Critical Reasoning (Assumptions) Statement: Vitamin E tablets improve circulation and keep your complexion glowing. Which assumptions are implicit?

Introduction / Context:
The statement is persuasive, linking Vitamin E to improved circulation and a glowing complexion. We must uncover the assumptions that make this message appealing and coherent to the audience.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: People like a glowing complexion.
• II: Complexion becomes dull in the absence of circulation.

Concept / Approach:
For an advertisement-like claim, one essential assumption is that the benefit offered (glowing complexion) is desirable. A second, overly strong medical assertion (II) goes beyond what is necessary; 'absence of circulation' would be fatal rather than cosmetic and is not required to support the claim.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) The message aims to motivate purchase; thus, it presumes the audience values a 'glowing complexion' (Assumption I).2) The causal chain implied is: Vitamin E → better circulation → glowing complexion. This suggests improved circulation contributes to complexion quality, but it does not require the extreme notion that without circulation complexion becomes dull (Assumption II as phrased).3) Therefore, I is necessary for persuasiveness; II is an exaggerated formulation and not required.

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate I: 'People do not care about complexion.' Then the appeal collapses. Negate II: 'Even if lack of circulation did not necessarily dull complexion,' the promise 'improves circulation and keeps complexion glowing' can still be attractive; hence II is unnecessary.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only II or Both: II is not needed and is poorly framed.
• Either I or II / Neither: I is clearly required to make the message relevant.

Common Pitfalls:
Avoid accepting overstatements as assumptions. The test often includes a scientifically awkward or absolute claim to distract you from the minimal necessary assumption.

Final Answer:
Only assumption I is implicit