|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Posts: 232
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
27
[0], given: 16
|
sushom101 wrote: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate form this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms. Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends? (A) Urban pollution has not doubled in the past decade. (B) Doctors and patients generally ignore the role of allergies in asthma. (C) Bronchial inhalers are unsafe, even when used according to the recommended instructions. (D) The use of bronchial inhalers aggravates other diseases that frequently occur among asthma sufferers and that often lead to fatal outcomes even when the asthma itself does not. (E) Increased urban pollution, improved recording of asthma deaths, and the use of bronchial inhalers are the only possible explanations of the increased death rate due to asthma. since the OA are given let me give my methodology for getting to the rights answer for question 2 since question 1 is thoroughly explained. a, c,d and are strengthening statements and should be eliminated.(B) is a potential AMC (alternative method of causation) but the correct answer is E for specifically applying the "eliminate the AMC" (please refer to MGMAT CR and/or CR Bible) strategy of eliminating any OTHER causation-s (wrong word but nevermind) that could hurt the argument...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 04 Feb 2010
Posts: 204
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
23
[0], given: 8
|
A for the first, E for the second.
For the first, I choose A because an increase in urban population does not mean an increase in pollution - making it out of scope
For the second, A contradicts the argument, B is irrelevant, C is not the choice since being unsafe doesn't necessarily mean it causes fatalities, D suggests deaths occur due to causes other than asthma, leaving us with E, saying that there isn't any other factor that could contribute to asthma related fatalities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 314
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
33
[0], given: 20
|
Got A and E..
Already explained beautifully by vc019
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 21 Dec 2010
Posts: 657
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
59
[0], given: 51
|
A and E blare .
_________________
What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
A this took a little time for me to figure out.But still E fits the bill.
_________________
Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 93
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
29
[0], given: 2
|
A for the first one..E actually strengthens the argument by confirming that "Increased urban pollution, improved recording ...are the only possible explanations of the increased death rate due to asthma" E for the second..it gives an argument (if true) which can weaken the argument
_________________
Fight till you succeed like a gladiator..or doom your life which can be invincible
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 109
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 15
|
A and E.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 260
Schools: UNC Duke Kellogg
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
19
[0], given: 4
|
These LSAT questions are tricked up more than the GMAT questions...good practice though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Posts: 89
Schools: INSEAD,IIMA,IIMB
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 2
|
E seems correct
_________________
_________________________
Try and you will succeed !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Math Forum Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 2098
Followers: 109
Kudos [?]:
666
[0], given: 376
|
LifeChanger wrote: sushom101 wrote: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate form this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread a nd accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms. Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT: (A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade. (B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years. (C) Evidence suggests that bronchial inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen. (D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures. (E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment. I don't understand why B is incorrect here.. the argument states that the recording of deaths was not accurate earlier..and Statement B opposes that by saying that the records have been accurate during the mentioned period..can someone please explain.. Thanks, LC Valid point. I remember reading this in CR Bible. Sometimes, though very rarely, GMAT presents an option that directly refutes the fact presented in the premise instead of the argument. This is an example of one such exception. In such situation, we should consider the option to be true.
_________________
~fluke
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rice (Jones) Thread Master
Status: How can I crack Verbal
Joined: 12 May 2011
Posts: 209
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 700 Q51 V32
GPA: 3
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 33
|
fluke wrote: LifeChanger wrote: sushom101 wrote: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate form this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread a nd accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms. Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT: (A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade. (B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years. (C) Evidence suggests that bronchial inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen. (D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures. (E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment. I don't understand why B is incorrect here.. the argument states that the recording of deaths was not accurate earlier..and Statement B opposes that by saying that the records have been accurate during the mentioned period..can someone please explain.. Thanks, LC Valid point. I remember reading this in CR Bible. Sometimes, though very rarely, GMAT presents an option that directly refutes the fact presented in the premise instead of the argument. This is an example of one such exception. In such situation, we should consider the option to be true. @Fluke-Thanks for clarifying my doubt..I have read both MGMAT CR and Powerscore CR,but unable to recollect the point u have stated..any idea where it might be? Thanks, LC
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rice (Jones) Thread Master
Status: How can I crack Verbal
Joined: 12 May 2011
Posts: 209
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 700 Q51 V32
GPA: 3
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 33
|
fluke wrote: LifeChanger wrote: @Fluke-Thanks for clarifying my doubt..I have read both MGMAT CR and Powerscore CR,but unable to recollect the point u have stated..any idea where it might be? Thanks, LC This rule is stated for weakening question and I don't see why the same can't be applied for this question. The point is: when two contradictory things are said in both Premise and the options(only for the questions that read "Each of the following, if true"), it is better to consider the options true. CR-2005 Edition Chapter Six: Weaken Questions Topic: How to weaken an Argument Sub-topic: 1. The Premises Extract: One of the classic ways to attack an argument is to attack the premises on which the conclusion rests. Regrettably, this form of attack is rarely used on the GMAT because when a premise is attacked, the answer choice is easy to spot. Literally, the answer will contradict one of the premises, and most students are capable of reading an argument and then identifying an answer that simply negates a premise. In practice, almost all correct GMAT Weaken question answers leave the premises untouched. Page: 113 Thank you for the info
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Oct 2010
Posts: 267
Location: India
GMAT 1: 560 Q36 V31
GPA: 3
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
14
[0], given: 24
|
A and C for me.. The others don't make sense..
_________________
petrifiedbutstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Posts: 25
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
1. An except question where we look for four choices in support for the conclusion : use of bronchial inhalers is actually the cause for the doubling of the death rate from asthma(A) has no connection with the use of inhaler as the cause of death. Also pollution and population ain't related in this context. (B) strengthens the conclusion by making the dismissed cause more dilute, and hence confirming the strength of the argument as it proceeds. (C)harmful effect of inhaler-strengthens (D) inhaler as an obstruction to more cures-strengthens (E) doesn't suggests inhalers were unavailable in between - strengthens 2. (A) urban pollution doesn't matter in this connection. (B) role of allergies takes us to the other side-introduces more causes. (C) strengths, but is not indispensable for the argument to hold. (D) has no connection with inhalers causing jump in the death rate from asthma. (E) the author did assume the 3 causes. however, he dismissed two of them in the end, citing a reason. If the assumption is negated, the dismissal of the earlier two causes will still leave more than one cause, and hence the argument will fall apart.
_________________
squeakvm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 06 Jul 2011
Posts: 25
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
LifeChanger wrote: sushom101 wrote: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate form this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread a nd accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms. Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT: (A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade. (B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years. (C) Evidence suggests that bronchial inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen. (D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures. (E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment. I don't understand why B is incorrect here.. the argument states that the recording of deaths was not accurate earlier..and Statement B opposes that by saying that the records have been accurate during the mentioned period..can someone please explain.. Thanks, LC In the end, the author dismissed the earlier causes, namely, improved documentation and increase in urban pollution. Presence of improved the documentation helps to do away with the quality of documentation as the cause.
_________________
squeakvm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 272
GMAT 1: 750 Q V
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
36
[0], given: 6
|
Re: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate [#permalink]
 22 Jun 2012, 03:34
Straight A for the first one. A doubling in population is not necessarily account for an increase in the rate of asthma deaths. Mathematically, if the number of asthma deaths increase, the rate will not change, since the population has also doubled.
_________________
+1 Kudos me - I'm half Irish, half Prussian.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 18 Jan 2012
Posts: 46
Location: United States
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
37
[0], given: 21
|
Re: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate [#permalink]
11 Jul 2012, 10:15
Let me clarify one aspect :-
For CR questions of the FORMAT - Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT:, one should remember a very important aspect , that while, 4 out of 5 options MUST SUPPORT the argument , 1 option(the correct answer) SHOULD NOT support it.
I see many posts which states that option b) is not the correct answer , as it is out of scope. This is an incorrect conclusion.
If option b) is not the correct answer choice, then Option b) MUST support the argument.
It is for us to evaluate why ? 
For Q-1) its a clear toss up between A) and B). Options - C,D,E clearly strengthen the argument.
(A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade.
{ Lets negate this. Urban populations have NOT doubled in the past decade. My response to this is "yawn"..
ahem..so what. The population has not doubled, but the population may have increased by 10%, 20% or 5 million percent. This still doesnt matter because as per the premise, the population has INCREASED and the RATES of asthma have also increased. Negating this premise has NO EFFECT on the conclusion,this clearly indicates that this answer choice is harmless.
}
(B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years.
[i]{ This answer option vexes me.
b) The premise clearly states the following - Quote: First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously . Now this answer answer option seems to question the correctness of the author's premise. I encourage all the smart folks to take a shot at illustrating why, b) supports the argument , INSPITE contradicting a premise given in the original argument .
If your response is that this answer choice dismisses the viability of "accurate record keeping" as a causative factor, then following the same rationale, the "Population increase" factor should gain more credence now, shouldn't it ?Brickbats please...--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It take considerable time and effort to post detailed responses. Your kudos is appreciated.
_________________
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IT TAKES QUITE A BIT OF TIME AND TO POST DETAILED RESPONSES.
YOUR KUDOS IS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last edited by hafizkarim on 14 Jul 2012, 11:19, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 21 Feb 2012
Posts: 10
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Retail Banking)
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 3
|
Re: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate [#permalink]
13 Jul 2012, 12:29
hafizkarim wrote: Let me clarify one aspect :-
For CR questions of the FORMAT - Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT:, one should remember a very important aspect about questions that use the "EXCEPT" format, while, 4 out of 5 options MUST SUPPORT the argument , 1 option(the correct answer) SHOULD NOT support it. The "Should not support" phrase implies EITHER of the 2 - does nothing (OR) weakens the argument
I see many posts which states that option b) is not the correct answer as it is out of scope. This is an incorrect conclusion.
If option b) is not an answer, then Option b) MUST support the argument.
It is for us to evaluate why ?
@hafizkarim :Nice to see a detailed explanation! But am not quite sure what you re trying to explain here... I guess its option A and E hands down now, right? Now on the 1st qn, option b. @fluke, @life changer: I think the option b does not directly damage the entire premise. True, it causes a lot of harm but not entirely. Premise: First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously Option b: Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years. Option b only hits on accuracy, but the widespread word is still standing. The accuracy rate may be the same (for eg, the tests conducted were 80% accurate before and now) but the tests have become more widespread, i.e more ppl are taking the tests now. Hence, with this option we do not have conclusive evidence to weaken the argument. A provides us that! Hope this clears it!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 11 Mar 2012
Posts: 98
Location: United Kingdom
GMAT 1: 720 Q48 V40
GRE 1: 2170 Q800 V700
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
8
[0], given: 15
|
Re: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate [#permalink]
14 Jul 2012, 08:54
A for me. the fact that the population has increased doesnt add anything, because the stimulus already takes explains this bit as (i) rates have increased (ii) this cant be attributed to increase in population
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2012
Posts: 66
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
6
[0], given: 1
|
Re: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate [#permalink]
22 Jul 2012, 09:48
I went with B for the first one since it did seem that the population doubling did not support the argument. Still thinking over why A seems to be the OA. For the second one, E looks the part. Still mulling on why A for the first question. Good question though personally.
_________________
My attempt to capture my B-School Journey in a Blog : tranquilnomadgmat.blogspot.com
There are no shortcuts to any place worth going.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate
[#permalink]
22 Jul 2012, 09:48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|
close
