Question

question 1 (ri.8.6 – author’s point of view)
the author includes examples from mexico, hungary, and the united states mainly to—
a. show that junk - food taxes are successful in most countries
b. explain how junk food became popular worldwide
c. demonstrate that junk - food taxes have been widely considered but remain controversial
d. prove that the united states is behind other countries in health reform

question 2 (ri.8.3 – connections among ideas)
how does the author connect the ideas of food deserts and junk - food taxes to support the overall argument?
a. by showing that food deserts are caused by junk - food taxes
b. by explaining that junk - food taxes would limit choices for people already lacking access to healthy food
c. by arguing that food deserts would disappear if junk food were taxed
d. by comparing food deserts in the u.s. to those in other countries

question 3 (ri.8.6 – author’s purpose)
why does the author reference studies from the american journal of public health and george mason university?
a. to prove that all experts agree junk - food taxes are ineffective
b. to show that scientific studies are unreliable
c. to acknowledge opposing viewpoints while strengthening the author’s own argument
d. to encourage readers to conduct their own research

Explanation:

1. For Question 1: Using examples from multiple countries shows the concept of junk-food taxes is discussed globally, but they face pushback, matching option C.
2. For Question 2: Food deserts are areas with limited healthy food access; linking junk-food taxes to this means the taxes would further restrict options for those in these areas, which is option B.
3. For Question 3: Citing studies from different sources that may have opposing views while building the author's own argument is a common rhetorical strategy, matching option C.

Answer:

1. C. demonstrate that junk-food taxes have been widely considered but remain controversial
2. B. By explaining that junk-food taxes would limit choices for people already lacking access to healthy food
3. C. To acknowledge opposing viewpoints while strengthening the author’s own argument