NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 24 Apr 2024, 19:03 It is currently 24 Apr 2024, 19:03
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
avatar
prakhag
Manager
Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 72
Own Kudos [?]: 49 [23]
Given Kudos: 2
 Q48  V30 GMAT 2: 730  Q49  V40
Send PM
Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2010, 19:06
6
Kudos
16
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

68% (02:26) correct 32% (02:31) wrong based on 1038 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation dramatically increases the likelihood of contracting some form of cancer. According to a research study involving a town near a former nuclear testing site, no person who resided in the tow during the testing - which occurred more than sixty years ago - and who was under the age of 10 during the testing lived beyond 50 years of age. However, some of the town's former residents who are now over 50 years old are cancer survivors but resided in the town during the nuclear testing.

If the information provided is true, which of the following must on the basis of it also be true about the town that is the subject of the research study?

(A) Some people who resided in the town during the nuclear testing do not remember the testing.

(B) The cancers contracted by the town's cancer survivors were to caused by exposure to nuclear radiation.

(C) Some of the town's former residents living today were over 10 years of age during the nuclear testing

(D) The nuclear testing resulted in the emission of lower levels of radiation than initially believed.

(E) Some of the town's residents died before turning 50 years of age due to causes other than cancer.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
C
User avatar
L
IanStewart
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 4128
Own Kudos [?]: 9242 [2]
Given Kudos: 91
 Q51  V47
Send PM
Re: CR: Confusing OA [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2010, 21:04
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
prakhag wrote:
Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation dramatically increases the likelihood of contracting some form of cancer. According to a research study involving a town near a former nuclear testing site, no person who resided in the tow during the testing - which occurred more than sixty years ago - and who was under the age of 10 during the testing lived beyond 50 years of age. However, some of the town's former residents who are now over 50 years old are cancer survivors but resided in the town during the nuclear testing.

If the information provided is true, which of the following must on the basis of it also be true about the town that is the subject of the research study?

(A) Some people who resided in the town during the nuclear testing do not remember the testing.

(B) The cancers contracted by the town's cancer survivors were to caused by exposure to nuclear radiation.

(C) Some of the town's former residents living today were over 10 years of age during the nuclear testing

(D) The nuclear testing resulted in the emission of lower levels of radiation than initially believed.

(E) Some of the town's residents died before turning 50 years of age due to causes other than cancer.


Where's the OA from? The answer can't be B. The question says that everyone who was under the age of 10 during the testing hasn't survived. So if there were survivors, as we learn later in the question, they must have been over 10 years old at the time of the testing. That's what answer C says.
avatar
prakhag
Manager
Manager
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 72
Own Kudos [?]: 49 [0]
Given Kudos: 2
 Q48  V30 GMAT 2: 730  Q49  V40
Send PM
Re: CR: Confusing OA [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2010, 21:51
Question's is from Princeton review tests. OE also gives the same explanation as yours but OA is given as B!! (that's why the heading "Confusing OA":) ).

However, looking at the question more closely, the passage states that the residents were aged UNDER 10 years at the time of these tests, so for any survivors they have to be ATLEAST 10 years old, i.e. 10 years or more. Option C states that former residents were OVER 10 years old. So, are we not couting out residents who will be exactly 10 year old at the time of nuclear tests or am I taking it too far? I believe in must be true questions all the aspects should conform with the premise. Is it possible to eliminate option C on basis of this? Please advise.
User avatar
L
IanStewart
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 4128
Own Kudos [?]: 9242 [0]
Given Kudos: 91
 Q51  V47
Send PM
Re: CR: Confusing OA [#permalink] New post   05 Aug 2010, 22:31
Expert Reply
prakhag wrote:
So, are we not couting out residents who will be exactly 10 year old at the time of nuclear tests or am I taking it too far?


That is taking it a bit too far, I'd say, but strictly speaking you're certainly right - the survivors, in theory, could *all* have been exactly 10 years old at the time of the tests. If that were the case, then C is not true.

It's clear that C is intended to be the right answer, but it's not an official question; it's a prep company question. The 'technicality' you've pointed out here, that everyone might have been exactly 10 years old, is not the kind of thing you'd need to worry about on a real GMAT question. The wording of official questions is always absolutely precise. Prep companies often don't hold their questions to such a high editorial standard, unfortunately.
User avatar
ahsanmalik12
Intern
Intern
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 24
Own Kudos [?]: 19 [0]
Given Kudos: 8
Send PM
Re: CR: Confusing OA [#permalink] New post   08 Sep 2010, 14:00
If the information provided is true, which of the following must on the basis of it also be true about the town that is the subject of the research study?

this question means to infer and sniff through the lines to search for the answer..
C) is too direct straight to be asked for like this...
User avatar
L
IanStewart
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 4128
Own Kudos [?]: 9242 [0]
Given Kudos: 91
 Q51  V47
Send PM
Re: CR: Confusing OA [#permalink] New post   Updated on: 13 Sep 2010, 07:33
Expert Reply
ahsanmalik12 wrote:
this question means to infer and sniff through the lines to search for the answer..
C) is too direct straight to be asked for like this...


No, that's not the case. Very often, the correct answer to real CR questions of this type simply restates information in the passage, but in different words. Sometimes you need to reach some logical conclusion from the data given, but not always.

Originally posted by IanStewart on 08 Sep 2010, 15:13.
Last edited by IanStewart on 13 Sep 2010, 07:33, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
sidhu09
Manager
Manager
Joined: 02 Jan 2011
Posts: 91
Own Kudos [?]: 159 [1]
Given Kudos: 22
Send PM
Re: Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   07 Jun 2012, 04:05
1
Kudos
(A) Some people who resided in the town during the nuclear testing do not remember the testing. - Remembering the incident has nothing to do with the premise - Irrelevant - Incorrect
(B) The cancers contracted by the town's cancer survivors were to caused by exposure to nuclear radiation. - Not necessarily. They might have contracted cancer due to reasons other than nuclear radiation as well - Incorrect
(C) Some of the town's former residents living today were over 10 years of age during the nuclear testing - Definitely yes. People who were below the age of 10 during the test did not live beyond the age of 50. Where as some people who survived cancer have lived beyond 50. This means that exposure to radiation has more deadly effect on people if they are young, more the poeple are young, more is the affect of the radiation - Correct
(D) The nuclear testing resulted in the emission of lower levels of radiation than initially believed. - Irrelevant - Incorrect
(E) Some of the town's residents died before turning 50 years of age due to causes other than cancer. - Cannot be said for sure. No evidence of such cases has been provided in the passage - Incorrect
User avatar
S
KrishnakumarKA1
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Posts: 416
Own Kudos [?]: 284 [0]
Given Kudos: 15
Location: India
Send PM
Re: Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   01 Mar 2017, 03:55
(A) Some people who resided in the town during the nuclear testing do not remember the testing.( Wrong Answer : This is not supported by facts given)

(B) The cancers contracted by the town's cancer survivors were to caused by exposure to nuclear radiation.( Wrong Answer : there is no evidence present in the argument to support this type of a conclusion.)

(C) Some of the town's former residents living today were over 10 years of age during the nuclear testing( Right answer : The lines, “some of the town’s …….50 years of age” indicates this)

(D) The nuclear testing resulted in the emission of lower levels of radiation than initially believed.( Wrong Answer : this is not supported by facts given)

(E) Some of the town's residents died before turning 50 years of age due to causes other than cancer.( Wrong Answer : This is not supported by facts given)
avatar
S
debtanuB
Intern
Intern
Joined: 22 Feb 2017
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Posts: 29
Own Kudos [?]: 29 [0]
Given Kudos: 141
Location: India
GPA: 3.6
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   12 Jun 2017, 02:36
prakhag wrote:
Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation dramatically increases the likelihood of contracting some form of cancer. According to a research study involving a town near a former nuclear testing site, no person who resided in the tow during the testing - which occurred more than sixty years ago - and who was under the age of 10 during the testing lived beyond 50 years of age. However, some of the town's former residents who are now over 50 years old are cancer survivors but resided in the town during the nuclear testing.

If the information provided is true, which of the following must on the basis of it also be true about the town that is the subject of the research study?

(A) Some people who resided in the town during the nuclear testing do not remember the testing.

(B) The cancers contracted by the town's cancer survivors were to caused by exposure to nuclear radiation.

(C) Some of the town's former residents living today were over 10 years of age during the nuclear testing

(D) The nuclear testing resulted in the emission of lower levels of radiation than initially believed.

(E) Some of the town's residents died before turning 50 years of age due to causes other than cancer.


The highlighted texts say we are talking about a time that is 50 years back from now & if some people were below 10 years during the test they must have survived >50years and now its already 50+years. Option C says exactly that.
avatar
B
Jeeva1989
Intern
Intern
Joined: 17 Aug 2016
Posts: 11
Own Kudos [?]: 4 [0]
Given Kudos: 55
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   05 Sep 2018, 00:11
I chose (B) as the answer and I am unable to understand how (C) is the right answer. Can someone please help.
User avatar
P
LordStark
Current Student
Joined: 31 Aug 2016
Status:Valar Dohaeris
Posts: 299
Own Kudos [?]: 916 [0]
Given Kudos: 911
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V37
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   05 Sep 2018, 05:20
Jeeva1989 wrote:
I chose (B) as the answer and I am unable to understand how (C) is the right answer. Can someone please help.


Quote:
Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation dramatically increases the likelihood of contracting some form of cancer. According to a research study involving a town near a former nuclear testing site, no person who resided in the tow during the testing - which occurred more than sixty years ago - and who was under the age of 10 during the testing lived beyond 50 years of age. However, some of the town's former residents who are now over 50 years old are cancer survivors but resided in the town during the nuclear testing.

If the information provided is true, which of the following must on the basis of it also be true about the town that is the subject of the research study?

Quote:
(B) The cancers contracted by the town's cancer survivors were to caused by exposure to nuclear radiation.

why this is wrong: No where it is given that these people got cancer because of exposure to nuclear radiation. Yes they were present during the nuclear testing. In the first sentence, it says exposure increase LIKELIHOOD, it does not say that it cancer will happen for sure.


Quote:
(C) Some of the town's former residents living today were over 10 years of age during the nuclear testing


There were only two group of residents during the testing. less than 10 and more than 10 years old.
The passage says less then 10 years old did not survive. About the second group, the passage clearly says "However, some of the town's former residents who are now over 50 years old are cancer survivors but resided in the town during the nuclear testing." This must be the second group of residents who were more than 10 years old at that time.

I hope it helps.
User avatar
S
kanakdaga
Manager
Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2017
Posts: 66
Own Kudos [?]: 153 [3]
Given Kudos: 52
Location: India
Schools: XLRI GMBA '20 Yale '19
GMAT 1: 660 Q46 V35
GPA: 3.8
Send PM
Re: Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   08 Oct 2018, 02:56
3
Kudos
Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation dramatically increases the likelihood of contracting some form of cancer. According to a research study involving a town near a former nuclear testing site, no person who resided in the tow during the testing - which occurred more than sixty years ago - and who was under the age of 10 during the testing lived beyond 50 years of age. However, some of the town's former residents who are now over 50 years old are cancer survivors but resided in the town during the nuclear testing.

If the information provided is true, which of the following must on the basis of it also be true about the town that is the subject of the research study?

(A) Some people who resided in the town during the nuclear testing do not remember the testing. Irrelevant

(B) The cancers contracted by the town's cancer survivors were to caused by exposure to nuclear radiation.No substantial evidence for this claim.

(C) Some of the town's former residents living today were over 10 years of age during the nuclear testing.If some lived beyond 50, lets alum that the person is 72. then the person was above 10 years of age sixty years ago. CORRECT.

(D) The nuclear testing resulted in the emission of lower levels of radiation than initially believed.Irrelevant

(E) Some of the town's residents died before turning 50 years of age due to causes other than cancer.No substantial proof.
User avatar
VerbalBot
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17213
Own Kudos [?]: 848 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink] New post   09 May 2021, 10:12
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.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Human exposure to even low levels of nuclear radiation [#permalink]
09 May 2021, 10:12
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6920 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
mysterymanrog
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions