Purebred dogs are prone to genetically determined abnormalities. Although such abnormalities often can be corrected b...

jasonsanchez1993@outlook.com on June 2, 2021

Sorry. *Can someone please show how A is the correct answer.*

Mazen on November 19, 2022

Hi,

Not a tutor, but I think I can help:

B is about "nongenetically determined," as opposed to "genetically determined"; it is out of scope.

C, which is about life span, is also out of scope because the conclusion is specific to saving money "by reducing the risk of incurring costly medical bills."

D has the same problem as C in that it does not impact the relationship between "genetically determined abnormalities" and "the risk of incurring the cost of correcting it."

E, like the other three answers (B, C, and D), is also out of scope, because we are not talking about the offsprings but rather the dog itself.

So through the process of elimination we arrive at A; so what does A say and how does it play into the stimulus? There's the rub!

I felt that the difficulty in this question stems from the fact that the stimulus assumes that people are going to feel a "need," i.e. a "necessity," to correct the abnormality. But what if the abnormality does not affect the health of the dog, such as a cosmetic abnormality in the dog's ears, nose, etc... This where A comes into play.

A states that "most" of these genetic abnormalities do not affect the general well-being of dogs." Well, if more than fifty percent of the abnormalities do not affect the well-being of dogs, than the "risk" associated with "the costly medical bills" is certainly reduced in light of A.

Side note, when I read A, I did not like it, in part I did not quite understand it and hence how it is factoring into the stimulus. But I know that when an answer-choice is confusing me, but I am certain that the rest are clearly wrong, then I should select the confusing one. Moreover, after understanding it, I felt that it does not weaken significantly, but the question stem is about which of the answers weakens the most, not find an answer that weakens or destroys the argument.

Anyway, this is my take!

I am sure, a Testmax expert will correct me if I am wrong!

Mazen

Emil-Kunkin on August 13 at 03:19PM

I agree with what Mazen said, but I think theres an easier process. We dont need to knock out b-e, we can show A is right. If the abnormalities are essentially harmless, then here is no reason to undergo the procedure, thus they will not incur the costly medical bills.