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

 It is currently 22 Nov 2014, 06:10

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of

Author Message
TAGS:
Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 586
Followers: 2

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

Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of [#permalink]  30 May 2005, 10:54
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
13. Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of the cattle disease CXC, the death rate from the disease was 5 percent of all reported cases, whereas today the corresponding figure is over 18 percent. It is clear, therefore, that during these past 5 years, CXC has increased in virulence.

Which one of the following, if true, most substantially weakens the argument?

(A) Many recent cattle deaths that have actually been caused by CXC have been mistakenly attributed to another disease that mimics the symptoms of CXC.
(B) During the first North American outbreak of the disease, many of the deaths reported to have been caused by CXC were actually due to other causes.
(C) An inoculation program against CXC was recently begun after controlled studies showed inoculation to be 70 percent effective in preventing serious cases of the illness.
(D) Since the first outbreak, farmers have learned to treat mild cases of CXC and no longer report them to veterinarians or authorities.
(E) Cattle that have contracted and survived CXC rarely contract the disease a second time.
SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1734
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Cow disease [#permalink]  30 May 2005, 12:21
A.

There are two ways to weaken the argument.
1. if the deathes reported were actually misreported as in A.
2. if the number of reports five years ago was substantiaslly higher with few dathes and no of reports now is subtantially low with high deaths. for example:
five years ago: no of reports=400, % death= 5% i.e. no of death = 20.
now: no of reports=100, % death= 18% i.e. no of death = 18.

the question provides information about the first inforation. therefore, A should be correct.
VP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1493
Location: Germany
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 58 [0], given: 0

D)...
_________________

If your mind can conceive it and your heart can believe it, have faith that you can achieve it.

Intern
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 48
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

D.

C actually strengthen the statement. Some of the cases are attributed to other diseases, implying the actual increase is even more.

Same with B. meaning the actual % should be less than 5%.. does not explain the increase.
D is straight forward (I guess!!)..The reported cases are mostly severe cases, increasing % cattle died. (cattle died/cases reported)
_________________

krish

Director
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 870
Followers: 1

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

One more for D
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5093
Location: Singapore
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 161 [0], given: 0

1) 5 yrs ago, the death rate from cxc was 5% of all reported cases

2) Today, the figure is over 18% of all reported cases.

3) During past 5 years, CXC has increased in virulence. <-- conclusion

(A) Many recent cattle deaths that have actually been caused by CXC have been mistakenly attributed to another disease that mimics the symptoms of CXC.
- doesn't streghten the argument

(B) During the first North American outbreak of the disease, many of the deaths reported to have been caused by CXC were actually due to other causes.
- Doesn't strenghten the argument

(C) An inoculation program against CXC was recently begun after controlled studies showed inoculation to be 70 percent effective in preventing serious cases of the illness.
- Still can't explain the large perentage

(D) Since the first outbreak, farmers have learned to treat mild cases of CXC and no longer report them to veterinarians or authorities.
- If so, then only deaths due to CXC are reported.

(E) Cattle that have contracted and survived CXC rarely contract the disease a second time.
- Not important.

D is the best option. If only deaths due to cxc is reported, then the figure is not accurate since mild cases are nto included when the % is computed in the study.
Director
Joined: 01 Feb 2003
Posts: 854
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR: Cow disease [#permalink]  30 May 2005, 23:44
HIMALAYA wrote:
A.

There are two ways to weaken the argument.
1. if the deathes reported were actually misreported as in A.
2. if the number of reports five years ago was substantiaslly higher with few dathes and no of reports now is subtantially low with high deaths. for example:
five years ago: no of reports=400, % death= 5% i.e. no of death = 20.
now: no of reports=100, % death= 18% i.e. no of death = 18.

the question provides information about the first inforation. therefore, A should be correct.

A would lead to the conclusion that the number of reported deaths because of CXC is less than the actual number.

D should be it
SVP
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 1709
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

It's D)
SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1734
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: Cow disease [#permalink]  31 May 2005, 06:17
Vithal wrote:
HIMALAYA wrote:
A.

There are two ways to weaken the argument.
1. if the deathes reported were actually misreported as in A.
2. if the number of reports five years ago was substantiaslly higher with few dathes and no of reports now is subtantially low with high deaths. for example:
five years ago: no of reports=400, % death= 5% i.e. no of death = 20.
now: no of reports=100, % death= 18% i.e. no of death = 18.

the question provides information about the first inforation. therefore, A should be correct.

A would lead to the conclusion that the number of reported deaths because of CXC is less than the actual number.

D should be it

agree with you, vithal. thanx....
Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2005
Posts: 674
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 0

Agree with D...Who knows what the farmers might have thought about serious cases without reporting?
Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 586
Followers: 2

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

The OA is D.
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of 8 14 Jul 2010, 02:50
Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of 2 07 Jun 2009, 06:09
Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of 6 22 Feb 2008, 02:40
Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of 13 29 Nov 2006, 07:57
Five years ago, during the first North American outbreak of 9 13 Dec 2004, 18:53
Display posts from previous: Sort by