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

It is currently 22 Oct 2014, 16:43

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

CR-nerves

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

CR-nerves [#permalink] New post 03 Sep 2008, 20:29
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Damaged nerves in the spinal cord do not regenerate themselves naturally, nor even under the spur of nerve-growth stimulants. The reason, recently discovered, is the presence of nerve-growth inhibitors in the spinal cord. Antibodies that deactivate those inhibitors have now been developed. Clearly, then, nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in the foreseeable future.
Which of the following, if true, casts the most serious doubt on the accuracy of the prediction above?
(A) Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth.
(B) Certain nerve-growth stimulants have similar chemical structures to those of the antibodies against nerve-growth inhibitors.
(C) Nerves in the brain are similar to nerves in the spinal cord in their inability to regenerate themselves naturally.
(D) Researchers have been able to stimulate the growth of nerves not located in the spinal cord by using only nerve-growth stimulants.
(E) Deactivating the substances inhibiting nerve growth for an extended period would require a steady supply of antibodies

Need explanation
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 215
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR-nerves [#permalink] New post 04 Sep 2008, 08:37
spriya wrote:
Damaged nerves in the spinal cord do not regenerate themselves naturally, nor even under the spur of nerve-growth stimulants. The reason, recently discovered, is the presence of nerve-growth inhibitors in the spinal cord. Antibodies that deactivate those inhibitors have now been developed. Clearly, then, nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in the foreseeable future.
Which of the following, if true, casts the most serious doubt on the accuracy of the prediction above?
(A) Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth - Out of scope.
(B) Certain nerve-growth stimulants have similar chemical structures to those of the antibodies against nerve-growth inhibitors. - Out of scope
(C) Nerves in the brain are similar to nerves in the spinal cord in their inability to regenerate themselves naturally -
(D) Researchers have been able to stimulate the growth of nerves not located in the spinal cord by using only nerve-growth stimulants. - This statement tells us that you don't need antibodies for nerve growth in areas other than the spinal cord.
(E) Deactivating the substances inhibiting nerve growth for an extended period would require a steady supply of antibodies - Out of Scope. Who cares about the supply of antibodies

Need explanation


I am having a tough time explaining why D is good. A, B & E are out of scope. Between C and D, I'll pick D.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

Re: CR-nerves [#permalink] New post 05 Sep 2008, 18:20
wizardofwashington wrote:
spriya wrote:
Damaged nerves in the spinal cord do not regenerate themselves naturally, nor even under the spur of nerve-growth stimulants. The reason, recently discovered, is the presence of nerve-growth inhibitors in the spinal cord. Antibodies that deactivate those inhibitors have now been developed. Clearly, then, nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in the foreseeable future.
Which of the following, if true, casts the most serious doubt on the accuracy of the prediction above?
(A) Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth - Out of scope.
(B) Certain nerve-growth stimulants have similar chemical structures to those of the antibodies against nerve-growth inhibitors. - Out of scope
(C) Nerves in the brain are similar to nerves in the spinal cord in their inability to regenerate themselves naturally -
(D) Researchers have been able to stimulate the growth of nerves not located in the spinal cord by using only nerve-growth stimulants. - This statement tells us that you don't need antibodies for nerve growth in areas other than the spinal cord.
(E) Deactivating the substances inhibiting nerve growth for an extended period would require a steady supply of antibodies - Out of Scope. Who cares about the supply of antibodies

Need explanation


I am having a tough time explaining why D is good. A, B & E are out of scope. Between C and D, I'll pick D.


D is not the answer and anyways this option says about other areas
where N.stimulants are required !!does not say about spinal chord.
we want to cover all the areas ,to regenerate nerves.

Kindly let me know how to approach these types of questions !!
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 513
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 45 [1] , given: 0

Reviews Badge
Re: CR-nerves [#permalink] New post 13 Sep 2008, 20:26
1
This post received
KUDOS
The answer to this should be A, according to me .

Premise :-

1- Damaged nerves in the spinal cord do not regenerate themselves naturally or even in presence of nerve growth stimulators as there is presence of nerve-growth inhibitors in the spinal cord.

2-Antibodies that deactivate those inhibitors have now been developed


Conclusion :- Nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in the foreseeable future.

Answer Choice A :- Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth


As it is mentioned that regeneration is just a byproduct of the main function of the substances inhibiting nerve growth. Therefore by using the antibodies, we may also disturb the other functions of the substances inhibitng growth. Hence it may cause undesriable side effects.Therefore its use in futre is doubtful.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 121 [0], given: 0

Re: CR-nerves [#permalink] New post 13 Sep 2008, 22:07
bhatiagp wrote:
The answer to this should be A, according to me .

Premise :-

1- Damaged nerves in the spinal cord do not regenerate themselves naturally or even in presence of nerve growth stimulators as there is presence of nerve-growth inhibitors in the spinal cord.

2-Antibodies that deactivate those inhibitors have now been developed


Conclusion :- Nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in the foreseeable future.

Answer Choice A :- Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth


As it is mentioned that regeneration is just a byproduct of the main function of the substances inhibiting nerve growth. Therefore by using the antibodies, we may also disturb the other functions of the substances inhibitng growth. Hence it may cause undesriable side effects.Therefore its use in futre is doubtful.

Yes true most close is this one !!but E is a close competitor !!!how did u eliminate that
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 01 Jan 2008
Posts: 513
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 45 [1] , given: 0

Reviews Badge
Re: CR-nerves [#permalink] New post 14 Sep 2008, 09:28
1
This post received
KUDOS
E is easy to eliminate , as no where it is mentioned that the antibodies that would be needed would be limited in supply. Hence it is not a strong enough readon to eliminate.

I would have said B is a strong competitor, as it mentions that nerve growth stimulants have a similiar chemical composition to antibodies, and as the nerve growth stimulants didnt work, it is possible that these antibodies may also not work
GMAT Forum Moderator
avatar
Status: Accepting donations for the mohater MBA fund
Joined: 05 Feb 2008
Posts: 1860
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Economics
Schools: Ross '14 (M)
GMAT 1: 710 Q48 V38
GMAT 2: Q V
GPA: 3.54
WE: Accounting (Manufacturing)
Followers: 55

Kudos [?]: 411 [0], given: 234

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: CR-nerves [#permalink] New post 17 May 2011, 02:24
Back from the grave...

Another thread with discussion:
cr-damaged-nerves-76764.html

Locked.
_________________

Strategy Discussion Thread | Strategy Master | GMAT Debrief| Please discuss strategies in discussion thread. Master thread will be updated accordingly. | GC Member Write Ups

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Re: CR-nerves   [#permalink] 17 May 2011, 02:24
Display posts from previous: Sort by

CR-nerves

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Moderators: bagdbmba, WaterFlowsUp



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®.