CSAT Solved Papers/ 2021/Q22
2021 CSAT — Q22
Passage
There are reports that some of the antibiotics sold in the market are fed to poultry and other livestock as growth promoters. Overusing these substances can create superbugs, pathogens that are resistant to multiple drugs and could be passed along humans. Mindful of that, some farming companies have stopped using the drugs to make chickens gain weight faster. Since Denmark banned antibiotic growth promoters in the 1990s, the major pork exporter says it is producing more pigs — and the animals get fewer diseases.
Which one of the following statements best reflects the critical message conveyed by the passage given above?
Thinking pathway
Locate. This asks for the central idea — pin the passage’s exact target, the load-bearing thesis, not a true-but-minor detail. The harm is specific: antibiotics fed “as growth promoters” create superbugs. The remedy is specific too: Denmark “banned antibiotic growth promoters” — and the result was more pigs with fewer diseases. The passage indicts a particular misuse, not antibiotics as such.
Test (thesis, not detail; check the fit). The critical message must match that precise target: stop using antibiotics to fatten animals; keep them for genuine disease. (d) “antibiotics should only be used to treat diseases” states exactly that boundary. Test the rivals: (c) bans all antibiotic use on animals — broader than the passage, which bans only growth-promoter use and even notes animals still “get… diseases” (so treatment use remains). (a)/(b) tell people to avoid or replace animal foods — a different topic entirely.
Eliminate by anatomy. (c) is too strong for what the passage says — it widens “ban growth promoters” into “ban antibiotics on animals,” ignoring that sick animals still need treatment. (a) is out of scope — “avoid consuming animal products” is never the passage’s recommendation, a claim the passage never makes. (b) is out of scope too — replacing animal foods with plant foods is nowhere in the text. The transferable rule: the message inherits the passage’s exact scope — here, growth-promoter misuse, not all antibiotic use, not diet choices. Key: (d).
Evidence in the text
“Some of the antibiotics… are fed to poultry and other livestock as growth promoters. Overusing these substances can create superbugs… Since Denmark banned antibiotic growth promoters in the 1990s, the major pork exporter says it is producing more pigs — and the animals get fewer diseases.” — the harm is the use of antibiotics as GROWTH PROMOTERS, and Denmark banned growth promoters (not all antibiotic use) with no loss of productivity. The message is to confine antibiotics to treating disease → (d). (c) over-bans ALL antibiotic use on animals (the passage targets growth-promoter misuse, and animals still “get… diseases”); (a)/(b) about avoiding/replacing animal foods are out of scope.
Worked rationale
The passage’s logic: antibiotics used as growth promoters breed resistant superbugs that reach humans; Denmark banned growth promoters and saw more pigs and fewer diseases. So the lesson is to restrict antibiotics to treating disease.
- (d) captures the precise boundary — antibiotics for treatment, not for fattening. Correct.
- (c) over-bans all antibiotic use on animals, which the passage does not advocate.
- (a)/(b) shift to avoiding or replacing animal foods, off the passage’s topic.
Answer: (d).
Why the other options miss
- A out of scope: “avoid consuming animal products” is a diet prescription the passage never makes; it discusses how antibiotics are used, not whether to eat meat.
- B out of scope: replacing animal foods with plant foods is unrelated to the passage’s antibiotic-misuse message.
- C too strong for what the passage says: bans all antibiotic use on animals, while the passage targets only growth-promoter use and implies disease treatment continues (“the animals get fewer diseases”).
Specialist insight
The trap is (c). It feels like the “strong, decisive” message — ban antibiotics on animals — and many will pick it for that force. But the passage is surgically narrow: the villain is growth-promoter use, the cure (Denmark) is banning growth promoters, and disease still exists, so treatment use must survive. (d) preserves that distinction; (c) erases it by over-banning. On “critical message” items, match the passage’s scope exactly — a remedy broader than the harm the passage names is an over-strong trap, not a stronger answer.
The passage bans antibiotic *growth promoters*, not all antibiotic use — (c) over-bans; the precise message is "use antibiotics only to treat disease," so (d).