Law School Discussion

MASTER LR LIST - ONLY 4 LEFT!!!

lex19

Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #50 on: December 03, 2005, 08:46:57 PM »
3 more correct by the list and lsd standards and i'm good as far as LR, thanks to everyone who participated!

Rooster

  • ****
  • 496
  • This dog has a tough life.
    • View Profile
Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #51 on: December 03, 2005, 08:48:05 PM »
i remember reading something about brain waves...i couldnt say what though

Wolvie

  • ****
  • 173
    • View Profile
Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #52 on: December 03, 2005, 08:48:32 PM »
did you have experimental lr?

Rooster

  • ****
  • 496
  • This dog has a tough life.
    • View Profile
Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #53 on: December 03, 2005, 08:48:55 PM »
Yes

Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #54 on: December 03, 2005, 08:49:17 PM »
nah- don't worry about putting it up. i think i'm on my own in defending it anyway :)

i put heart disease. and despite being in the tiny, tiny minority, i'm still relatively confident. there's not a consensus on whether the study drew a proportional or inverse relationship between the incidence of heart disease and the two vitamins- but it doesn't matter:

a) attractive distractor: Says that food that contains those two vitamins, also contain non-vitamin nutrients that are known to have the same results (reducing or elevating heart disease risk) but it was not provided that the female doctors ate food that contained the two vitamins. they could have had it in juice, and it would still be part of their "diet." nit-picky? yes. but it's the lsat, so i think it's what they wanted.

b) remember a main logical flaw is assuming there's a causal correlation when it may be merely coincidencal. if the study did not screen for women with pre-existing heart conditions, all the women in the study who were given the vitamins could have already had heart disease and all those in the control group could have been healthy (or vice versa). the data isn't any good if anyone already had heart disease.

this is my last time jumping into the fray on this one, promise. hopefully if i'm wrong, it's debateable enough, they'll throw it out :)

Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #55 on: December 03, 2005, 08:53:15 PM »
nah- don't worry about putting it up. i think i'm on my own in defending it anyway :)

i put heart disease. and despite being in the tiny, tiny minority, i'm still relatively confident. there's not a consensus on whether the study drew a proportional or inverse relationship between the incidence of heart disease and the two vitamins- but it doesn't matter:

a) attractive distractor: Says that food that contains those two vitamins, also contain non-vitamin nutrients that are known to have the same results (reducing or elevating heart disease risk) but it was not provided that the female doctors ate food that contained the two vitamins. they could have had it in juice, and it would still be part of their "diet." nit-picky? yes. but it's the lsat, so i think it's what they wanted.

b) remember a main logical flaw is assuming there's a causal correlation when it may be merely coincidencal. if the study did not screen for women with pre-existing heart conditions, all the women in the study who were given the vitamins could have already had heart disease and all those in the control group could have been healthy (or vice versa). the data isn't any good if anyone already had heart disease.

this is my last time jumping into the fray on this one, promise. hopefully if i'm wrong, it's debateable enough, they'll throw it out :)

No, I'm pretty sure it was the diet/foods one, because there was a specific reference in the text to "dietary intake"...

Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #56 on: December 03, 2005, 08:56:12 PM »
but diet would include drinks. it's not specified how in the diet the vitamins were supplied. and the answer choice involved only food. the lsat would not be so imprecise.

42 is wrong. it's question 20 from test 46

Brett McKay

  • ****
  • 225
  • The Frugal Law Student
    • View Profile
    • The Frugal Law Student
Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #57 on: December 03, 2005, 08:56:58 PM »
Wolive rocks my world. Thanks for keeping the list alive.

Wolvie

  • ****
  • 173
    • View Profile
Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #58 on: December 03, 2005, 08:57:24 PM »
guys - do me a favor. im really tired but i want to see if we can get the rest of the questions down.

look at the list and tell me if there are duplicates or if an answer is blatantly wrong. if there are 2 choices then don't tell me about it, those are ones that are being disputed.

you're very welcome for the list...i just cant believe i have actually sat still for this long. its amazing. and i'm a dork. sometimes i wish i were one of those kids who just wanted to get into like lincoln technical crap law school, so i wouldn't get so upset about this stuff.

chidochido

  • ****
  • 1138
  • Rebuilding
    • AOL Instant Messenger - sapotauro
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: updated master LR list
« Reply #59 on: December 03, 2005, 09:00:31 PM »
Good eye, Austen..and I agree with the physician reasoning...