A drug that is highly effective in treating many types of infection ca

Hi,
E could imply that it is impossible to produce large quantities of drugs as the ibora would be difficult to obtain but to me it a very indirect and far fetched fact.

D is direct and to the central point.

It worries me what you mention that the CR100 has some/many errors, does anybody know of a list of known errors in the answers? I spent a lot of time thinking why I answered incorrectly when the OA seemed really wrong

Do you know if the SC & RC1000 have the same problem?

Thanks

Conclusion: that continued production of the drug must inevitably lead to the ibora’s extinction.
Assumptions:
That drug is made only from Ibora tree
Number of trees grown proportion is less compared trees being cut for making the drug

Let me try analyzing the options:
(A) The drug made from ibora bark is dispensed to doctors from a central authority. - Irrelevant - Dispensed to doctor from central authority has nothing to do with the extenction of the tree
(B) The drug made from ibora bark is expensive to produce. - Out of scope - Expensive to produce - But this have nothing to with distinction. Even if its extensive the drun will be made and info expensive is out of scope
(C) The leaves of the ibora are used in a number of medical products. - May be strengthener - becuase the leaves are used in number of medical products which help in extenction of this Ibora tree
(D) The ibora can be propagated from cuttings and grown under cultivation. - Good weakener - Because if these trees are grown in cultiavation then this can give an alternate view for the Ibora extinction i.e. Conclusion
(E) The ibora generally grows in largely inaccessible places - Irreveleant

Hello! I am beginner here. The following tips helped me a lot to find the accurate answer.
1. Identifying & summarising conclusion
Perpetuating production of the drug will most likely to destroy Ibora.
2. Identifying & summarising premise
5000 Ibora trees are required to make 1kg of drug
High effectiveness in treatment leads to demand
Ibora is already rare tree in the wild.
3. Identifying possible assumption:
- Medical innovation to artificially create drug which has equal effectiveness as Ibora
- To plant Ibora
- Making it illegal

(A) The drug made from ibora bark is dispensed to doctors from a central authority.
Giving out drug will enable drug production. Therefore, it is STRENGTHENING the conclusion.
(B) The drug made from ibora bark is expensive to produce.
Inclusive purchase can be done with the people who has enough money to buy the drug.
(C) The leaves of the ibora are used in a number of medical products.
It is indicating uses of Ibora tree for medical purpose. It is NOT weakening the conclusion.
(D) The ibora can be propagated from cuttings and grown under cultivation.
This option is clearly weakening the conclusion. Because, as stated in the assumption, planting Ibora can be solution to prevent from extinction.
(E) The ibora generally grows in largely inaccessible places.
Even though, there is some difficulties, it doesn't mean that the production will be ceased.

Conclusion: Production of Ibora will eventually lead to its extinction
Premise 1: Ibora effective in treating many infections
Premise 2: A lot of Ibora bark needed to produce a small quantity of medicine
We need to find the answer that weakens the conclusion

(A) The drug made from ibora bark is dispensed to doctors from a central authority. - Does this weaken the conclusion? NO. If anything this is out of scope. We are not focused on how the drug is dispensed. Only its creation.

(B) The drug made from ibora bark is expensive to produce.- Does this weaken the conclusion? NO. If anything this strengthens the premise that Ibora is rare and thus expensive.

(C) The leaves of the ibora are used in a number of medical products - Does this weaken the conclusion? NO. This strengthens the usefulness of Ibora and hence more might be needed. Does not focus on the creation.

(D) The ibora can be propagated from cuttings and grown under cultivation. Does this weaken the conclusion?YES. If we can grow Ibora artificially, we can reduce the impact on its wild population thus probably avoid its extinction. Although this does not demolish the conclusion, it certainly weakens it.

(E) The ibora generally grows in largely inaccessible places.- Does this weaken the conclusion? NO. This is out of scope. The location where Iboras grow does not matter because the premise clearly says we are already harvesting it to a large extent.

Can someone please explain why cant E be the right answer. If ibore is grows in inaccessible places, then those plants could not be used for production of the drug. Therefore those plants still remain in some inaccessible places.

We need to weaken that continued production of the drug must inevitably lead to the ibora’s extinction. So the cocnclusion talks about a post effect of production of drug; the drug is already produced as per the conclusion. E is questioning something that is assumed to be happening in the main conclusion. Weaken the result of action and not the action itself.
As per your query ("...then those plants could not be used for production of the drug."), E is weakening the action at the first place, which is taken to be true in the conclusion.
Hope it helped.

Dear VeritasKarishma AjiteshArun GMATGuruNY IanStewart MartyTargetTestPrep DmitryFarber RonPurewal VeritasPrepBrian,

I have no solid reason to reject choice E.
(E) The ibora generally grows in largely inaccessible places.

If MOST (i.e. "largely") ibora CANNOT be accessed (inaccessible), how can ibora be taken down for drug and become extinct?

In order to reject choice E., do we have to assume that "inaccessible places" are in fact accessible eventually?
I don't think "inaccessible" means the same thing as HARD (but possible) to access.
I think "inaccessible" means IMPOSSIBLE to access -- regardless of the efforts put into

Hi varotkorn

I am no expert, but will try to help you. Let me know if it helps.

The passage mentions that currently about 5,000 trees are cut to produce 1 Kg of the drug. The passage further mentions that if the production continues at this rate then the plant might soon become extinct - These two lines indicate that the production is going on as we speak. In other words the folks producing this drug have already figured out how to get these trees from inaccessible regions. Ask the question that if the trees are inaccessible then how are the producers able to continue production in the first place?

Furthermore, in order to strengthen the argument you need to find an option that says that 'No, the trees will not go extinct' and D tells you that they can be regenerated

Hi varotkorn,

I agree with Pritishd. Look at the last part of what the question has to say: "continued production of the drug must inevitably lead to the ibora's extinction". A stronger version of option E would tell us that continued production is not possible, but even that wouldn't mean that continued production will not cause the ibora's extinction.

As others have mentioned, continued production of the drug requires the bark. So, the tree will have to be found and used regardless of where it is located in order for drug production to be continued.

Furthermore, notice that (E) does not say that most of the ibora trees grow in places that are completely inaccessible. It says "The ibora generally grows in largely inaccessible places." "Largely inaccessible places" are places that are barely accessible, or very difficult to access for most people most of the time, but are not completely inaccessible. So, what we can gather from what (E) says is that, in order for production of the drug to continue, people will have to access very difficult to access places. OK, so, it may be difficult to make the drug and difficult to drive the trees to extinction, but what (E) says does not give us reason to believe the continued production won't result in the ibora's becoming extinct.

The conclusion of this particular passage is the last line. It follows, therefore, that continued production of the drug must inevitably lead to the ibora's extinction.

A. Incorrect. How the drug is made available to doctors will not affect the conclusion as it talks about the "continued production". This might perhaps result in the extinction happening a bit later than if the drug was made available otherwise, but that doesn't mean that it will never lead to ibora's extinction.

B. Incorrect. Expense is irrelevant to the conclusion.

C. Incorrect. The argument talks about the production of the drug which is made from the bark of the tree. The leaves of ibora are irrelevant to the conclusion.

D. Correct. This gives us a reason to believe why the Ibora might not be extinct despite the continued production of the drug.

E. Incorrect. Just because Ibora generally grows in places that are largely inaccessible doesn't mean it can't be extinct. Moon, for some, might be a largely inaccessible place but people have still managed to reach that. The top of the Mount Everest is also an inaccessible place, but people have reached that too. So, really this does not affect our conclusion as much.

­This is the quick solution I came up with:

Conc:  Continued production of drug => Ibora's extinction.

(A) The drug made from ibora bark is dispensed to doctors from a central authority - One of those options that are straightforward and easy to eliminate. The distribution network, channel or logistics of such don't seem to impact the conclusion. Drop

(B) The drug made from ibora bark is expensive to produce. - Cost of the drug, doesn't look like it'll induce or prevent extinction. Drop

(C) The leaves of the ibora are used in a number of medical products. - Number of applications or products it's used in doesn't impact the conclusion. Moreso, this option talks about leaves and not the bark. If the leaves are finite resources, similar to the bark, this can suggest the extinction could be faster than expected. Drop

(D) The ibora can be propagated from cuttings and grown under cultivation. - This information tell us that as long as we can cultivate ibora from cuttings, we continue to extract the drug from the ibora barks. This does weaken the possibility of extinction stated in the passage. Keep

(E) The ibora generally grows in largely inaccessible places. - Interesting option. Easy to make a mistake by creating an unsupported story here if we don't keep the conclusion in mind. The conclusion states that the continued production of drug will lead to Ibora's extinction. This option tells us that Ibora that grows in accessible places will be, if not already, used in extracting the drug. Those that are inaccessible, can't be tapped, hence, Ibora won't go extinct. Meaning that "If continued production stops (due to any reason), Ibora won't go extinct." This seems to be in line with the conclusion stated. This option, at best supports and at worst, doesn't impact the conclusion in anyway. Drop