(A) Consumers are aware of the origins of the produce they purchase.

and

(D) Organic pesticides are incapable of penetrating the skin of a fruit or vegetable.


Our argument is that when purchasing with a farm THAT ONLY USES organic pesticides, then you don't have to worry about ingesting pesticides.

Why? because, inorganic pesticides lasts on the surface longer than organic pesticides do. This argument is assuming that organic pesticides are innocuous and incapable of affecting consumers in some other way. But, option D exposes this assumption.

Now let's look at A. Does A have to be true for argument to sustain? It doesn't matter if consumers know about the origin of the produce, because regardless of the outcome, the argument is still valid.

Hope that helps!

For me all the options look wrong. How to eliminate it.
Also "incapable" is a strong word. Germs/bacteria would have penetrated within that less time also

Posted from my mobile device

The argument above assumes that

A Consumers are aware of the origins of the produce they purchase. THE ORIGINS? THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS WHETHER ORGANIC OR INORGANIC PESTICIDE IS USED - WRONG
B Produce from farms that use organic pesticides reaches the consumer within hours after it is picked or harvested. TOTALLY OUT OF SCOPE- WRONG
C No farm uses both organic and inorganic pesticides. EVEN IF FARMS USE BOTH, THIS DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT A FRUIT WILL CONTAIN BOTH AT THE SAME TIME. NICE TRY- WRONG
D No pesticide is capable of penetrating the skin of a fruit or vegetable.- NOW IF ITS CAPABLE OF PENETRATING THE SKIN, THEN WHETHER INORGANIC OR ORGANIC WE DO NEED TO WORRY
E The use of either type of pesticide does not increase the cost of produce- THE DISCUSSION IS NOT ABOUT THE COST YOU CHEAP BASTARDS!- WRONG

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The conclusion of the argument is that one need not worry about ingesting pesticides when purchasing produce from farms that use only organic pesticides. The basis for that claim is the fact that organic pesticides leave the surface of produce within a few hours of spraying. In order for this argument to be valid, we must assume that the organic pesticides do not harm the produce in any lasting way.

(A) This is unrelated to the argument since the conclusion speaks about not having to worry about ingesting produce on which only organic pesticides were known to be used.

(B) If anything, this statement runs counter to what the argument is saying. If produce that has been sprayed with organic pesticide reaches the final consumer within hours after it is picked, it is possible that the consumer does need be concerned about the pesticides.

(C) The conclusion of the argument is already limited to those farms which use "only organic pesticides."

(D) CORRECT. If a pesticide is capable of penetrating the skin of a fruit or vegetable then, while the organic pesticide will dissipate from the surface of the fruit in a few hours, it may remain inside the fruit. The author of this argument assumes that the pesticides cannot penetrate the skin.

(E) The issue of cost is unrelated to the argument's conclusion about pesticide residues.­