Select all that apply - Restricting by question stem

[raophaneendra792]

Hi,

First of all, the forums are awesome. Please do keep answering our queries.

I have a doubt in a question regarding the below RC passage.

Initially,scientists suspected a high dietary calcium intake of increasing the risk of kidney stones. A high intake of calcium, however, reduces the urinary excretion of oxalate,which is thought to lower the risk. Therefore,the concept that a higher dietary calcium intake increases the risk of kidney stones,and the mechanism underlying their formation,required examination. Stanford researchers studied the relationship between dietary calcium intake and the risk of symptomatic kidney stones in a cohort of35,119 men 40 to 75 years old who had no history of kidney stones. Dietary calcium was
measured by means of a semi-quantitative food-frequency questionnaire in 1998. During four years of follow-up, 535 cases of kidney stones were documented by LifeWork analysts. After adjustment for age, dietary calcium intake was inversely associated with the risk of stones; in fact,a high calcium intake decreased the risk of symptomatic kidney stones. Surprisingly,intake of animal protein was directly associated with the risk of stone formation.

Select all that apply
Q: In this study, according to the author, dietary calcium intake

A:was measured by means of a semi quantitative medical examination

B:was discovered to decrease the chance of symptomatic kidney stone formation, after adjustment for age

C:might decrease excretion of oxalate through the urinary tract

Answers: B & C

Shouldn't the answer be only B? The passage says that a high dietary calcium intake reduces the urinary excretion of oxalate, not dietary calcium per se. Dietary calcium intake is associated only with the reduced risk of kidney stones. Additionally, "C" is not something that is the result of the study. It might well be the reason, but the study says nothing about how/why the association is there.

Am I missing something ? Am I being too fussy about the details ?

Thanks :)

[tommywallach]

Hey There Rao,

Where is this passage from. I agree with you that answer choice (C) is very iffy. If the question were changed to

According to the passage, which of the following can be inferred?

Then I would like (C). But I agree with you that, as written, it has nothing to do with the study. HOWEVER, it is fair to say that (C) is inferable based on the PASSAGE, because the only way we can eliminate a "might" would be if the passage had definitively told us the thing in question WAS NOT happening. In other words, the passage would have had to tell us definitively that calcium does not decrease excretion of oxalate for us to be able to NOT pick (C).

All that said, I agree with you that the question is poorly written. Is it one of ours, or someone else's, or (worst of all) an official passage? : )

-t

[raophaneendra792]

Thanks for the clarification !! That helps. How I hate those "hedge" words. Just to be clear, therefore, since the passage fails to say the opposite does not happen and instead alludes a bit of support, it is inferable that dietary calcium might cause a decrease in excretion of oxalate.

The RC is from verbal practice section of a prestigious test prep company with its name starting from K.

Just one more query, I have noticed that I take an inordinate amount of time on ASPs and "reading" long difficult passages(1.5-3 mins for ASPs and for such RC way more than appropriate after accounting for time required for answering the RC questions). The answers are more or less right(>80%), but I take an average of 5-6 minutes extra, in aggregate, in sections where there are difficult RC and ASPs. This after I have tried stealing time from discrete verbal questions; I try to complete them within 10 mins, 12 at worst.

I don't think the problem is with GRE vocabulary, because I get the TC/SE right and don't feel most of the words as an impediment(Not that I know all, but it just works out fine). Instead, I think it is the sentence structure. Not being a native speaker, I haven't been exposed to those types of convoluted structure before. And I end up reading, sometimes, a long sentence over and over again. Even then,at times, I feel helpless when I have to "Text-to-me" the paragraph.

Any suggestions as to how can I improve my reading skills on such RC? I have tried the MGRE RC passages but sadly, familiarity breeds contempt. I know before hand that there is a question from a particular part of the passage. So, I basically tend to "turn on and off". Any additional practice will also help me put to effect MGRE's techniques on a broader range of examples and thus, learning the subtle caveats in the process. Also regarding the ASPs, would you advocate any practice material ?

I have heard that the critical reasoning and logical reasoning sections of GMAT and LSAT respectively are similar to ASPs. Will any of them help? Or are both of them too dissimilar to the GRE? Additionally the RC passages of LSAT are way more tougher/longer than the GRE, so should I practice with them? Or are the skills tested are different on both the tests, rendering the practice bootless?

To cut the long story short, I am sort of asking for additional practice material that might assuage my fears of not completing the more difficult 2nd verbal section on time. I know I am asking a bit too much. But any help will be welcome. Sorry for the long post. Thanks in advance.

[tommywallach]

Hey Rao,

First off, fantastic usage of the word "bootless." Secondly, sorry if this post is quite late. Now, some pointers.

#1: If the problem you're having is reading, then the only true practice would be doing a lot of reading. You don't need to be answering GRE questions to improve your reading skills. Read as much as you can, as often as you can, in English. Read difficult texts. I recommend, as an example, Thomas Piketty's new book "Capital in the 21st Century." It's super interesting, culturally important, and dense. It'll force you to stay focused for long stretches of time to get the meaning. Reading books or long articles (Foreign Affairs, The Economist, etc.) is good, because it'll make the GRE essays seems short and simple by comparison.

#2: The GMAT RC section is, on the whole, more difficult than the GRE, but I think it makes for good practice. I would recommend you stay away from the LSAT, which structures its passages in very different, much more complex ways. (For what it's worth, I teach all three, so I promise I know what I'm talking about!).

#3: As for ASPs, again, the GMAT is harder, but the CR section is very similar. LSAT LR is usually similar, but there are a few non-standard question types. I'd recommend you just skip it and stick to GRE/GMAT, but if you're insistent, you could check the question stem each time and make sure it's something you recognize.

#4: I'll repeat, however, that if the problem is reading, you need to practice reading. Books and serious magazines to the rescue!

-t

[raophaneendra792]

Thanks a ton !! You are awesome.

I will try reading the suggested magazines and books. Then proceed with the related sections in GMAT and LSAT, in that order.

Thanks again. :)

[tommywallach]

Glad to help! Good luck!