GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 23 Sep 2018, 01:49

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Sep 2007
Posts: 902
Schools: Kellogg '10
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2007, 13:08
Even without doing the math on C, I would choose D.

I feel it's too strong to say that it "will" reduce the incidence, whereas "can help" isn't so absolute.

It's probably a statistics/semantics argument, but I'm sticking with it!
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 02 Aug 2007
Posts: 343
Location: Greater New York City area
Schools: Tuck, Ross (R1), Duke, Tepper, ISB (R2), Kenan Flagler (R2)
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2007, 13:09
For me the answer is D.
C is incorrect because when the incidence is 34% for normal dosage, a 25% reduction will mean 34% - 25% of 34% , which is 25.5%
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Sep 2007
Posts: 902
Schools: Kellogg '10
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2007, 13:10
Edit: now that I've looked at the numbers, doesn't the increased dose lead to a 74% decrease?

It would be a ~25 percentage point decrease, but 25 percentage points is equal to 74% of the initial incidence.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 68
Schools: HBS '10
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Oct 2007, 18:48
It could either be C or D.

You're right on the "25% decrease" is only 25% of 34%, not a 25% absolute drop.

But who says that 1,500 is a 'massive' dose. Massive is far too ambiguous. Massive to me would be like 15,000 ...

Don't worry about it - move on to the next one
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2005
Posts: 567
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jan 2008, 04:31
A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that of a group of 600 people who regularly took 1,500 mg of vitamin C daily for a year, fewer than 9 percent suffered serious cases of flu; of a group of 600 people who took 250 mg of vitamin C (the standard recommended daily allowance) daily for a year, 34 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu; and of a group of 600 people who took no vitamin C for a year (other than that found in the foods in a balanced diet), 32 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu.

Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?

(A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken.
(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease.
(C) Doses of vitamin C that exceed the standard recommended daily allowance by 500 percent will reduce the incidence of serious cases of flu by 25 percent.
(D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu.
(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 20 Jun 2007
Posts: 151
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jan 2008, 04:40
(A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken.
Not shown by the text
(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease.
Not proven
(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C.
Not shown by the text

So between C and D.

I think D has a problem, because we have not defined what we can call massive dose.

So answer has to be C.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 02 Feb 2007
Posts: 113
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jan 2008, 13:39
I think it's D

C sounds beautiful, but 25% of 32 is not less than 9%, therefore is wrong.
Please correct me if i am wrong.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2005
Posts: 567
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jan 2008, 14:36
namurad wrote:
automan wrote:
A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that of a group of 600 people who regularly took 1,500 mg of vitamin C daily for a year, fewer than 9 percent suffered serious cases of flu; of a group of 600 people who took 250 mg of vitamin C (the standard recommended daily allowance) daily for a year, 34 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu; and of a group of 600 people who took no vitamin C for a year (other than that found in the foods in a balanced diet), 32 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu.

Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?

(A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken. The evidence contradicts this hypotheses
(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease. the evidence talks about specific disease and does not mention anything abt diseases in general
(C) Doses of vitamin C that exceed the standard recommended daily allowance by 500 percent will reduce the incidence of serious cases of flu by 25 percent. A hypotheses is a message based on incomplete evidence. Hence it cannot be concluded to the point from evidence.
(D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu. This seems to be the best option
(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C. contradicts the evidence


I think you are right. C can be inferred from the information stated in the argument, but this is not an hypothesis. An hyphotesis requires us to conclude something from all the facts and evidences presented in the passage. Therefore D must be the correct anwer. Do you agree with me?
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Posts: 1058
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jan 2008, 06:35
automan wrote:
A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that of a group of 600 people who regularly took 1,500 mg of vitamin C daily for a year, fewer than 9 percent suffered serious cases of flu; of a group of 600 people who took 250 mg of vitamin C (the standard recommended daily allowance) daily for a year, 34 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu; and of a group of 600 people who took no vitamin C for a year (other than that found in the foods in a balanced diet), 32 percent suffered at least one serious case of flu.

Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?

(A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken.
(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease.
(C) Doses of vitamin C that exceed the standard recommended daily allowance by 500 percent will reduce the incidence of serious cases of flu by 25 percent.
(D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu.
(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C.


the only possible answers could be b/w C and D. D says "massive"doses..we don't know what a massive dose is. moreover, we don't know if taking vit C helps prevent..we know that it reduces...anyway C is wrong in that taking vit C doesn't reduce of 25%..we would have a 75%decrease...so OA is D
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Oct 2007
Posts: 105
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Jan 2008, 11:21
michaelny2001 wrote:
I think it's D

C sounds beautiful, but 25% of 32 is not less than 9%, therefore is wrong.
Please correct me if i am wrong.


The hypotheses talks about the dosage being 500% more than normal daily dosage. Hence the decrease in no of flu cases also should be relative to the no of flu cases in population adhering to normal daily dosage (which is 34%). 25% less 34% = 9%.
I think C should be rejected on the basis of its accuracy rather than inaccuracy :)
VP
VP
User avatar
Status: mission completed!
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Posts: 1312
GPA: 3.77
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Mar 2010, 03:03
Hi,
I was lured by B that talk about preventing disease, not about case of flu, damn it.
_________________

Audaces fortuna juvat!

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 814
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Apr 2010, 07:40
In D, it says - Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu. But, there are chances of still getting the flu.

So, I marked A.
_________________

Want to improve your CR: http://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 07 Jun 2010
Posts: 9
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jun 2010, 08:48
must be true ques

The evidence presented in the argument is not complete ,so we cannot infer anything something that is definitely going to happen ,because ,in that case,author will give another evidence that disproves your answer to counter the solution, the answer has to be something that is probable
(D) says vitamin C can help ,it doesn’t say it will help to prevent => correct

if you choose answer (C) ,to counter you answer author canl provide further evidence something like

Doses of vitamin C that exceed the standard recommended daily allowance by 600 percent will not reduce the incidence of serious cases of flu by 25 percent.


correct me if my explanation is wrong :)
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2010
Posts: 20
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jul 2010, 21:13
I went for D, but I was also tempted by C.

After read the entire thread, I agree that the main problem with D would be define "massive".

Rereading the question, I think I found the answer for this:

A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that...

So, from nutritionist's point of view, I think we can consider 1,500mg a massive dosage. Hence answer D is correct.

What do you guys think?
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Apply - Last Chance
Affiliations: IIT, Purdue, PhD, TauBetaPi
Joined: 18 Jul 2010
Posts: 636
Schools: Wharton, Sloan, Chicago, Haas
WE 1: 8 years in Oil&Gas
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Sep 2010, 19:33
if all the groups were having balanced diets + vitamin C tablets when why is it wrong to assume that the balanced diet < 250mg? I assume the #s reported are the tablets+food. I dont get why E is wrong. Is it because it is not a hypothesis?
_________________

Consider kudos, they are good for health

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Oct 2009
Posts: 26
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Sep 2010, 23:50
vbarrozo wrote:
I went for D, but I was also tempted by C.

After read the entire thread, I agree that the main problem with D would be define "massive".

Rereading the question, I think I found the answer for this:

A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that...

So, from nutritionist's point of view, I think we can consider 1,500mg a massive dosage. Hence answer D is correct.

What do you guys think?


IMO D...
OA is also D. Mentioned at.... urch dot com / forums / gmat-critical-reasoning / 98722-nutritionist-studying-effects.html
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Posts: 203
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Nov 2010, 16:54
I don't get how D can be the oa.
Massive doses of vit c is based on the 1500 case - fewer than 9 pc- but the premise does not specify how many serious cases were accounted for by these 9 pc. The 250 case and the no vit c other than balanced diet case mention atleast x serious cases. So let's say if these 2 cases only accounted for one serious case per ill person and the 9 pc case each ill person reports 2 mn serious cases where they fall I'll repeatedly - then though the number of 9 pc is less - the number of serious cases can be more and it could be that vit c massive dose has no effect. How does d satisfy the "must be true" test?

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Posts: 28
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Nov 2010, 19:39
I'm also confused between C and D. Please help by providing and explaining the OA. Thanks
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Status: I rest, I rust.
Joined: 04 Oct 2010
Posts: 103
Schools: ISB - Co 2013
WE 1: IT Professional since 2006
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Nov 2010, 20:42
IMO D..

"...by 500 percent will reduce the incidence of serious..."

I rejected C because "will" made it too strong to be a hypothesis...
_________________

Respect,
Vaibhav

PS: Correct me if I am wrong.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Posts: 203
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Nov 2010, 22:53
According to the websters dictionary "hypothesis" can mean one of 3 things. One of the listed meanings is: an assumption

When the GMAT uses the word "hypothesis" does it require the use of the "must be true" test associated with an assumption or even a conclusion or a simple can be true/likely standard used for strengthen/weaken questions?

Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Bot
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun &nbs [#permalink] 29 Nov 2010, 22:53

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 52 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


Copyright

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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.