Everyone knows that a home should be "child-proof" to protect young babies and toddlers from illness and injury. (2) Pets are al
so in danger from many common household sources which many people don't realize. (3) Pets can chew and swallow seemingly safe things, resulting in disaster. (4) It may seem perfectly harmless to toss a pet a grape or a raisin as a treat, but these can be very deadly. (5) Although the exact cause is not known, gastrointestinal problems will result after a pet ingests grapes or raisins. (6) Kidney failure frequently occurs.
(7) Flowering plants, when eaten by pets, can also be lethal. (8) Lilies are especially toxic to cats by causing kidney failure. (9) Azaleas and rhododendrons can lead to serious problems for dogs. (10) Vomiting, diarrhea, and central nervous system problems can result.
(11) Small amounts of Xylitol, an artificial sweetener used in sugar-free candy, chewing gum, cookies, and other baked goods, can cause low blood sugar and liver damage in dogs. (12) It doesn't take much of this stuff to cause serious problems.
(13) There are many other common household items that are hazardous to pets. (14) All pet owners should educate themselves about these items and the effects that they have on pets. (15)Every effort should be made to "pet-proof" homes to provide safe and healthy environments for pets.
Which BEST provides a counter-argument to this passage?
A) Common household products are used everyday to keep homes clean and germ free.
B) Dogs are in danger from things that are quite ordinary in the life of a human.
C) Dogs are protected from danger by their instincts, such as their keen sense of smell.
D) Artificial sweeteners are a delicious and low calorie way to keep foods low calorie.
Dogs are protected from danger by their instincts, such as their keen sense of smell. This is the only answer choice that provides a counter-argument because it expresses a different view from the one expressed in the passage. The passage supports the idea of doing things to protect your pet from dangers around the house. So a counter-argument would support the idea that pets (in this case: dogs) can protect themselves. The answer choice gives a counter-argument that dogs have a keen sense of smell, suggesting they would be able to smell things and 'know' instinctively NOT to eat or chew it.
