Q9 - Public health expert: Until

[jennifer]

I found this to be a very difficult main conclusion question, I did not choose answer choice C because I felt like i was making an inference. Can someone please walk me through this problem, thank you

[noah]

Sure!

The argument is structured like this:

People say X.
But, there's evidence that calls that into question.
So, we should do something different with our policy.

We're looking to identify the conclusion, which is basically the final sentence. It's tricky, because it's a twist on a typical argument form that the LSAT employs in this question type:

People say X
They are wrong.
Here's why.

In that form, the "they are wrong" is the conclusion. But, in this question, the author goes on to make a further point - the author then puts the new idea to use to make the final point.

(C) is a rather unattractive answer since it seems rather broad, however it does summarize the author's point, though it doesn't delve into the details.

(A) is a premise.

(B) is too extreme - it's a possible effect of the premise.

(D) is also too extreme - and it's out of scope.

(E) is an implied premise.

[JohnZ880]

In addition to what Noah said, I would also add that what helped me decide between A and C was the fact that the one making the argument is a Public Health expert. I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that since a public health expert was the one doing the arguing that the purpose of such argumentation was to advance an argument related to public health solutions/policies/recommendations, rather than just relaying scientific discoveries.