|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 156
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
13
[1] , given: 4
|
Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate [#permalink]
 08 Dec 2009, 11:07
1
This post received
KUDOS
Question Stats:
78% (02:17) correct
21% (01:39) wrong based on 92 sessions
Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate grain, was blamed for the high rate of nerve damage suffered by people who work in grain-processing plants, many such plants switched to other chemical fumigants two years ago. Since then, however, the percentage of workers at these plants who were newly diagnosed with nerve damage has not dropped significantly. Therefore, either ethylene dibromide was wrongly blamed or else the new chemicals also cause nerve damage.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. If the new chemicals cause nerve damage, the nerve damage caused would be different from any nerve damage that ethylene dibromide may cause.
B. There are no chemical fumigants that are completely safe for workers in grain processing plants.
C. If ethylene dibromide causes nerve damage, it does not take two years or longer for that damage to become detectable.
D. Workers at grain-processing plants typically continue to work there even after being diagnosed with nerve damage.
E. Workers at grain-processing plants that still use ethylene dibromide continue to have a high rate of nerve damage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 275
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
20
[0], given: 1
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
08 Dec 2009, 11:27
Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate grain, was blamed for the high rate of nerve damage suffered by people who work in grain-processing plants, many such plants switched to other chemical fumigants two years ago. Since then, however, the percentage of workers at these plants who were newly diagnosed with nerve damage has not dropped significantly. Therefore, either ethylene dibromide was wrongly blamed or else the new chemicals also cause nerve damage.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. If the new chemicals cause nerve damage, the nerve damage caused would be different from any nerve damage that ethylene dibromide may cause. - BEST ANSWER
B. There are no chemical fumigants that are completely safe for workers in grain processing plants. Irrelevant
C. If ethylene dibromide causes nerve damage, it does not take two years or longer for that damage to become detectable. Out of Scope.
D. Workers at grain-processing plants typically continue to work there even after being diagnosed with nerve damage. - The passage talks about newly detected people. So this cannot be a factor in the % of new cases.
E. Workers at grain-processing plants that still use ethylene dibromide continue to have a high rate of nerve damage. - The passage says that the industry has stopped using ethyl dibromide. Out of Scope
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 26 Sep 2009
Posts: 22
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[1] , given: 3
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
08 Dec 2009, 12:45
1
This post received
KUDOS
IMO C IF ethylene dibromide does not take two years or longer for that damage to become detectable then it is either the new chemical or ethylene dibromide that is causing the damage.. If ethylene dibromide does takes more than 2 years then the conclusion is wrong..Then the only reason for the damage is ethylene dibromide.. Hope that helps.. If u like my post..consider it for kudos 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 13 Nov 2009
Posts: 64
Schools: Columbia(RD-ding w/o int),
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
3
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
08 Dec 2009, 14:36
IMO, Answer is C.
If it does take longer than 2 years to detect nerve damage, clearly ethy d. is causing it and the new chemical has nothing to do with it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 156
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 4
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
09 Dec 2009, 01:13
OA is C. Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1395
Followers: 8
Kudos [?]:
86
[0], given: 10
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
15 May 2011, 06:32
clean C,negating it crashes the conclusion.
_________________
Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 657
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
59
[0], given: 51
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
15 May 2011, 10:59
i think C it is, negation test result confirm C . but this was not easy to prephrase.
_________________
What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: Prepping for the last time....
Joined: 28 May 2010
Posts: 202
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GPA: 3.2
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 21
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
16 Sep 2011, 06:42
C it is.. if ethylene dibromide takes more than 2 years to cause nerve damage..the conclusion of 'falsely blamed' would be invalid.
_________________
Two great challenges: 1. Guts to Fail and 2. Fear to Succeed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2011
Posts: 147
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 1
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
16 Sep 2011, 09:23
Yup C clearly..
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 01 Jun 2011
Posts: 176
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 6
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
18 Sep 2011, 02:27
A is the best
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 03 Jan 2011
Posts: 22
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 1
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
18 Sep 2011, 11:05
IMO C
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1746
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 49
Kudos [?]:
150
[0], given: 108
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
18 Sep 2011, 21:14
+1 C
_________________
"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."
My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: Retaking next month
Affiliations: None
Joined: 05 Mar 2011
Posts: 232
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V27
GPA: 3.01
WE: Sales (Manufacturing)
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 32
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
19 Sep 2011, 03:54
C it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 17 Sep 2011
Posts: 14
GMAT Date: 10-24-2011
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 9
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
27 Sep 2011, 08:06
C. If ethylene dibromide causes nerve damage, it does not take two years or longer for that damage to become detectable.
It's been 2 years since grain-processing plants stop using ethylene dibromide, still the nerve damage occurs. Unless the effect of ethylene dibromide lasts (and thus the damage could become detectable after 2 years), the suggestion of the wrongful blame or the new blame for new chemicals could not be valid. => Thus, C.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Status: Target MBA
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 213
Location: Singapore
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 12
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
27 Sep 2011, 09:28
bsv180985 wrote: Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate grain, was blamed for the high rate of nerve damage suffered by people who work in grain-processing plants, many such plants switched to other chemical fumigants two years ago. Since then, however, the percentage of workers at these plants who were newly diagnosed with nerve damage has not dropped significantly. Therefore, either ethylene dibromide was wrongly blamed or else the new chemicals also cause nerve damage.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. If the new chemicals cause nerve damage, the nerve damage caused would be different from any nerve damage that ethylene dibromide may cause.
B. There are no chemical fumigants that are completely safe for workers in grain processing plants.
C. If ethylene dibromide causes nerve damage, it does not take two years or longer for that damage to become detectable.
D. Workers at grain-processing plants typically continue to work there even after being diagnosed with nerve damage.
E. Workers at grain-processing plants that still use ethylene dibromide continue to have a high rate of nerve damage. I always forget to apply the negation rule. Thanks guys for the explanation.
_________________
Thanks and Regards,
GM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 98
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 3
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide [#permalink]
01 Nov 2011, 23:53
A is the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verbal GMAT Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 787
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Finance
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 18
Kudos [?]:
83
[0], given: 35
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate [#permalink]
16 Dec 2011, 02:09
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 283
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
13
[0], given: 110
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate [#permalink]
22 Dec 2011, 12:18
C is clearly the best answer here. If it takes two years for the symptoms to become visible, then the symptoms of the use of ethylene dibromide should start becoming visible now.
_________________
Consider KUDOS if you feel the effort's worth it
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 25 Sep 2010
Posts: 85
Schools: HBS, LBS, Wharton, Kelloggs, Booth
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 15
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate [#permalink]
23 Jan 2012, 07:14
IMO C. Negate and the conclusion will fall apart.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 17 May 2012
Posts: 17
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 2
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate [#permalink]
03 Jun 2012, 06:43
IMO C. But IMO this is not a 700 level problem. May be a 600 level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate
[#permalink]
03 Jun 2012, 06:43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|
close
