The Ergonomic Society conducted a study that indicated that many peopl

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The argument proposes that directing chiropractic treatment toward adults with severe back problems is the best way to minimize the proportion of the population that suffers from back pain. The argument assumes a high degree of overlap between those adults who suffer from severe back problems and all people who suffer from back pain, where the former group may comprise only a subset of the latter group. It also assumes that there is not another recommendation that could better accomplish the goal of minimizing back pain for a larger segment of the population than treating just those adults with severe back problems.

(A) The argument does not depend upon whether or not chiropractic treatment can or cannot be used in conjunction with other medical treatments. The fact that people could benefit from other forms of treatment aside from chiropractic care weakens the argument to a slight degree, and does not act as a supportive assumption.

(B) The relative degree of insurance coverage of chiropractic care compared with other medical treatments is not vital to the argument. Also, that insurance carriers cover chiropractic care to a lesser degree weakens the argument marginally, and does not act as a supportive assumption.

(C) CORRECT. This statement rules out the possibility that chiropractic care or other medical treatments could effectively prevent or lessen back pain among those people who have not yet developed severe back problems.

(D) That chiropractic treatment is more effective over time is irrelevant to the argument.

(E) The economic impact of severe back pain and other problems is not addressed in the argument. Instead, addressing back pain is treated as an intrinsic goal, with no mention of economic externalities.

Simply negate the option C and you will find that the option destroys the argument...!!
It has to be C.

could you please put option C i.e. "Individuals who receive chiropractic or other treatment prior to developing severe back problems are not less likely to develop back pain than those who do not" in your wordings.. i am not able to comprehend or taking in different way.. many thanks

thanks a lot fluke and great way of thinking.
Just one question though,how do we interpret such a complex choice in exam(as in ,i could only prephrase this much that adults who sufer from back pain form a major proportion of people suffering from back pain)
thanks agian

Seriously, I don't consciously follow any strict rule or protocol while solving these. I suggest you to read "Powerscore CR bible". It really helped me a lot.

For this question in particular, because it is an assumption question, locating the argument is highly important AND not missing anything what's mentioned in argument is necessary. Spend 10 seconds thinking whether we really require some additional information for that conclusion. Let me tell you this; most of the time, I can't figure out just by reading the argument what a possible assumption might be. But, after looking at the options, I can eliminate 2-3 options easily.

Don't eliminate an answer choice just because it's wordy, sounds convoluted, uses unheard words. Keep it aside and proceed further to eliminate the choices with conspicuous errors and then come back to the difficult option.

But, read the CR powerscore bible.

The Ergonomic Society conducted a study that indicated that many people develop severe back problems during adulthood, and that virtually all such people who received chiropractic treatment showed great improvement. Therefore, in order to minimize the proportion of the population that suffers from back pain, the Ergonomic Society recommended that chiropractic treatment be directed toward those adults who suffer from severe back problems.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
Any person who receives chiropractic treatment for back pain may also benefit from other forms of treatment.
Large insurance carriers cover chiropractic care for back problems to a lesser degree than they do other medical treatments.
Individuals who receive chiropractic or other treatment prior to developing severe back problems are not less likely to develop back pain than those who do not.
Chiropractic treatment is more effective in treating severe back problems when utilized over a long period of time, as opposed to sporadically.
Severe back pain and other problems often cause individuals to miss workdays.

In the above answer choices, can someone apply Logical Negation to choice (C), which is the answer to the question.
My question is to know in which part of the sentence we need to apply the logical negation. In answer choice (C), we can apply logical negation at 3 places. So can someone explain where to apply.

Individuals who DO/DON'T receive chiropractic or other treatment prior to developing severe back problems are LESS LIKELY not less likely to develop back pain than those who do DOES not.

Thanks

Hi Krackgmat,

Let me see if I can help..

Individuals who receive chiropractic or other treatment prior to developing severe back problems are not less likely to develop back pain than those who do not.

Is answer C. It's tricky, because as you say there are lots of negatives to work out. So, before we go any further, we need to work out what it actually saying.

It is saying that people who get preventative chiropractic treatment will not fare better than people who do not receive preventative treatment.

Re phrased like that the key 'negation' is clearer (highlighted above).

And it also makes it clear that this is an assumption. Because if we put all our $$ into treating people with back problems we need to know that we could not have spent the money better by treating all people before they get pain (preventative treatment).

James

Use of POE will help here:

Conclusion : Therefore, chiropractic treatment be directed toward those adults who suffer from severe back problems.

(A) Any person who receives chiropractic treatment for back pain may also benefit from other forms of treatment. Other treatments (Irrelevant)

(B) Large insurance carriers cover chiropractic care for back problems to a lesser degree than they do other medical treatments. Irrelevant.

(C) Individuals who receive chiropractic or other treatment prior to developing severe back problems are not less likely to develop back pain than those who do not.

(D) Chiropractic treatment is more effective in treating severe back problems when utilized over a long period of time, as opposed to sporadically. Not mentioned anywhere. Irrelevant

(E) Severe back pain and other problems often cause individuals to miss workdays.[/quote] Out of scope.

Only (C) left.

Why is C correct?
Negation of C does not affect the argument.
I feel C is irrelevant. Please advise.

(C) works if you read the passage as saying that the conclusion is that chiropractic treatment should be directed toward those adults who suffer from severe back problems, and not at adults who do not suffer from back problems.

That that is the conclusion is not entirely clear, and that conclusion is not clearly supported by what the passage says, but, anyway, if you read the conclusion that way, (C) works.

KarishmaB - Can you please explain why option C is right and how negation of option C weakens the conclusion?

Thanks,
Anshul

Context: Many people develop severe back problems during adulthood, and virtually all such people who received chiropractic treatment showed great improvement
Plan: Chiropractic treatment be directed toward those adults who suffer from severe back problems
Aim: minimize the proportion of the population that suffers from back pain

Our aim is to minimize the proportion of the population that suffers from back pain. We plan to direct chiropractic treatment toward people with severe back problems. But what if directing chiropractic treatment toward other adults will prevent back problems in the first place. Our plan is to focus on treatment of severe back pain. What if prevention will lead to minimising the population that suffers from back pain?

When we conclude that we should direct chiropractic treatment to people with back problems to minimise the proportion of people with back problems, we are assuming that chiropractic treatment will not have much use as a preventive strategy.

(C) Individuals who receive chiropractic or other treatment prior to developing severe back problems are not less likely to develop back pain than those who do not.

Negated (C): Individuals who receive chiropractic or other treatment prior to developing severe back problems are less likely to develop back pain than those who do not.

If people given chiropractic treatment before developing severe back problems are less likely to develop back pain in the first place, it is possible that 'to minimize the proportion of the population that suffers from back pain,' the best idea may not be to direct these treatments to treat back pain but instead to treat everyone.
Hence, (C) is an assumption.

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.