Undoubtedly E

Ans is E.

No matter how much practise you do for CR , there will always a Point in favour or in against close options...

After so much of reasoning defintly i will be 'E' ...

But guys, how many ppl will get it right in given time constraint of 1 minute in the actual exam...
_________________

Kudos if any of my post helps you !!!

Hello everyone,
picking up this old thread thanks to my daily delivery of GMAT delights in my emails

It's hard to undersand how E really strenghtens the argument.
Here is my explanation.

As said before, the argument is: patients taking old drug often stop treatment after 3 days, which leads to more reinfection cases; new drug is effective in 3 days, so reinfection should occur less often.

Choice E gives an explanation for the first part: patients stop after some time (3 days) because they feel better, even though the treatment is not over.
The same thing could happen with new drug: active in 3 days, fine, but what if you feel better after a couple of days? Well, choice E addresses this concern, hence reinforces the argument.

Hope that's clear and helpful.

But I'll add that in less than 2 minutes, you should tackle the question differently: all the "out of scope" answer choices can be eliminated quickly. The argument is about reinfection/time for the drug to be effective/time patients take drug (~patients behaviour - inferred related to psychology).

E is the only choice that has all that, so it's enough to pick your choice without drilling too much into logic

my 2 Euros (not worth much these days)

cheers to all and keep it up!
_________________

Le Patron is the Boss

E

E is good
_________________

Sky is the limit

E it is
_________________

+1 Kudos If found helpful..

The traditional treatment of strep infections has been a seven-day course of antibiotics, either penicillin or erythromycin. However, since many patients stop taking those drugs within three days, reinfection is common in cases where those drugs are prescribed. A new antibiotic requires only a three-day course of treatment. Therefore, reinfection will probably be less common in cases where the new antibiotic is prescribed than in cases where either penicillin or erythromycin is prescribed.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) Some of the people who are allergic to penicillin are likely to be allergic to the new antibiotic.
If so, people are equally unlikely to take both. Irrelevant.
(B) A course of treatment with the new antibiotic costs about the same as a course of treatment with either penicillin or erythromycin. Cost is out of scope.
(C) The new antibiotic has been shown to be effective in eradicating bacterial infections other than strep. Talks about other infections. not interested in them.
(D) Some physicians have already begun to prescribe the new antibiotic instead of penicillin or erythromycin for the treatment of some strep infections. This does not show that the new drug is better at not causing re-infection.
(E) Regardless of whether they take a traditional antibiotic or the new one, most patients feel fully recovered after taking the drug for three days. Correct. If the patient feels fully recovered, he will not take the drug anymore. By the end of these three days, however, the prescription of new drug will be completed. Hence, lesser chance of re-infection.

Agree with E

This is a good example of a question with good intent, but with a poor outcome. Answer choice E does nothing for the argument and those on here who have argued for it are making a common flaw in interpreting it.

There is a big difference between something because an outcome and that something being the only outcome. In this case, answer E says "most patients feel fully recovered after taking the drug for three days." This answer says nothing about when the patient first starts feeling better under the new drug, only that, at the three day mark, the patient feels better. The patient easily could have started feeling better during day 1 or day 2. Therefore, everyone has incorrectly interpreted this to fix the issue that patients might start feeling better before the dosage of the new drug is complete and stop taking it.

For example:



However, the word "only" appears nowhere in the actual answer choice.

The obvious intention of the author was to have E eliminate the possibility that people stop using the new drug because they feel better before they finish treatment. E should therefore instead say:

(E) Regardless of whether they take a traditional antibiotic or the new one, most patients DO NOT feel fully recovered afterUNTIL taking the drug for three days.

Fortunately, we do not see this as a trap answer too much on actual GMAT questions. However, if you were to work some LSAT CR questions, you would see this come up a lot, especially in assumption, inference, and flaw questions.

Side note: B seems like the best alternative because it seems to eliminate a potential barrier. Whenever consumer choice is involved, cost is definitely relevant. In this case, B seems to eliminate the problem that the new drug is more expensive so people won't choose it. However, it has no effect because the conclusion limits the scope to "in cases where the new antibiotic is prescribed." Therefore, there is no consumer choice here, which, in this case, makes B irrelevant.