Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 02 Sep 2015, 02:47
GMAT Club Tests

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Mar 2009
Posts: 25
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 13

A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen [#permalink] New post 02 Nov 2009, 02:58
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

73% (02:52) correct 27% (01:11) wrong based on 106 sessions
A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen year study on the relationship between fatty or lean fish consumption and the risk of kidney cancer; the study revealed that those who ate on average more than one serving per week of fatty fish had 44 percent less risk for developing renal cell carcinoma, the most common form of kidney cancer. Though all previous studies on the relationship between fatty fish and the prevalence of kidney cancer have been inconclusive, the Swedish scientists attribute the lower rate of kidney cancer to increased intake of omega 3 fatty acids. Lean fish is rarely rich in omega 3’s, and those in the study who ate lean fish had the same risk for developing renal cell carcinoma as those who ate no fish at all.

In the statement above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
The first is an opinion that is supported by the argument; the second is one part of the information uncovered in the study.
The first is a fact that goes against the argument that is being presented; the second is one element of a logical argument in support of the scientists’ claim.
The first presents the quandary the scientists are attempting to solve; the second is the result of that quandary.
The first is a claim in support of the argument; the second is a piece of evidence against the argument.
The first is an explanation advocated by the argument; the second is a finding used to challenge that explanation.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 268
Schools: Columbia, INSEAD, RSM, LBS
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 4

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 02 Nov 2009, 07:52
IMO B
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 123
Location: France
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 96 [0], given: 15

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 02 Nov 2009, 22:17
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 31 Aug 2009
Posts: 420
Location: Sydney, Australia
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 165 [0], given: 20

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 02 Nov 2009, 22:27
I thought it was B as well. Here is my reasoning:


In the statement above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
The first is an opinion that is supported by the argument; the second is one part of the information uncovered in the study.
There is no evidence the first portion is an opinion. And the second part seems to be a fact that was previously known. Wrong.

The first is a fact that goes against the argument that is being presented; the second is one element of a logical argument in support of the scientists’ claim.
The argument is that increasing intake of fatty fish -> lowering rate of kidney cancer. The first BF states that this relationship is inconclusive and hence it goes against the argument or at the least does not support it. The second part uses logic to prove the opposite of consuming fatty fish. Correct.

The first presents the quandary the scientists are attempting to solve; the second is the result of that quandary.
The scientists are trying to solve whether fatty fish intake affects rate of kidney cancer.The first BF does not directly present this as a quandary. Wrong.


The first is a claim in support of the argument; the second is a piece of evidence against the argument.
As stated above the first BF at best does not support the argument. The second piece at best supports the claim by logically deducing what would happen by consuming non fatty fish. Wrong.

The first is an explanation advocated by the argument; the second is a finding used to challenge that explanation.
The first BF does not explain anything but presents information that goes against the conclusion. Wrong
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
Posts: 64
Schools: Wharton, Kellogg, Duke (Health care management)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 3

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 05 Nov 2009, 07:08
If you look at at the first part, only B & C is aligned with it. And second part of C is wrong.
Hence B.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 262
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 128 [0], given: 3

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 05 Nov 2009, 09:10
I more B.. C,D,E far from being correct.. A and B almost on similar lines but B appears to be better answer..
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 31 Oct 2009
Posts: 38
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 0

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 05 Nov 2009, 11:20
For sure, B
Think this is a <700 question :wink:
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1676
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 374 [0], given: 36

Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 22 Mar 2011, 07:01
It's B.
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

2 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 16 Apr 2010
Posts: 5
Location: India
Schools: ISB, NSU, NTU
WE 1: 6 year as a HR personal in Govt. Sec.
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [2] , given: 1

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 22 Mar 2011, 08:30
2
This post received
KUDOS
Both the bold face arguments are facts, hence premise. The first one is undoubtedly a fact which goes against the argument that fatty fish helps in reducing the cancer risk.
Second bold face argument provides a support to the argument as lean fish lacks omega 3 fatty acid, its consumption does not affect the occurring of cancer.

the evident answer is "B"
though it seems too easy to be a 700 level question. I can be wrong.
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Matriculating
Affiliations: Chicago Booth Class of 2015
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 925
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 123

Reviews Badge
Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 22 Mar 2011, 23:05
"though" throws away the answer. B it is. I found GMAT cr to be relatively easier than LSAT. That's very subjective though.

Posted from my mobile device Image
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2011
Posts: 178
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 8

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 23 Mar 2011, 00:04
+1 FOR B
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 92
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: BOLD FACED CR [#permalink] New post 13 Sep 2011, 07:04
B...
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2010
Posts: 31
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V36
GPA: 3.59
WE: Accounting (Accounting)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 13

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen [#permalink] New post 20 May 2012, 09:11
The first is a fact that goes against the argument that is being presented; the second is one element of a logical argument in support of the scientists’ claim.

1) study is inconclusive

2) scientist make claim that such fish, lean, does not lower risk of cancer

so B it is
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 201
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 22

Re: A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen [#permalink] New post 21 May 2012, 00:39
Arguement:
Omega 3 fatty acid contained fish reduces the risk of cancer than does the lean fish that has no essential fats.

Conclusion:
Omega 3 fats reduces cancer occurance.

The first bold face statement neither supports not negates the argument.
The second bold face statment is part of the conclusion and supports the conclusion as well.

Only option B has these properties.
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 25 Apr 2012
Posts: 734
Location: India
GPA: 3.21
WE: Business Development (Other)
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 462 [0], given: 723

Premium Member Reviews Badge
A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen [#permalink] New post 30 Jul 2014, 00:30
A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen year study on the relationship between fatty or lean fish consumption and the risk of kidney cancer; the study revealed that those who ate on average more than one serving per week of fatty fish had 44 percent less risk for developing renal cell carcinoma, the most common form of kidney cancer. Though all previous studies on the relationship between fatty fish and the prevalence of kidney cancer have been inconclusive, the Swedish scientists attribute the lower rate of kidney cancer to increased intake of omega 3 fatty acids. Lean fish is rarely rich in omega 3’s, and those in the study who ate lean fish had the same risk for developing renal cell carcinoma as those who ate no fish at all.

In the statement above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The first is an opinion that is supported by the argument; the second is one part of the information uncovered in the study.

The first is a fact that goes against the argument that is being presented; the second is one element of a logical argument in support of the scientists’ claim.

The first presents the quandary the scientists are attempting to solve; the second is the result of that quandary.

The first is a claim in support of the argument; the second is a piece of evidence against the argument.

The first is an explanation advocated by the argument; the second is a finding used to challenge that explanation.
_________________


“If you can't fly then run, if you can't run then walk, if you can't walk then crawl, but whatever you do you have to keep moving forward.”

GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 5062
Followers: 528

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen [#permalink] New post 19 Aug 2015, 11:17
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen   [#permalink] 19 Aug 2015, 11:17
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Recently, a team of scientists digging through a tar pit unearthed a Harley1980 2 23 Aug 2015, 12:21
6 A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen WoundedTiger 1 30 Jul 2014, 00:31
A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen WoundedTiger 0 30 Jul 2014, 00:30
9 Experts publish their posts in the topic Reporter: A team of scientists has recently devised a new smashzone 28 24 Dec 2009, 09:30
According to a recent study, fifteen corporations in the vivek123 9 25 Dec 2005, 10:55
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A team of Swedish scientists recently concluded a fifteen

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.