Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 20 Jan 2017, 14:26

### 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

# Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 314
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 319 [0], given: 9

Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2009, 01:31
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

29% (02:43) correct 71% (01:41) wrong based on 102 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so, since such advertisements encourage people to engage in an unhealthy practice. But cigarette advertisements should remain legal since advertisements for fatty foods are legal, even though those advertisements also encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict between Kendrick's statements?

(B) The advertisement of fattening foods, unlike that of cigarettes, should not be prevented, because fattening foods, unlike cigarettes, are not addictive.

(D) Governments should try to prevent the advertisement of cigarettes by means of financial disincentives rather than by legal prohibition.

(E) Governments should place restrictions on cigarette advertisements so as to keep them from encouraging people to engage in unhealthy practices, but should not try to prevent such advertisements.

OA and OE will follow

If you have any questions
New!
Intern
Joined: 19 Aug 2009
Posts: 16
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [1] , given: 3

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2009, 10:05
1
KUDOS
I wrestled between C and D, but I think the answer is D.

Kendrick is saying that government is justified in preventing (cigarette) advertisements because it encourages unhealthy practices. However, because the same government allows fast food advertisements that also encourage unhealthy practices, they have no right to prevent cigarette advertisements. The voice of this passage is not really relating to advertisements and the legal right therein, but more about restricting the unhealthy practice of cigarettes.

---

A - Goes against his argument

B - This would work if Kendrick is arguing against allowing cigarette advertisements, but he's not.

C - Although it seems a little bit out of place, this answer "works" because it allows for Kendrick to resolve his conflict by postulating that all advertisements should be legal. The second part deflects responsibility from government, which also helps to "resolve the conflict". Yet, I feel that this answer does not hold true to the point of Kendrick's argument.

D - This is the other answer that is plausible. Although there is no mention of financial disincentives in the passage, it flows nicely with my interpretation of the theme. Governments will have no conflict between two advertisements that both encourage unhealthy practices - they will not legally halt advertising. However, they can through other methods carry on what Kendrick feels is a justifiable practice - inhibiting cigarette advertising.

E - I think restrictions and prevention can be argued to be similar - this doesn't resolve the conflict.
Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 62

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2009, 12:08
mikeCoolBoy wrote:
Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so, since such advertisements encourage people to engage in an unhealthy practice. But cigarette advertisements should remain legal since advertisements for fatty foods are legal, even though those advertisements also encourage people to engage in unhealthy practices.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict between Kendrick's statements?

(B) The advertisement of fattening foods, unlike that of cigarettes, should not be prevented, because fattening foods, unlike cigarettes, are not addictive.

(D) Governments should try to prevent the advertisement of cigarettes by means of financial disincentives rather than by legal prohibition.

(E) Governments should place restrictions on cigarette advertisements so as to keep them from encouraging people to engage in unhealthy practices, but should not try to prevent such advertisements.

OA and OE will follow

I'll take a crack at it ...

My summary of the conflict: Governments are justified when they attempt to prevent the advertisement of cigs because smoking cigs is an unhealthy habit. However, cig ads should be legal because advertisements for fatty foods are legal although eating fatty foods is an unhealthy practice.

So what helps to resolve the conflict? I determined that it would be something that would justify the government's actions to prevent the unhealthy habit of cigarette smoking or in other words distinguish cigs from fatty foods.

A) This doesn't add anything to the resolution of the conflict.

B) I like this answer. The government is justified because smoking cigs is an unhealthy practice and is addictive which perpetuates the unhealthy practice. Eating fatty foods, while an unhealthy practice, isn't an addictive practice. This differentiation justifies the government preventative measures and resolves the conflict.

C) Totally irrelevant since it does not resolve the conflict.

D) Again irrelevant since it does not resolve the conflict.

E) This answer is interesting because the government can place restrictions on cig ads but allow those ads to remain legal. My question would be then what about restrictions on ads for fatty foods? The conflict hasn't been resolved in my opinion.

I believe B is the answer.
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 339
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 122 [0], given: 14

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2009, 15:59
I will go with B
_________________

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 328
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 296 [0], given: 13

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2009, 16:19
B?
Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 62

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2009, 19:07
Okay reading this again I think I will change my answer to D.

Here's the reason: financial disincentives allow cig ads to remain legal but allows governments to try to prevent cig advertising by making it financially difficult. This resolves the conflict.
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 314
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 319 [2] , given: 9

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Sep 2009, 10:00
2
KUDOS
OA is D.

The key is to realize of the wording in the passage.

Fact1: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so

Option D explains this apparently contradiction.

Lincfucious wrote:
D - This is the other answer that is plausible. Although there is no mention of financial disincentives in the passage

This is perfectly valid in paradox questions. Anyway, you solved the question nicely. Congratulations + 1
Manager
Joined: 01 Jul 2009
Posts: 235
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 22 [1] , given: 39

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2009, 10:10
1
KUDOS
I was inclined to choose either D or E. I dont see much difference between "restrictions" and "financial disincentives", cuz one can consider disincentives some kind of "restriction". Also prohibiting and restricting are not the same, as some argued here. So I think this question was controversial. Both D and E could've been considered correct at some extent.
_________________

Consider giving Kudos if you like the post.

Manager
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 142
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 33 [0], given: 50

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent ... [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2009, 05:28
i chose D should say im bit lucky with this
Manager
Joined: 07 Jun 2011
Posts: 73
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 31

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Apr 2012, 07:59
First thought E, later figured out that E is out of scope because it basically talks about restrictions whereas the question talks about prevention.

D is a better choice because it talks about prevention at the same time circumventing legality
Manager
Status: Bunuel's fan!
Joined: 08 Jul 2011
Posts: 242
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 55

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 May 2012, 18:38
I eliminated down to C and E and picked C actually while the answer is D.

I was a bit wary of financial incentives in D. It is a tough question.
Manager
Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 195
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.6
WE: Project Management (Computer Software)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 60 [0], given: 7

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 May 2012, 01:46
right answer lies in the way one interpret the questions.

Whoever says Answer should be B, must be trying to resolve the conflict following statement :

However questions asks us to resolve conflict between following two statements
- Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so

So essentially kendrick is trying to say that Government should to prevent the Cigarettes Ads by some other measures instead of banning them or making them illegal. Option D states this exactly.

For those who think option E is right answer may be mistaking that it contradicts the main statement by saying "Governments should not try to prevent such advertisements"
_________________

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://gmatclub.com/forum/a-guide-to-the-official-guide-13-for-gmat-review-134210.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 271
GMAT 1: 750 Q V
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 6

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2012, 05:23

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.
_________________

+1 Kudos me - I'm half Irish, half Prussian.

Manager
Affiliations: Project Management Professional (PMP)
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 213
Location: New Delhi, India
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 12

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jul 2012, 00:01
Why is Option B incorrect.
_________________

Best
Vaibhav

If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, Thanks

Intern
Joined: 22 Apr 2013
Posts: 10
Location: Mexico
GPA: 3.5
WE: Business Development (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2013, 16:49
it is D because the question focus on its meaning on the Legal issue so that D states something about legalilty. It is a little tricky as it that word showed up at the end of the answer
Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2013
Posts: 68
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 6

Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2013, 19:37
Previously, I also chose B, then realized my mistake.
I focused on the example of the fact rather than on the fact.
Key here is the facts:
1. Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from being advertised are justified in doing so.
2. But cigarette advertisements should remain legal (Fatty food is the example of this fact)

Governments should try to prevent the advertisement(Justify fact 1) of cigarettes by means of financial disincentives rather than by legal prohibition(Justify fact 2).

So, the only choice that addressed both the facts is choice "D"

Learning: To resolve a paradox, focus on facts not on the examples of facts.
Re: Kendrick: Governments that try to prevent cigarettes from   [#permalink] 21 Oct 2013, 19:37
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Addiction to nicotine in cigarettes prevents many people from quitting 1 18 Jan 2017, 09:46
6 To prevent harbor porpoises from getting tangled in its nets 11 01 Apr 2012, 07:34
4 The government has no right to tax earnings from labor. 12 15 Jul 2010, 11:04
Let's try... Celluar components originating from 17 25 Sep 2008, 10:16
This one is from 1000 CR.... For a local government to 5 07 Mar 2008, 16:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by