WeakenDiff: Medium

Logic Breakdown

Passage Summary: People who drink a certain tea have more kidney problems than those who don't, so the tea must be causing the kidney issues.

Conclusion: Regularly drinking camellia tea can lead to an increased risk of developing kidney damage.

Reasoning: There is a correlation between regular tea consumption and a higher incidence of kidney damage compared to the general population.

Analysis: This argument falls into the classic trap of assuming correlation implies causation. Just because tea drinkers have more kidney damage doesn't mean the tea is the culprit. Perhaps people with kidney issues are drawn to this tea because it soothes their symptoms, or maybe tea drinkers have other lifestyle habits that cause the damage. To weaken the argument, look for an answer that suggests an alternative cause or implies that the kidney damage might actually be what leads people to drink the tea in the first place.

Passage Stimulus

Passage Redacted

Unlock Full Passage

9.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Correct Answer
E
It introduces a plausible confounder: many camellia tea drinkers also regularly consume other beverages suspected of causing kidney damage. That alternative cause undercuts the argument’s move from correlation to “the tea raises risk.”
Upgrade Your Prep

Ready to go beyond free explanations?

LSAT Perfection is the #1 modern LSAT prep platform, trusted by thousands of students for comprehensive test strategies, advanced drilling, and full analytics on every PrepTest.

Detailed explanations for 59 PrepTests
Advanced drillset builder
Personalized analytics
Built-in Wrong Answer Journal
Explore Perfection Plus for full LSAT prep