Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Nov 2014, 20:08

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
5 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 55
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 11 [5] , given: 2

Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2008, 07:52
5
This post received
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  25% (medium)

Question Stats:

66% (01:54) correct 34% (01:24) wrong based on 470 sessions
Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before reaching a hospital or clinic where they can benefit from the drugs that dissolve clots in coronary arteries. The Food and Drug Administration recently approved a new blood clot dissolving agent, which a spokesman claimed could save the lives of many people who would otherwise join this group of heart attack victims.

Which of the following, if true, would seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting.
(B) Many heart attack victims die unnecessarily even though they reach a hospital or clinic in time
(C) The new agent can be effectively administered prior to the victim's arrival at a hospital or clinic
(D) The Food and Drug Administration has already approved agents that are at least as effective as the new drug in dissolving blood clots
(E) The new blood clot dissolving agent causes kidney damage and irregular heart rates in some patients.

Please explain the answer.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 997
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 5

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2008, 07:54
a)
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 55
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 2

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2008, 08:01
Why A? I can't understand
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 May 2008
Posts: 196
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2008, 08:08
I think is A. The author says that "Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before reaching a hospital or clinic where they can benefit from the drugs that dissolve clots in coronary arteries". So, if "The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting", the situation remains the same and what spokesman says is not true. What is the OA?
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 55
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 2

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2008, 08:12
Thank vbalex. OA is A
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 May 2008
Posts: 196
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2008, 08:15
Let me explain: people die because they must go to a hospital to have medication. They need a drug which could be administred at home, not at hospital, without doctors . If we take A, we will see that even for the new drug they will need to go at hospital, so the situation remains the same.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Posts: 793
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 107 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 14 Aug 2008, 15:44
Conclusion: The Food and Drug Administration recently approved a new blood clot dissolving agent, which a spokesman claimed could save the lives of many people who would otherwise join this group of heart attack victims.

Assumption: The drug can be taken by the patients before or during onset of the heart attack.

The weaken conclusion either invalid the assumption or introduce the additional extra information that overall weaken the argument.

Tie is between: A and D

Since A weakens the central pillar (assumption) of the arguments, hence wins.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Posts: 146
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 15 Aug 2008, 14:58
vbalex wrote:
Let me explain: people die because they must go to a hospital to have medication. They need a drug which could be administred at home, not at hospital, without doctors . If we take A, we will see that even for the new drug they will need to go at hospital, so the situation remains the same.


Well said....

Ans - A
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 55
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 2

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 15 Aug 2008, 20:12
Thank you so much :thanks
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 241
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 17 Aug 2008, 21:53
A
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 452
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 1

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 18 Aug 2008, 04:10
fiesta wrote:
Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before reaching a hospital or clinic where they can benefit from the drugs that dissolve clots in coronary arteries. The Food and Drug Administration recently approved a new blood clot dissolving agent, which a spokesman claimed could save the lives of many people who would otherwise join this group of heart attack victims.
Q: Which of the following, if true, would seriously weaken the argument above?
A. The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting.
B. Many heart attack victims die unnecessarily even though they reach a hospital or clinic in time
C. The new agent can be effectively administered prior to the victim's arrival at a hospital or clinic
D. The Food and Drug Administration has already approved agents that are at least as effective as the new drug in dissolving blood clots
E.The new blood clot dissolving agent causes kidney damage and irregular heart rates in some patients.

Please explain the answer.


IMO A).

The main concern is that patients die before reaching hospital. Now if there is new drug which must be administered by team of doctors then it will not help in improving the concern.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 277
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 18 Aug 2008, 05:24
IMO A.

It reinstates the fact that the patient should be in a Hospital atmosphere....but the argument states that most patients die before they reach the hospital. Thus this drug would be ineffective cause by the time the doctors administer it, the patient would already have been dead.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 128 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 18 Aug 2008, 05:42
fiesta wrote:
Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before reaching a hospital or clinic where they can benefit from the drugs that dissolve clots in coronary arteries. The Food and Drug Administration recently approved a new blood clot dissolving agent, which a spokesman claimed could save the lives of many people who would otherwise join this group of heart attack victims.
Q: Which of the following, if true, would seriously weaken the argument above?
A. The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting.
B. Many heart attack victims die unnecessarily even though they reach a hospital or clinic in time
C. The new agent can be effectively administered prior to the victim's arrival at a hospital or clinic
D. The Food and Drug Administration has already approved agents that are at least as effective as the new drug in dissolving blood clots
E.The new blood clot dissolving agent causes kidney damage and irregular heart rates in some patients.

Please explain the answer.


A. The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting. -> this is IMO answer since if the drug needs to be given in hospital then again the patients need to reach the hospitals so theres no use of such drugs
B. Many heart attack victims die unnecessarily even though they reach a hospital or clinic in time -> irrelevant
C. The new agent can be effectively administered prior to the victim's arrival at a hospital or clinic -> this strengthens
D. The Food and Drug Administration has already approved agents that are at least as effective as the new drug in dissolving blood clots -> this strengthens
E.The new blood clot dissolving agent causes kidney damage and irregular heart rates in some patients. -> this is side effects but here evidence is failure to reach hospitals which is the cause of death
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Verbal Forum Moderator
Verbal Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 500
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 76 [0], given: 149

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 26 Nov 2010, 05:12
A is the answer because it brings under consideration the possibility that if the new drug will only available at clinical setup, patients who r not able to to reach the setup on time will unable to enjoy the benefits of the drug
_________________

My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Please let me know your opinion about the Chandigarh Gmat Centrehttp://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-experience-at-chandigarh-india-centre-111830.html

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Oct 2010
Posts: 87
Location: India
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 6

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 26 Nov 2010, 05:15
A.

if a new agent is released, though it might be effective, but it still needs to be administered in a clinic by doctors. Hence the premise of the above argument is still valid that states that most of the heart patients die because they are not able to recieve medication in time to remove blood clots. Time to deliver is being questioned here in the premise and not the quality of drug.
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: I rest, I rust.
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 121
Schools: ISB - Co 2013
WE 1: IT Professional since 2006
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 104 [1] , given: 8

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 26 Nov 2010, 05:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
I just started reading PowerScore CR Bible. Lets see if it has helped me any.

fiesta wrote:
Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before reaching a hospital or clinic where they can benefit from the drugs that dissolve clots in coronary arteries [Premise]. The Food and Drug Administration recently approved a new blood clot dissolving agent, which a spokesman claimed could save the lives of many people who would otherwise join this group of heart attack victims [Conclusion].

Which of the following, if true, would seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting.
This sounds like a winner since it says that "patients would still have to brought to the hospital before the drug could be administered", but its the transit itself during which most patients die. But lets assess other options too.

(B) Many heart attack victims die unnecessarily even though they reach a hospital or clinic in time.
This actually strenghtens the argument; since it says that "not reaching hospital in time" is not the problem, but "lack of a good remedy" is. Stimulus tells us that such a remedy has just been develped. Rejected

(C) The new agent can be effectively administered prior to the victim's arrival at a hospital or clinic.
This also strenghtens the argument; since it says that "patients can be saved to a large extent even before they reach the hospital". Rejected

(D) The Food and Drug Administration has already approved agents that are at least as effective as the new drug in dissolving blood clots.
This neither weakens nor strengthens the argument, since the agent may not have any effect at all. Rejected

(E) The new blood clot dissolving agent causes kidney damage and irregular heart rates in some patients.
This comes dangerously close to weakening the argument but actually does not, since there may exist a cure for damaged kidney and irregular heart rates, or they may even not be life threatening. Rejected

Only A remains


_________________

Respect,
Vaibhav

PS: Correct me if I am wrong.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 01 Nov 2010
Posts: 197
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Marketing
GMAT Date: 08-27-2012
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Manufacturing)
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 37

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 26 Nov 2010, 23:59
The only ans is A.
_________________

kudos me if you like my post.

Attitude determine everything.
all the best and God bless you.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: Trying to get into the illustrious 700 club!
Joined: 18 Oct 2010
Posts: 79
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 19 [0], given: 58

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 30 Nov 2010, 11:45
The assumption is that the drug will save lives because it can be taken anywhere instead of relying on the drugs at the hospital (most people die in route to the hospital)

(A) The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting.

If the drug has to be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital than there really are no advantages to the drug. Patients might die on the way to the hospital just the same as before.
_________________

I'm trying to not just answer the problem but to explain how I came up with my answer. If I am incorrect or you have a better method please PM me your thoughts. Thanks!

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Posts: 154
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 37

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 07 Dec 2010, 14:52
The first sentence says that ppl die before reaching hospital when they suffer from heart attack...
A directly is related to that claim and weakens the conclusion.
IMO A
_________________

Thanks,
VP

2 KUDOS received
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 30 Nov 2010
Posts: 264
Schools: UC Berkley, UCLA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 57 [2] , given: 66

Re: CR: heart attack [#permalink] New post 09 Dec 2010, 07:53
2
This post received
KUDOS
fiesta wrote:
Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before reaching a hospital or clinic where they can benefit from the drugs that dissolve clots in coronary arteries. The Food and Drug Administration recently approved a new blood clot dissolving agent, which a spokesman claimed could save the lives of many people who would otherwise join this group of heart attack victims.

Which of the following, if true, would seriously weaken the argument above?

(A) The new agent must be administered by a team of doctors in a hospital or clinic setting.
(B) Many heart attack victims die unnecessarily even though they reach a hospital or clinic in time
(C) The new agent can be effectively administered prior to the victim's arrival at a hospital or clinic
(D) The Food and Drug Administration has already approved agents that are at least as effective as the new drug in dissolving blood clots
(E) The new blood clot dissolving agent causes kidney damage and irregular heart rates in some patients.

Please explain the answer.


A is the answer.
Premise: People who have heart attacks must go to a clinic or a hospital.
Premise 2: On their way to the hospital they die without receiving the proper medical attention that they need.
Premise 3: A new blood dissolving agent is approved.
Conclusion: This new agent can save the life of heart attack victims.

A: If the new agent must be taking with the administration of a doctor in a hospital, it defeats the whole purpose of the drug being made. (B/c heart attack victims die on their way to a hospital)
B: Irrelevant.
C: Supports argument
D: Does not weaken the argument
E: Does not help with attacking the conclusion of the argument.
_________________

Thank you for your kudoses Everyone!!!


"It always seems impossible until its done."
-Nelson Mandela

Re: CR: heart attack   [#permalink] 09 Dec 2010, 07:53
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 Elderly women who have suffered heart attacks are five times nusmavrik 22 28 Jun 2010, 19:35
Of 2,500 people who survived a first heart attack, those who noboru 8 03 Jun 2010, 04:06
2 Elderly women who have suffered heart attacks are five times netcaesar 25 28 Aug 2009, 10:59
cr-heart attack AK47 5 02 Feb 2007, 07:54
CR: Heart attack WinWinMBA 8 07 Jun 2005, 16:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Thousands who suffer heart attacks each year die before

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 41 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.