A new medication for migraine seems effective, but there is concern th

Question

A new medication for migraine seems effective, but there is concern that the medication might exacerbate heart disease. If patients with heart disease take the medication under careful medical supervision, however, harmful side effects can definitely be averted. The concern about those side effects is thus unfounded.

The argument depends on which one of the following assumptions?

(A) The new medication actually is effective when taken by patients with heart disease.

(B) No migraine sufferers with heart disease will take the new medication except under careful medical supervision.

(C) Most migraine sufferers who have taken the new medication in trials also had heart disease.

(D) The new medication has various other side effects, but none as serious as that of exacerbating heart disease.

(E) The new medication will displace all migraine medications currently being used.

ywilfred · Answer

Premises (In logical chronological order)
1) New medication for migraine seems effectvie <-- not effective, but seems to be
2) Concern about new medication is it might exacerbate heart disease <-- use of 'might' (maybe)
3) Concer about side effects is unfounded
4) If patients with heart disease take medication under medical supervision ---> then side effects can be averted (conclusion)


If A then B, If Non B, then non A

We want an assumption to hold up the conclusion.

The argument depends on which one of the following assumptions? 

(A) The new medication actually is effective when taken by patients with heart disease. 
- Doesn't help. In fact refutes the premise given in the passage. A is out.

(B) No migraine sufferers with heart disease will take the new medication except under careful medical supervision. 
- Non A doesn't mean Non B. So this is out.

(C) Most migraine sufferers who have taken the new medication in trials also had heart disease. 
- This most supports the conclusion that taking the medication under supervision (trials) can avert the side effects

(D) The new medication has various other side effects, but none as serious as that of exacerbating heart disease. 
- Doesn't help

(E) The new medication will displace all migraine medications currently being used.
- Still doesn't tell us how medical supervision can avert side effects

C it is

HongHu · Answer

The link is from the fact that side effect can be eliminated if under close supervision to the conclusion that all side effects do not need to be worried.

The assumption that is needed to arrive that conclusion is that everybody that might suffer from the side effect would be under close supervision.

christoph · Answer

B) negate it and the conclusion cannot be properly drawn

ywilfred · Answer

B should be the answer. I did not read the choice clearly enough to see the word 'except' which holds the conclusion up very strongly. :oops:

In (B), No migraine sufferers with heart disease will take the new medication except under careful medical supervision.

siddharthmuzumdar · Answer

Clear B. It fills up the logic gap between the premise and the conclusion.

tanishajain800 · Answer

ANSWER B

PREMISE 1: new medication for migraine effective but might exacerbate or worsen  heart disease  
PREMISE 2 : medication taken by heart patient under  medical supervision  can avert harmful side effect.

CONCLUSION: concern about side effect is unfounded.
Assumption heart patient will take new migraine medication under medical supervision

Thus Answer: (B) No migraine sufferers with heart disease will take the new medication except under careful medical supervision.

deepthit · Answer

Conclusion: If new medication is taken under supervision, it is not a concern anymore

B) No migraine sufferers with heart disease will take the new medication except under careful medical supervision. 
This states that if every sufferer with heart disesse take under medical supervision, no concern will be there.

I go with B

sobby · Answer

why D is wrong : (perfect example of careful reading) 
The last line of the argument is important :
The concern about  those  side
effects is thus unfounded.

here we are talking explicitly about side effect with respect to heart disease ...So other side effects are out of scope.

Now B says patient will take medicine under expert supervision..This is kind assumption that defends the conclusion that the concern is unfounded ....

Madhavi1990 · Answer

My contention for B is that it is something which the argument is saying even after negation - it is not an assumption
B) No migraine sufferers with heart disease will
take the new medication except under careful
medical supervision-  Migraine sufferers WILL NOT take the medication except under supervision - well thats what the conclusion also says. 
C) Most migraine sufferers who have taken the
new medication in trials also had heart
disease  I felt this was nessecary because without it how would they arrive at the conclusion of 'careful medical supervision' -
 if they hadn't had a trial on them

Would appreciate some clarity on B is right. Thank you!

akshayk · Answer

Read B again! You will catch your oversight!

Madhavi1990 · Answer

Oh.

however, harmful side effects can definitely be averted. The concern about those side effects is thus unfounded. Its about the concern being unfounded - so we need to find the reason to that The argument depends on which one of the following assumptions? (B) No migraine sufferers with heart disease will take the new medication except under careful medical supervision Yes - assuming this would hit the concern bit Got it. Thank you!

anothermillenial · Answer

A new medication for migraine seems effective, but there is concern that the medication might exacerbate heart disease. If patients with heart disease take the medication under careful medical supervision, however, harmful side effects can definitely be averted. The concern about those side effects is thus unfounded.

Notes 
new migraine med. effective
BUT med may ^ heart dis.
meds w/ super —> avoid side effects
(C) side effect concern is false

Analysis 
Author argues against an external claim that a new medication “seems” effective but isn’t because of the harmful side effects. The author notes that while this concern may be true, if patients take the medication supervise, the harmfulness will be diminished. Because of the supervision reducing side effects, the author concludes that concerns about the medication are untrue. Thinking aloud here, a gap in the author’s thought is that all medication takers WILL be supervised.

The argument depends on which one of the following assumptions?

(A) The new medication  actually is effective  when taken by patients with heart disease. 
This answer choice discusses the effectiveness of the drug. The efficacy of the medication has no bearing on the side effects that the author is arguing against.

(B) No migraine sufferers with heart disease will take the new medication  except under careful medical supervision . 
Ah, this sounds like our pre-think. The only way for the conclusion to work is if the medication is taken under supervision. Let’s keep this.
 
(C) Most migraine sufferers who have taken the new medication in trials  also had heart disease . 
OK, this answer choice tells us that new medication takers ALSO HAD heart disease….but is not clear about whether they had the disease before the medication. Also, we’re not sure which what is causing what. Is the medication causing the heart disease? Is it some other variable? Also, the answer choice says “most”. Even if negated, “less than 50% of suffers had heart disease”….doesn’t hurt the conclusion that the concern about the side effects is “unfounded”….if anything, it strengthens it.

(D) The new medication  has various other side effects , but none as serious as that of exacerbating heart disease. 
This choice tells us there are MORE side effects than the author knew about….but who cares? We only care about the “heart disease” side effect!

(E) The new medication  will displace all migraine medications  currently being used. 
Great to know that its effective?...But the future of the medication has no bearing on whether the claim of side effects is (or is not) unfounded.

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

A new medication for migraine seems effective, but there is concern th

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A new medication for migraine seems effective, but there is concern th

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards