The argument is, basically, a series of assertions implying that exposure to the luminous paint causes illness. The claim that least strengthens this is the one that most strongly contradicts any of the argument's premises, conclusion, or implications.

The most contradictory claim is E, which asserts that most people who worked with radium -- the radioactive ingredient in the luminous paint -- did not have adverse health reactions. This contradicts the argument's general thrust which is that exposure to radium in the paint causes illness.

Answer 2

When we are reviewing questions like these on a standardized assessment, it would help to take a moment to review the prompt and understand what is being asked. By reviewing it, the argument in the prompt suggests that people who own watches with luminous dials made before 1960 should either bury these watches or store them in lead boxes to avoid health issues like anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures, and death from cancer. The argument is based on the harmful effects of radium exposure, as evidenced by historical data on factory workers who painted watch dials with luminous paint.

The correct answer to this question will be the option that least strengthens the argument.

Let's go through each answer choice:

A) The surveys also found that the incidence of anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures, and death from cancer among factory workers who painted watch dials with non-luminous paint was not greater than that among the general population.

1. Strengthens: This strengthens the argument by implying that the health problems observed were specific to the use of luminous (radium-containing) paint and not due to other factors related to the work environment.

B) The surveys also found that factory workers who painted watch dials with luminous paint, the extent of their health problems was directly proportional to the cumulative number of hours for which they had worked with luminous paint till then.

1. Strengthens: This strengthens the argument by suggesting a direct correlation between the amount of exposure to radium and the severity of health issues, reinforcing the claim that radium exposure is dangerous.

C) Barriers of lead or earth provide adequate protection to human beings from harmful radioactive substances.

1. Strengthens: This strengthens the argument by supporting the recommended solution of storing watches in lead boxes or burying them to protect against radiation exposure.

D) People who wear watches that have luminous dials and were made before 1960 for more than a decade have an alarming incidence of anemia.

1. Strengthens: This strengthens the argument by providing evidence that even modern wearers of old watches experience health issues, which implies that the watches are still dangerous.

E) Most chemists and laboratory workers who worked with radium for more than a year in the first decade after its discovery in 1898 did not have, for the rest of their lives, a greater incidence of anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures, and death from cancer than the general population.

1. Least Strengthens: This least strengthens the argument. If chemists and laboratory workers who worked with radium for over a year did not suffer higher incidences of the health problems mentioned, it undermines the claim that radium exposure is necessarily harmful and casts doubt on the severity of the risk from owning radium-painted watches.

After going through each of the answer choices, the correct answer would be E.

I hope this makes sense. If you have any additional questions, please let me know. Take care!

-Dr. Christal-Joy Turner

Answer 3

*First, did you make sure to read the brief question prompt before the passage to know what kind of question it was going to be and what you should be looking for ahead of time? This is a crucial habit for every Logical Reasoning Question on the LSAT*

The correct answer is:

E) Most chemists and laboratory workers who worked with radium for more than a year in the first decade after its discovery in 1898 did not have, for the rest of their lives, a greater incidence of anemia, loss of teeth, bone fractures and death from cancer than the general population.

1. Explanation: This weakens the conclusion because it shows that a notable population outside of the factory workers handled radium but did not have health issues. Having health issues, which were caused by the paint, is an assumption on which the conclusion depends. The population demolishes this supposed causation in the prompt. This strengthens the argument the least, if at all.

A) is wrong because it refers to a group who did not even use the luminous paint in the factory, comparing them with others who did not use the luminous paint, and that they had similar diseases, unlike those of the poisoned factory workers. This actually strengthens the conclusion quite a bit.

B) is wrong because it shows more paint the workers were exposed to, the more health problems they had. This clearly strengthens the assumption that it was the paint causing health problems, possibly the most out of all answer options.

C) is wrong because it fundamentally validates an assumption on which the conclusion depends.

D) is wrong because it shows those who were around even small amounts of the paint (the watch wearers), after long periods, ended up with many of the same health issues as the factory workers. Thus, this strengthens the conclusion far more than the correct answer.