LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

Get expert LSAT preparation and law school admissions advice from PowerScore Test Preparation.

 Administrator
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 7689
  • Joined: Feb 02, 2011
|
#71187
Please post your questions below! Thank you!
 horns2
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: Feb 17, 2020
|
#73888
I realize that D and E specify different places, Asia vs. Chesapeake Bay, but wouldn't her new technique reveal the presence of V. Cholerae in both of those water samples?
 Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 3676
  • Joined: Apr 14, 2011
|
#73932
It could, horns2, but the issue here is whether there is evidence that Colwell would say the test would reveal the presence of the bacterium in those places. We know that Colwell claimed that she found it in the Chesapeake Bay, so if she believed she had found it there then of course she would say that her test would confirm that finding. But what evidence is there that she would say the bacterium is currently present in coastal waters "throughout Asia"? Would she say it would for sure be found all over those waters? The only place we know about is the Bay of Bengal, where it looks like she would expect to find it. But what would she say about the East China Sea, or the Sea of Japan? Would she say "yes, if we test those waters, we will find cholera"? That's the problem with answer E - it goes beyond what we know in a way that makes it unsupported (and certainly less supported than answer D).
 horns2
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: Feb 17, 2020
|
#73955
Adam, thank you so much! That was really helpful
 myaysa.evans16
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: Aug 05, 2020
|
#79456
Hi, I am still a little confused as to where in the passage we see evidence that the bacteria would've been more likely found in the Bay than in Asia. I get the answer of E is a lot broader than that of D, but I am still having trouble proving D over E.
User avatar
 KelseyWoods
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 971
  • Joined: Jun 26, 2013
|
#79483
Hi Myaysa!

It isn't that the bacteria would've more likely been found in the Bay than in Asia. It's that the passage gives us evidence that Colwell believed that V. cholerae was present in the Chesapeake Bay at the beginning of the 2nd paragraph ("In the 1970s, microbiologist Rita Colwell’s claim that she had isolated V. cholerae from the Chesapeake Bay..."). Since Colwell believes that she isolated V. cholerae from the Chesapeake Bay, then it follows that she would believe that her new detection method would detect V. cholerae in samples from the Chesapeake Bay. We have specific support for this specific location.

We can't as strongly support that she would agree water samples from coastal regions throughout Asia would also reveal the presence of V. cholerae. We know that she found it in some specific locations in Asia. But that's not enough to support she would find it throughout Asia. Think of it this way--we know she believes V. cholerae is in the Chesapeake Bay. Does that mean she would agree that V. cholerae would be found in water samples from coastal regions throughout the U.S.? Not necessarily. She believed it was in one specific location--not everywhere along the coast.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey
 kenlars5
  • Posts: 21
  • Joined: Oct 27, 2020
|
#82908
Hi there,
Could you also eliminate E given that Colwell’s antibody test only found the bacteria in 51/52 samples in Asia? I understand that we don’t know what the sample of costal regions throughout Asia would consist of, and it’s very possible that ALL might have the bacteria but given that a study already done found that not 100% of water samples in Asia have the bacteria then it casts doubt on the strength/certainty of answer E which is that throughout Asia water samples from costal regions WOULD reveal the presence of the bacteria. Ideally I think it’s helpful to recognize and understand that at the beginning of para. 2 she said she isolated V. cholerae in Chesapeake Bay, so D absolutely is supported but as this question is difficult to pre-phrase so process of elimination is used, would this be an acceptable reason to eliminate E.
Thanks!
 Jeremy Press
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 836
  • Joined: Jun 12, 2017
|
#83743
Hi Ken,

That's an interesting suggestion, but I'd be careful with it here. The question asks what Colwell would be most likely to believe, and, at least for the region she studied in Asia, there was such a high percentage of positive samples (51/52) that I think she'd be likely to believe any given water sample from that region would contain the bacteria in question.

As Adam and Kelsey helpfully pointed out above, the language "throughout Asia" is more problematic in answer choice E. Since we only know that Colwell worked in one specific coastal region of Asia (the Bay of Bengal), we have no evidence of what would happen, or what she would believe her tests would reveal, in other coastal regions of Asia. Thus, we are truly in the dark in regard to this answer (whereas we know from the passage she had a strong belief that she had isolated the bacteria from the Chesapeake Bay).

I hope this helps!

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

Analyze and track your performance with our Testing and Analytics Package.