12-2-11

mythicalman · 发表于 2003-11-22 23:50:00

The labeling of otherwise high-calorie foods as "sugar-free," based on the replacement of all sugar by artificial sweeteners, should be prohibited by law. Such a prohibition is indicated because many consumers who need to lose weight will interpret the label "sugar-free" as synonymous with "low in calories" and harm themselves by building weight-loss diets around foods labeled "sugar-free." Manufacturers of sugar-free foods are well aware of this tendency on the part of consumers.

11. Which one of the following, if true, provides the strongest basis for challenging the conclusion in the passage?

(A) Food manufacturers would respond to a ban on the label "sugar-free' by reducing the calories in sugar-free products by enough to be able to promote those products as diet foods.

(B) Individuals who are diabetic need to be able to identify products that contain no sugar by reference to product labels that expressly state that the product contains no sugar.

(C) Consumers are sometimes slow to notice changes in product labels unless those changes are themselves well advertised.

(D) Consumers who have chosen a particular weight-loss diet tend to persist with this diet if they have been warned not to expect very quick results.

(E) Exactly what appears on a product label is less important to consumer behavior than is the relative visual prominence of the different pieces of information that the label contains.

B

B是不是举个反例？糖尿病人可以吃artificial sweetness.

catmimi · 发表于 2003-11-23 01:33:00

Conclusion: The labeling of otherwise high-calorie foods as "sugar-free," based on the replacement of all sugar by artificial sweeteners, should be prohibited by law.

Facts: many consumers who need to lose weight will interpret the label "sugar-free" as synonymous with "low in calories" and harm themselves by building weight-loss diets around foods labeled "sugar-free." Manufacturers of sugar-free foods are well aware of this tendency on the part of consumers.

this is actually asking you to weaken the conclusion
B-- if individual who is diabetic, it is possible to tell whether the products are "low in calories" or "sugar-free" and also they know what is the difference between them.
therefore, the prohibition law is not necessary because those manufacturers cannot fool their customers by saying "sugar-free" as to imply "low calories".

mythicalman · 发表于 2003-11-23 02:04:00

Thank you for your kind help first. MM. However, I cannot understand your follow reasoning:
"if individual who is diabetic, it is possible to tell whether the products are "low in calories" or "sugar-free" and also they know what is the difference between them."

Compared to
(B) Individuals who are diabetic need to be able to identify products that contain no sugar by reference to product labels that expressly state that the product contains no sugar.

It seems that the diatetic cannot know the content unless they're expressed by the label, which seems support the conclusion.

What's your comment?

catmimi · 发表于 2003-11-23 02:18:00

you are right!!

author said "Manufacturers of sugar-free foods are well aware of this tendency on the part of consumers."
however, customers are really not aware of the label meanings.

12-2-11

12-2-11

所属分类: GMAT考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()