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

 It is currently 07 Oct 2015, 07:55

### 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

# Leona: If the average consumption of eggs in the United

Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2004
Posts: 57
Followers: 1

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

Leona: If the average consumption of eggs in the United [#permalink]  31 Mar 2005, 13:16
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
21. Leona: If the average consumption of eggs in the United States were cut in half, an estimated 5,000 lives might be saved each year.
Thomas: How can that be? That would mean that if people adopt this single change in diet for ten years, the population ten years from now will be greater by 50,000 people than it otherwise would have been.

Which one of the following is a statement that Leona could offer Thomas to clarify her own claim and to address the point he has made?
(A) It is possible for the population to grow by 5,000 people for every year if the base year chosen for purposes of comparison is one with unusually low population growth.
(B) It is accurate to say that 5,000 lives have been saved as long as 5,000 people who would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, did not do soâ€“even if they died for some other reason.
(C) If egg consumption were reduced by more than half, the estimated number of lives saved each year could be even more than 5,000.
(D) The actual rate of population growth depends not only on the birth rate, but also on changes in life expectancy.
(E) For the average consumption of eggs to be cut by half, many individual consumers would have to cut their own consumption by much more than half.

VP
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 1441
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 0

"B" is best.....we need to find an answer which can combine both these people's arguments i.e. we can say that ppl didn't die off becose of high egg consumption but they still cud die of other causes.
VP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1488
Location: Germany
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 151 [0], given: 0

agree with B) it adresses his point => "how can that be?" it can be when the people, who changed their diet, did not die. so her claim would only be possible when none of these died but that would be unrealistic because they could die because of some other reason. so her claim is more abstract and his response is more practical. B) solves this kind of discrepancy.
Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 907
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 0

B it is . Only B and D both address Leone and Thomas' claim but B is better
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1794
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

for a change I will go with (D).

(B) It is accurate to say that 5,000 lives have been saved as long as 5,000 people who would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, did not do so–even if they died for some other reason.

According to this these people would have died anyway. Changing the diet would not have any effect on these people. If this happens the population might not increase in that case.
I believe Leona cannot use this to defend her claim. But she can use it to show that Thomas's claim may not hold good.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5067
Location: Singapore
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 0

(A) It is possible for the population to grow by 5,000 people for every year if the base year chosen for purposes of comparison is one with unusually low population growth.
- Does not help her one bit. Her conclusion is one meant to apply generally across any population, not only those with low growth.

(B) It is accurate to say that 5,000 lives have been saved as long as 5,000 people who would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, did not do soâ€“even if they died for some other reason.
- This is the best answer. It is accurate to the point that these 5000 people mentioned did not die due to other causes other than over-consumption of eggs. If this was not the case, then you can't expect an extra 50,000 people because they might die of other things (accidents, dieases, old age etc)

(C) If egg consumption were reduced by more than half, the estimated number of lives saved each year could be even more than 5,000.
- Out of scope.

(D) The actual rate of population growth depends not only on the birth rate, but also on changes in life expectancy.
- Weakens her stand in fact. It says population is dependent not only on birth rate but also on life expectancy. But saving lifes means extending their life expectancy and so Thomas's stand might actually be valid.

(E) For the average consumption of eggs to be cut by half, many individual consumers would have to cut their own consumption by much more than half.
- That's not important and does not allow leona to clarify her claim.

B it is.
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1794
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

(B) It is accurate to say that 5,000 lives have been saved as long as 5,000 people who would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, did not do so–even if they died for some other reason.

Could anyone explain what these people did not do ? (did not do so)
SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1794
Location: NewJersey USA
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 0

I think the answer is definitely (B)

It is accurate to say that 5,000 lives have been saved as long as 5,000 people who would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, did not do so–even if they died for some other reason.

I think the bold portion says that

these people did not change their diets.

If people are going to die anyway then the diet change will not help and these people cannot be counted towards number of people saved.

If they are not going to die for any reason other than changing diets then these people could be counted as long as they change their diets.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5067
Location: Singapore
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 0

anandnk wrote:
(B) It is accurate to say that 5,000 lives have been saved as long as 5,000 people who would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, did not do soâ€“even if they died for some other reason.

Could anyone explain what these people did not do ? (did not do so)

hmmm.. did not should refer to changing their diets, i guess. You can't use do to refer to death (which is not something you do, but rather something you experience)
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1225
Location: Taiwan
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 0

ywilfred wrote:
anandnk wrote:
(B) It is accurate to say that 5,000 lives have been saved as long as 5,000 people who would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, did not do soâ€“even if they died for some other reason.

Could anyone explain what these people did not do ? (did not do so)

hmmm.. did not should refer to changing their diets, i guess. You can't use do to refer to death (which is not something you do, but rather something you experience)

Hi, all

I cannot understand what does the sentense "did not do soâ€“even if they died for some other reason" mean?

Could you paraphrase it?

Thanks
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 The United States consumption 5 26 Jan 2008, 11:59
The average normal infant born in the United States weights 4 23 Jan 2007, 01:41
Leona: If the average consumption of eggs in the United 6 16 Nov 2006, 10:13
In the United States in 1986, the average rate of violent 9 08 Nov 2006, 20:31
Leona: If the average consumption of eggs in the United 3 31 Jan 2006, 01:23
Display posts from previous: Sort by