LSAT and Law School Admissions Forum

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

User avatar
 dshen123
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: Nov 18, 2023
|
#113241
Will B be correct if we change it to "drugs that inhibit angiogenesis will probably prevent obesity for some obesity humans " ?
User avatar
 Dana D
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: Feb 06, 2024
|
#113272
Hey Dshen,

Remember that we are always picking the best answer on the LSAT, so here, that's not what could be true, it's what answer choice must be true based on the facts presented to us. So no, answer choice (B) as you re-wrote it still wouldn't win out over answer choice (C), because answer choice (C) is backed by a premise in the stimulus. We know the drugs stop the creation of angiogenesis, and in rodents this prevented obestity, supporting the idea that fat tissue must need angiogenesis to grow. However, assuming this would work the same way in humans, or that the drugs would "probably" prevent obestity is just not as strongly supported.

Be very strict with yourself when answering must be true questions - you don't want to assume anything outside the facts that the stimulus presents you. Often you will have multiple answer choices that could be true, like your re-written answer choice (B), but that doesn't mean they must be true.

hope that helps!
User avatar
 flowerpower
  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: Jul 11, 2025
|
#121753
Hi! I diagrammed this as Stop ANG --> prevent obesity. I thought because this was a causal claim that then meant ANG --> obesity, but (C) seems to have flipped the sides of this statement. Should I have done the contrapositive instead?
User avatar
 Jeff Wren
PowerScore Staff
  • PowerScore Staff
  • Posts: 1153
  • Joined: Oct 19, 2022
|
#121767
Hi flowerpower,

This stimulus is an example of one in which conditional reasoning and causal reasoning overlap, and the statements can be viewed either way. The difficulty is treating/interpreting them one way (such as causal) in the stimulus and then another way (such as conditional) in the answers and then confusing the two concepts.

The stimulus states that certain drugs "work by depriving growing tumors of needed blood vessels" (my emphasis). The word "needed" indicates necessity, and so this means that "if tumors grow, then blood vessels (i.e. angiogenesis) are needed." However, this statement also can be viewed causally, in that these drugs cause the angiogenesis to be inhibited (preventing the creation of blood vessels) which in turn prevents tumors from growing.

Because the final sentence of the stimulus indicates that these same drugs prevent obesity in rodents, the implication is that they prevent obesity in the same manner as they prevent tumors from growing (i.e. by inhibiting angiogenesis).

While Answer C is expressing a conditional relationship rather than a causal relationship (as indicated by the word "depends"), it is still supported by the conditional relationship in the stimulus. In other words, just as growing tumors depend on angiogenesis, there's support in the stimulus that growing fat tissues also depend on angiogenesis, which is why these same drugs appear to have similar effects on these two conditions.

Get the most out of your LSAT Prep Plus subscription.

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