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

 It is currently 29 Aug 2016, 17:44

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Using new detection techniques, researchers have found

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 29 Dec 2011
Posts: 38
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 29

Using new detection techniques, researchers have found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2012, 04:03
00:00

Difficulty:

15% (low)

Question Stats:

78% (02:32) correct 22% (01:32) wrong based on 110 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Hello All,

I'm looking at this question:

-------------
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Using new detection techniques, researchers have found trace amounts of various medicinal substances in lakes and rivers. Taken in large quantities, these substances could have serious health effects, but they are present in quantities far too low to cause any physiological response in people who drink the water or bathe in it. Nevertheless, medical experts contend that eliminating these trace amounts from the water will have public health benefits, since ____________.

(A)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers are harmless to humans in large quantities

(B)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers can counteract possible harmful effects of other such substances found there

(C)

people who develop undesirable side effects when being treated with medicines that contain these substances generally have their treatment changed

(D)

most medicinal substances that reach lakes or rivers rapidly break down into harmless substances

(E)

disease-causing bacteria exposed to low concentrations of certain medicinal substances can become resistant to them

We are essentially looking for an answer that favours the removal of such medicinal substances.

I saw (C) and (E) as such examples. However, why would E be considered a stronger choice than C?

Best Greetings.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Moderator
Joined: 02 Jul 2012
Posts: 1230
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Followers: 110

Kudos [?]: 1255 [0], given: 116

Re: Using new detection techniques, researchers have found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Oct 2012, 04:09
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
The argument only speaks about the effects of the medicine present in the water. Option C speaks about the medicines used when treating patients. Hence it is completely out of scope. It only creates an illusion of staying close to the argument by using similar words.

E speaks directly about low concentrations of the medicine. The argument says that the medicine found in the water supply is of low concentration. So E stays close to the argument. Hence E is the right answer.

Kudos Please... If my post helped.
_________________

Did you find this post helpful?... Please let me know through the Kudos button.

Thanks To The Almighty - My GMAT Debrief

GMAT Reading Comprehension: 7 Most Common Passage Types

Manager
Joined: 14 Apr 2015
Posts: 83
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 48

Re: Using new detection techniques, researchers have found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2015, 17:30
elegan wrote:
Hello All,

I'm looking at this question:

-------------
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Using new detection techniques, researchers have found trace amounts of various medicinal substances in lakes and rivers. Taken in large quantities, these substances could have serious health effects, but they are present in quantities far too low to cause any physiological response in people who drink the water or bathe in it. Nevertheless, medical experts contend that eliminating these trace amounts from the water will have public health benefits, since ____________.

(A)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers are harmless to humans in large quantities

(B)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers can counteract possible harmful effects of other such substances found there

(C)

people who develop undesirable side effects when being treated with medicines that contain these substances generally have their treatment changed

(D)

most medicinal substances that reach lakes or rivers rapidly break down into harmless substances

(E)

disease-causing bacteria exposed to low concentrations of certain medicinal substances can become resistant to them

We are essentially looking for an answer that favours the removal of such medicinal substances.

I saw (C) and (E) as such examples. However, why would E be considered a stronger choice than C?

Best Greetings.

C is wrong. If people have their treatment changed, then there is no need of removing the traces.
Manager
Joined: 16 Jan 2013
Posts: 80
GMAT 1: Q V
GPA: 2.75
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 501

Re: Using new detection techniques, researchers have found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Apr 2016, 12:01
elegan wrote:
Hello All,

I'm looking at this question:

-------------
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Using new detection techniques, researchers have found trace amounts of various medicinal substances in lakes and rivers. Taken in large quantities, these substances could have serious health effects, but they are present in quantities far too low to cause any physiological response in people who drink the water or bathe in it. Nevertheless, medical experts contend that eliminating these trace amounts from the water will have public health benefits, since ____________.

(A)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers are harmless to humans in large quantities

(B)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers can counteract possible harmful effects of other such substances found there

(C)

people who develop undesirable side effects when being treated with medicines that contain these substances generally have their treatment changed

(D)

most medicinal substances that reach lakes or rivers rapidly break down into harmless substances

(E)

disease-causing bacteria exposed to low concentrations of certain medicinal substances can become resistant to them

We are essentially looking for an answer that favours the removal of such medicinal substances.

I saw (C) and (E) as such examples. However, why would E be considered a stronger choice than C?

Best Greetings.

Could someone explain why B is incorrect?
Intern
Joined: 11 Aug 2015
Posts: 2
GMAT 1: 580 Q45 V25
GPA: 3.4
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [1] , given: 49

Re: Using new detection techniques, researchers have found [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Apr 2016, 13:13
1
KUDOS
Hi there,
if you break out the conclusion, you will probably find this sentence rather easy.
The conclusion states that there would be benefits in eliminating the trace amount of medicinal substances from lakes and rivers.

Option B states that the medicinal substances can counteract possible harmful effects of substances found there. Clearly, it would not be beneficial to remove something that is good for the lakes and rivers. Therefore, this answer choice is paradoxical and rather states the opposite of what should be stated.

Instead, take a look at answer choice E. This option states a disadvantage of not eliminating the medicinal substances - that the bacteria in the river may become resistant. Hence, this is the right answer choice.

elegan wrote:
Hello All,

I'm looking at this question:

-------------
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Using new detection techniques, researchers have found trace amounts of various medicinal substances in lakes and rivers. Taken in large quantities, these substances could have serious health effects, but they are present in quantities far too low to cause any physiological response in people who drink the water or bathe in it. Nevertheless, medical experts contend that eliminating these trace amounts from the water will have public health benefits, since ____________.

(A)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers are harmless to humans in large quantities

(B)

some of the medicinal substances found in lakes and rivers can counteract possible harmful effects of other such substances found there

(C)

people who develop undesirable side effects when being treated with medicines that contain these substances generally have their treatment changed

(D)

most medicinal substances that reach lakes or rivers rapidly break down into harmless substances

(E)

disease-causing bacteria exposed to low concentrations of certain medicinal substances can become resistant to them

We are essentially looking for an answer that favours the removal of such medicinal substances.

I saw (C) and (E) as such examples. However, why would E be considered a stronger choice than C?

Best Greetings.

Could someone explain why B is incorrect?
Re: Using new detection techniques, researchers have found   [#permalink] 24 Apr 2016, 13:13
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
9 Using new detection techniques, researchers have found trace 7 31 Mar 2012, 10:26
Using computer techniques, researches analyze layers of 8 16 Mar 2008, 08:25
Using computer techniques, researchers analyze layers of 4 05 Apr 2007, 11:35
Using computer techniques, researchers analyze layers of 4 11 Dec 2006, 00:21
Using computer techniques, researchers analyze layers of 2 10 Nov 2006, 07:38
Display posts from previous: Sort by