User avatar
 
LSAT-Chang
Thanks Received: 38
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 479
Joined: June 03rd, 2011
 
 
trophy
Most Thankful
trophy
First Responder
 

Q22 - The relaxation of regulations governing

by LSAT-Chang Mon Aug 08, 2011 1:35 pm

I circled (A) for this, but this is one long confusing argument.
I actually had it down to (A) and (D), but I guess I didn't see the "link" in the argument, so I didn't circle it.
What is the "link" and why is (A) incorrect?
 
timmydoeslsat
Thanks Received: 887
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 1136
Joined: June 20th, 2011
 
This post thanked 2 times.
 
trophy
Most Thanked
trophy
First Responder
 

Re: Q22 - The relaxation of regulations governing

by timmydoeslsat Mon Aug 08, 2011 4:44 pm

After reading my post you will see how this is not that bad! :ugeek:

This is a long argument, but not really complex.

The conclusion is:

The relaxation of regulations governing the manufacture and sale of new medicines to increase their availability should not be part of a larger act to relax all regulations with industrial activity.

In other words, the author wants to make sure only a certain part of regulations are relaxed. While it may be a good thing for that part to be relaxed, the author does not want an across the board relaxation of rules for industrial activity, just the manufacture and sale of new medicines. The reason the author wants this done is so that the availability of medicines will increase.

Sounds good.

However, why in the world would the author not want to relax regulations across the board for industrial activity?

The author tells us!

Unless strict environmental regulations are maintained, endangered species of plants and animals will become extinct.

In other words,

endangered species of plants and animals do not become extinct ---> strict enviro. regs. are maintained

Well, la dee dah!

Who cares about endangered species of plants and animals. Weren't we talking about new medicines and their increase availability here? Maybe relaxing these regulations will help to increase the new meds availability.

I am thinking, where is this author going?

Next line!

A large majority of those new meds are derived from plants and animals.

Then the author tells us that since those new meds are derived from plants and animals, a general relaxation of regs in industrial activity could undermine the original intent of relaxing the regs concerning sale and manufacture of new meds.

The question stem asks us for the role played by the part "large majority of new medicines are derived from plants and animals."

We know that this role can be seen as a premise supporting the subsidiary conclusion of "a general relaxation of regs in industrial activity could undermine the original intent of relaxing the regs concerning sale and manufacture of new meds.

And we know that the subsidiary conclusion is supporting the main conclusion of the should statement in the first sentence of this stimulus.

Answer choices:

A) Not a single mention of research in the stimulus. Eliminate.

B) This is evidence used to support the author's own statement. Eliminate.

C) Cannot infer anything about overregulation of industrial activity.

D) Looks good. Does not have that abstract wording that we are familiar with on the LSAT, but this statement of "large majority of new meds..." shows us the relevance to why any decrease to the number of plant and animal species could undermine the intent of INCREASING availability of new meds.

E) The author does not say that only narrow efforts of deregulation has beneficial results. The author is targeting a goal of increasing availability of new meds. Perhaps in a different subject matter, relaxing regs can be beneficial as part of a wide effort of deregulation.
User avatar
 
LSAT-Chang
Thanks Received: 38
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 479
Joined: June 03rd, 2011
 
 
trophy
Most Thankful
trophy
First Responder
 

Re: Q22 - The relaxation of regulations governing the manufactur

by LSAT-Chang Mon Aug 08, 2011 6:52 pm

You are awesome! Thanks a bunch!! I just get overwhelmed when I see such a long argument that seems so daunting to understand at first. I made two new question posts in this same section, so whenever you have time, please take a look at those! I would love to hear your explanation on those as well =)
 
taaron
Thanks Received: 1
Forum Guests
 
Posts: 9
Joined: October 29th, 2012
 
 
 

Re: Q22 - The relaxation of regulations governing

by taaron Thu Nov 08, 2012 1:11 pm

Had A said a reason for "not lifting regulations" instead of "not restricting research" would it be correct? and if so, more correct than E?

I initially read A as the first one above, but chose E based on the reasoning that the premise in question wasnt itself a reason but was linking extinction with effect to thereby provide a reason altogether...perhaps this reasoning would not be sufficient if A had actually stated " a reason for not lfting regulations."..?

Thank u in advance.
User avatar
 
WaltGrace1983
Thanks Received: 207
Atticus Finch
Atticus Finch
 
Posts: 837
Joined: March 30th, 2013
 
 
trophy
Most Thanked
trophy
Most Thankful
trophy
First Responder
 

Re: Q22 - The relaxation of regulations governing

by WaltGrace1983 Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:39 pm

taaron Wrote:Had A said a reason for "not lifting regulations" instead of "not restricting research" would it be correct? and if so, more correct than E?


I mean it HELPS to get to the reason for "not lifting regulations" but I don't think it is a standalone reason in itself. Why? Because there is more to the evidence. The statement in question is really just an introduction, a way to bridge one idea to the next idea. Check this out...

    (1) We shouldn't lift all regulations to supposedly increase availability
    (2) Why? Because without environmental regulations then some plants and animals would become extinct.
    (3) So? Well since "a large majority of new medicines are derived from plants and animals," this would actually undermine the original intent of the regulations' relaxation - what I mean is that it would actually decrease their availability


Can you see what is going on here? We are given this fact in (2) about species being extinct. We have no idea how this is relevant. The statement in question tells us. It says (~environmental regulations → some P/A extinct) and since (majority new medicines → need some P/A → decrease availability). It links everything up! It links a seemingly unrelated statement up to a related one.
 
donghai819
Thanks Received: 7
Elle Woods
Elle Woods
 
Posts: 65
Joined: September 25th, 2015
 
 
 

Re: Q22 - The relaxation of regulations governing

by donghai819 Tue Jan 12, 2016 5:05 pm

For people who wonders if there are questions that are similar to this particular reasoning structure and CORRECT ANSWER CHOICE, please see 42-4-21. They are VIRTUALLY SAME!!!
 
emily315
Thanks Received: 0
Vinny Gambini
Vinny Gambini
 
Posts: 17
Joined: June 30th, 2014
 
 
 

Re: Q22 - The relaxation of regulations governing

by emily315 Thu Feb 09, 2017 6:27 pm

I initially got this question wrong and the circutous and verbose of this question just seems daunting to me.
After reading several of your explanations and a little mapping, it helped my understanding.
So here is the take/summary/analysis/mapping:

Relax Regulation [RR]
Manufacture and sale [m&S]
animals and plants [a p]

RR on M&S new drug ^ --> -(RR on all IA)
-(ER) --> a p extinct
a p -->most M&S new drug

therefore
-(ER) --> a p extinct --> most M&S new drug v

exactly what D is saying, the link between extinction of species and the decreased potential of the manufacturing and sale of new drugs, which is exactly what the Relaxation of regulation aim to do.
So in order to achieve its own goal, it cannot extend the relaxation to all the industrial activities, otherwise, it will make animals and plants extinct, that they will no long have any source to manufacture and sale for most of the new drug at all.