It is currently 23 Feb 2018, 23:51

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 56
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Feb 2012, 04:17
bholakc 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. Data presented in premise doesn't show a proportional relationship btw intake of vit C and serious flu cases
(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease. could be kept as a contender though stimulus doesn't state tht Vit C prevents diseases. It just mentions abt correlation btw two.
(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. accd to stimulus for 500% increase, reduction is 1- (34-9/34) = 9/34 , less thn 25%
(D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu. could be true but we donot know what is the amt massive doses correspond to. Kept as contender
(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C.out of scope


thus out of B and D, D sounds more appropriate based on stimulus
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10332
Premium Member
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Jul 2015, 11:11
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.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Mar 2014
Posts: 6
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 May 2016, 19:12
(A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken. - nothing to infer from the passage.
(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease. - disease is too broad a scope.
(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.
1,500 mg of vitamin C daily for a year, fewer than 9 percent suffered serious cases of flu. fewer than 9% could be 0% or 9%.
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.

So if we were to take 34% - 9%, we will get a reduction of serious cases of flu to 25%.
However, if we were to take 34% - 0%, we will not get any reduction of serious cases of flu.
Besides, answer choice states "will reduce", which indicates a strong answer choice for inference questions.

(D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu. - correct answer choice. Choice of word "can help" is preferable to answer choice (C).

(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C. - out of scope, nothing mentioned about balanced diet.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 14 May 2017
Posts: 57
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
WE: Business Development (Education)
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jan 2018, 06:38
VeritasPrepKarishma 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.
(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.


Quite a bit of confusion on this one... let's see if we can sort it out.

Read the question stem: Which of the following hypotheses is best supported by the evidence above?

The use of the word 'Hypotheses' signifies that what we are looking for is a proposition that is highly probable in the light of the data given in stimulus.
The stimulus provides evidence (premises) for one of the answer options. So that answer option must be a hypothesis that is supported by the stimulus.

Premises:
- 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;
- 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.

Let's look at the options to see which one is supported by this data.

(A) The effectiveness of vitamin C in preventing serious cases of flu increases in direct proportion to the amount of vitamin C taken.
Not supported by the study. We do not know how much vitamin C was taken by people who took a balanced diet only. Anyway, we cannot establish the direct proportion.

(B) Vitamin C is helpful in preventing disease.
Too generic. Talks of disease in general. Not supported by the study.

(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.
The popular but incorrect option. There is a difference between 'by 25%' and 'by 25 percent points'. If incidence of serious cases of flu was 34% and it reduces to 9%, that is a reduction of (34-9)/34 = 73.5% in the incidence. Or I can say that the incidence of serious flu has reduced by 25 percent points.
Similarly from 5%, if the growth rate goes up to 6%, that is an increase of 1/5 *100 = 20% (not 1%)
But I can say that the growth rate has increased by 1 percent point.

(D) Massive doses of vitamin C can help to prevent serious case of flu.
This is the hypothesis that is best supported by the study. Please note that it is not a 'must be true' statement. The author has already mentioned that these are hypotheses. We need to pick the one that is best supported by the stimulus. It is clear what massive doses are since the premise mentions "studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C found that of a group...". The results of the study imply that massive doses of vitamin C can help prevent serious case of flu.

(E) A balanced diet contains less than 250 mg of vitamin C.
No information about this. If anything, in the group taking a balanced diet, the incidence of serious flu was slightly less than those taking 250 mg. So if we do want to infer something, we might be tempted to infer (wrongly, let me add) that a balanced diet has more than 250 mg of Vitamin C. We also don't know what kind of diet was taken by people taking 250 mg of Vitamin C.

Answer (D).


Thanks Karishma.

Good explanation
I chose C without considering the difference between percent and percent points. But after going through your explanation, it helped me understand why the choice is wrong. E was pretty tempting too.
Re: A nutritionist studying the effects of massive doses of vitamin C foun   [#permalink] 16 Jan 2018, 06:38

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   [ 64 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  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.