Menu
Consumer advocate: In our nation, food packages must list the number of calories per food serving. But most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small and should be updated. The serving sizes were set decades ago, when our nation’s people typically ate smaller portions than they do today, and, as a result, people eating typical portions today consume more calories than the package labeling appears to indicate that they will. It is time package labeling reflected these changes.
Which of the following is the main point of the consumer advocate’s argument?
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Option E
(This question is from Official Guide. Therefore, because of copyrights, the complete question cannot be copied here. The question can be accessed at GMAT Club)
Consumer advocate: In our nation, food packages must list the number of calories per food serving.
The author here is a consumer advocate. She says that food packages need to mention the number of calories per food serving.
But most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small and should be updated.
‘But’ indicates some form of contrast. The author says that even though the requirement is there, the requirement doesn’t seem to be helpful since most of the serving sizes are misleadingly small. The author also recommends that the serving sizes should be updated (increased).
The serving sizes were set decades ago, when our nation’s people typically ate smaller portions than they do today,
This statement supports the previous statement. Why are most serving sizes small and should be updated? The reason is that people now eat larger portions today than when these serving sizes were set.
and, as a result, people eating typical portions today consume more calories than the package labeling appears to indicate that they will.
This statement presents a result of the previous statement (i.e. the part before ‘and’). Since the portions have increased in size, people eating typical portions today will consume more calories than the package labeling indicates that they will consume (the package labeling continues to calculate calories on the basis of the portion size set decades ago).
It is time package labeling reflected these changes
The author stresses that her recommendation should be implemented now. She says that the time has come for the labeling to reflect these changes – larger serving sizes and corresponding greater number of calories per serving.
Gist: The author first presents a problem with the existing scenario and then makes a suggestion to rectify it. She then supports her suggestion in the third line. In the fourth statement, the author emphasizes that the time to follow her suggestion has come.
The author presents a problem with the existing scenario and makes a suggestion to correct the problem. However, she doesn’t get into the pros and cons of implementing her suggestion. For example: coming up with a new standard serving size could involve extensive research and may be expensive. Besides, consumers may already be aware that the package labeling mentions calories for a smaller portion than they typically consume and thus estimate their calorie-intake accordingly. In such a case too, the existing labeling would work fine.
The question asks us to find the main point of the argument. What is the argument trying to get at? As we discussed, the argument is trying to recommend updating the serving sizes in the package labeling. The author supports this recommendation in the third sentence. The fourth statement reiterates the recommendation.
(A) Incorrect. The argument says that most of the serving sizes used are misleadingly small. If the serving sizes are misleadingly small, we can reasonably agree that the number of calories per serving will also be small. However, the argument doesn’t go in this direction (from ‘serving size’ to ‘calories per serving’). Rather, the argument, right after saying that the serving sizes are small, goes on to recommend updating the serving sizes. Thus, while this option can be inferred from the given passage, it is not the main point of the argument.
(B) Correct. This is in line with our understanding of the argument.
(C) Incorrect. Even though this is mentioned in the third statement of the argument, the author brings up this point to support her recommendation. Thus, while this option is an inference, it is not the main point of the argument.
(D) Incorrect. Like option C, this option too is an inference but not the main point since the author uses this information to argue in favor of her recommendation. The author is not arguing for this point; the author is using this point to argue for her recommendation. Thus, the recommendation and not this option is the main point.
(E) Incorrect. The problem with this option is that the author neither explicitly talks about it nor implicitly indicates toward it. The author just says that people currently consume more calories than the packaging indicates. Nowhere does the author say or indicate that people will start eating fewer calories once the labeling reflects the currently typical portion. The author never gets into how people react to the caloric details on food packages.
This question and the answer choices help clearly understand the difference between an ‘inference’ question and a ‘main point’ question.
SC Notes: This question, like many other CR questions, has quite a few sentences containing comparisons. You can pay attention to the way comparisons are phrased here so that you can understand the correct ways of phrasing a comparison sentence.
This solution was created by Chiranjeev Singh and Anish Passi.
If you have any doubts regarding any part of this solution, please feel free to ask in the comments section.
Learn GMAT the right way – through common sense and logic. There’s no shortcut to a well-deserved success!
© 2021 All rights Reserved.