|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 23 Jun 2008
Posts: 144
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
11
[0], given: 0
|
The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical [#permalink]
 12 Aug 2008, 07:56
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence that breathing other peoples tobacco smoke increases the incidence of heart disease or lung cancer in healthy nonsmokers, legislation banning smoking in workplaces cannot be justified on health grounds.
Q. Of the following, which is the best criticism of the argument reported above?
A. It ignores causes of lung cancer other than smoking.
B. It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.
C. It fails to mention the roles played by diet, exercise, and heredity in the development of heart disease.
D. It does not consider the possibility that nonsmokers who breathe smoke-filled air at work may become more concerned about their health.
E. It does not acknowledge that nonsmokers, even those who breathe smoke-filled air at work, are in general healthier than smokers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 452
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
26
[0], given: 1
|
balboa wrote: The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence that breathing other peoples tobacco smoke increases the incidence of heart disease or lung cancer in healthy nonsmokers, legislation banning smoking in workplaces cannot be justified on health grounds.
Q. Of the following, which is the best criticism of the argument reported above?
A. It ignores causes of lung cancer other than smoking.
B. It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.
C. It fails to mention the roles played by diet, exercise, and heredity in the development of heart disease.
D. It does not consider the possibility that nonsmokers who breathe smoke-filled air at work may become more concerned about their health.
E. It does not acknowledge that nonsmokers, even those who breathe smoke-filled air at work, are in general healthier than smokers. A) -> Does not criticize B) -> It does , keep it C) -> Out of place D) -> Hardly criticize E) -> Does not criticize IMO B)
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Apr 2008
Posts: 1899
Location: Oklahoma City
Schools: Hard Knocks
Followers: 25
Kudos [?]:
344
[0], given: 32
|
I also answered B. It's not the attack / criticism I first looked for, but upon a second read-through, it does weaken the argument somewhat, whereas the others don't weaken or are irrelevant entirely. balboa wrote: The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence that breathing other peoples tobacco smoke increases the incidence of heart disease or lung cancer in healthy nonsmokers, legislation banning smoking in workplaces cannot be justified on health grounds.
Q. Of the following, which is the best criticism of the argument reported above?
A. It ignores causes of lung cancer other than smoking.
B. It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.
C. It fails to mention the roles played by diet, exercise, and heredity in the development of heart disease.
D. It does not consider the possibility that nonsmokers who breathe smoke-filled air at work may become more concerned about their health.
E. It does not acknowledge that nonsmokers, even those who breathe smoke-filled air at work, are in general healthier than smokers.
_________________
------------------------------------
J Allen Morris
**I'm pretty sure I'm right, but then again, I'm just a guy with his head up his a$$.
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 23 Apr 2008
Posts: 90
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
IMO B
A. It ignores causes of lung cancer other than smoking.-NOT RELATED
B. It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.-
C. It fails to mention the roles played by diet, exercise, and heredity in the development of heart disease.-STRENGTHENS
D. It does not consider the possibility that nonsmokers who breathe smoke-filled air at work may become more concerned about their health.-NOT RELATED
E. It does not acknowledge that nonsmokers, even those who breathe smoke-filled air at work, are in general healthier than smokers.-CANT SAY
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 67
Location: D.C.
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 0
|
B for me... the lobbyist only considers healthy individuals, by introducing the issue of non-healthy workers it weakens the argument.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Vercules, Legendaddy, noboru, Marcab, metallicafan, rajeevrks27, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, souvik101990, doe007, MacFauz, PTK, carcass, kissthegmat, Narenn
|
close
