|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 810
Location: Singapore
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) a noninvasive diagnostic [#permalink]
 14 Nov 2005, 18:40
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)—a noninvasive diagnostic procedure—can be used to identify blockages in the coronary arteries. In contrast to angiograms—the invasive procedure customarily used—MRI’s pose no risk to patients. Thus, to guarantee patient safety in the attempt to diagnose arterial blockages, MRI’s should replace angiograms in all attempts at diagnosing coronary blockages.
Which of the following, if true, would most support the recommendation above?
(A) Angiograms can be used to diagnose conditions other than blockages in arteries.
(B) MRI’s were designed primarily in order to diagnose blockages in the coronary arteries.
(C) Angiograms reveal more information about the nature of a blockage than an MRI can.
(D) An MRI is just as likely as an angiogram to identify an arterial blockage.
(E) Some patients for whom an angiogram presents no risk are unwilling to undergo an MRI.
_________________
Cheers, Rahul.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 1133
Location: CA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
D.
Says MRI is at least as effective as Angiograms and thereby supporting conclusion.
C weakens the conclusion.
_________________
Whether you think you can or think you can't. You're right! - Henry Ford (1863 - 1947)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 810
Location: Singapore
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
But then, if MRI is as effective as angiogram, then how would D support the claim that MRI should replace angiogram...am i missing something??
_________________
Cheers, Rahul.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 1133
Location: CA
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
rahulraao wrote: But then, if MRI is as effective as angiogram, then how would D support the claim that MRI should replace angiogram...am i missing something??
Because it is less risky. It is mentioned in the argument. The question just asks additional premise to strenthen it. If it is not as effective as angiogram, even if it involves reduced risk, it cannot replace angiogram.
_________________
Whether you think you can or think you can't. You're right! - Henry Ford (1863 - 1947)
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 1001
Location: South Korea
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
10
[0], given: 0
|
duttsit wrote: rahulraao wrote: But then, if MRI is as effective as angiogram, then how would D support the claim that MRI should replace angiogram...am i missing something?? Because it is less risky. It is mentioned in the argument. The question just asks additional premise to strenthen it. If it is not as effective as angiogram, even if it involves reduced risk, it cannot replace angiogram. Yeah, if MRI is good enough, there's no reason not to use it.
_________________
Auge um Auge, Zahn um Zahn  !
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 503
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
I vote for D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1913
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
55
[0], given: 0
|
same reasonings to Duttsit's , it's D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1741
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR - Magnetic resonance imaging [#permalink]
15 Nov 2005, 07:03
rahulraao wrote: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)—a noninvasive diagnostic procedure—can be used to identify blockages in the coronary arteries. In contrast to angiograms—the invasive procedure customarily used—MRI’s pose no risk to patients. Thus, to guarantee patient safety in the attempt to diagnose arterial blockages, MRI’s should replace angiograms in all attempts at diagnosing coronary blockages.
The Bold part is the key here. It explicitly says that angiogram pose risk to patients.
now if MRI is as likely as angiogram to identify a blockage, why would choose angiogram and be exposed to risk.
clearly C is strengtheningsupporting the argument.
_________________
hey ya......
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1913
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
55
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR - Magnetic resonance imaging [#permalink]
15 Nov 2005, 07:20
nakib77 wrote: rahulraao wrote: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)—a noninvasive diagnostic procedure—can be used to identify blockages in the coronary arteries. In contrast to angiograms—the invasive procedure customarily used—MRI’s pose no risk to patients. Thus, to guarantee patient safety in the attempt to diagnose arterial blockages, MRI’s should replace angiograms in all attempts at diagnosing coronary blockages.
The Bold part is the key here. It explicitly says that angiogram pose risk to patients. now if MRI is as likely as angiogram to identify a blockage, why would choose angiogram and be exposed to risk. clearly C is strengtheningsupporting the argument. I guess you meant it's D 
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1741
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
Re: CR - Magnetic resonance imaging [#permalink]
15 Nov 2005, 07:36
laxieqv wrote: [
The Bold part is the key here. It explicitly says that angiogram pose risk to patients.
now if MRI is as likely as angiogram to identify a blockage, why would choose angiogram and be exposed to risk.
clearly C is strengtheningsupporting the argument. I guess you meant it's D [/quote]
 yup I meant D.... i guess long day at work  
_________________
hey ya......
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: CR - Magnetic resonance imaging
[#permalink]
15 Nov 2005, 07:36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
