It is currently 21 Oct 2017, 03:46

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 proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet

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

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
G
Status: It always seems impossible until it's done!!
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Posts: 984

Kudos [?]: 1458 [1], given: 270

Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V34
WE: General Management (Aerospace and Defense)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jun 2014, 22:11
1
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  15% (low)

Question Stats:

81% (01:10) correct 19% (01:40) wrong based on 129 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A proposed ordinance requires that all cyclists wear a helmet when riding a bike. However, one cycling enthusiast argued that since more than ninety percent of bike-related accidents do not cause more than a scrape, mandatory helmet use would only marginally decrease the number of serious injuries caused by cycling.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the cycling enthusiast's argument?

A. Most cyclists do not currently own bike helmets.

B. The cost of buying a proper bike helmet is significantly less than possible medical costs due to injury.

C. Helmets have not proven useful in preventing head trauma in biking accidents since the force of the accident often causes the helmet to fall off.

D. In the city where the ordinance was proposed, the number of injuries due to bike accidents was less than the national average.

E. Most of the serious injuries resulting from bike accidents occur due to head trauma.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Become a GMAT Club Premium member to avail lot of discounts

Kudos [?]: 1458 [1], given: 270

2 KUDOS received
Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
G
Status: It always seems impossible until it's done!!
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Posts: 984

Kudos [?]: 1458 [2], given: 270

Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V34
WE: General Management (Aerospace and Defense)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jun 2014, 22:11
2
This post received
KUDOS
A proposed ordinance requires that all cyclists wear a helmet when riding a bike. However, one cycling enthusiast argued that since more than ninety percent of bike-related accidents do not cause more than a scrape, mandatory helmet use would only marginally decrease the number of serious injuries caused by cycling.

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the cycling enthusiast's argument?

A. Most cyclists do not currently own bike helmets.

B. The cost of buying a proper bike helmet is significantly less than possible medical costs due to injury.

C. Helmets have not proven useful in preventing head trauma in biking accidents since the force of the accident often causes the helmet to fall off.

D. In the city where the ordinance was proposed, the number of injuries due to bike accidents was less than the national average.

E. Most of the serious injuries resulting from bike accidents occur due to head trauma.
_________________

Become a GMAT Club Premium member to avail lot of discounts

Kudos [?]: 1458 [2], given: 270

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Posts: 831

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 61

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jun 2014, 22:36
E seems best : Most of the serious injuries resulting from bike accidents occur due to head trauma.

Kudos [?]: 283 [0], given: 61

Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 23 Oct 2013
Posts: 144

Kudos [?]: 265 [2], given: 9

Re: A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jun 2014, 22:03
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
This question is a good example of a trick that is very common within GMAT critical reasoning questions. The question includes a subtle but very important scope shift. The cycling enthusiast argues that most bicycle accidents are minor (do not cause more than a scrape), and therefore mandatory helmet use would only marginally decrease the number of serious injuries caused by cycling. The scope shift is between accidents in general and serious accidents. If over 90% of accidents do not cause more than a scrape, then obviously these accidents are not causing serious injuries. In order to weaken this argument, we need to demonstrate that helmets would help reduce serious injuries in the other sub-10% of more serious accidents.

A - Out of scope. Whether bicyclists currently own a helmet is completely irrelevant to whether helmet use would decrease the number of serious injuries.

B - Out of scope. Costs of helmets vs. medical care has nothing to do with this argument.

C - OPPOSITE. This Strengthens the argument. It does not weaken it. Be on the lookout for traps like these.

D - Out of scope. Number of injuries there vs. other areas is irrelevant. We simply care about whether the new ordinance would reduce injuries.

E - Nails it. If most serious injuries are due to head trauma, then it would make sense that mandatory helmet usage would reduce serious injuries. This weakens the argument effectively, and is the correct answer.
_________________

Brandon
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor

If you found this post helpful, please give me kudos!!! :)

Save $100 on Veritas Prep GMAT Courses And Admissions Consulting
Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 265 [2], given: 9

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 18 Mar 2014
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 71

A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jul 2014, 07:43
Can you please explain why E seems to be the best choice here?

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 71

Moderator
Moderator
User avatar
G
Status: It always seems impossible until it's done!!
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
Posts: 984

Kudos [?]: 1458 [0], given: 270

Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V34
WE: General Management (Aerospace and Defense)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Jul 2014, 08:00
shanaya wrote:
Can you please explain why E seems to be the best choice here?


A. Most cyclists do not currently own bike helmets- If this is the case, then the cyclist point will be supported- Actually strengthens the argument- So eliminate.

B. The cost of buying a proper bike helmet is significantly less than possible medical costs due to injury- This is irrelevant, since we don't need this information about of the cost of buying the helmet- out of scope.

C. Helmets have not proven useful in preventing head trauma in biking accidents since the force of the accident often causes the helmet to fall off- Same as A. If helmets are not proven useful, then the cyclist point is supported- Strengthens- So eliminate.

D. In the city where the ordinance was proposed, the number of injuries due to bike accidents was less than the national average- Same as B. Out of scope- We don't need statistics about the number of injuries in the city and in the country.

E. Most of the serious injuries resulting from bike accidents occur due to head trauma- If head trauma causes more injuries to the cyclists. Then the most of cyclist are not wearing the helmet. In this case, proposing an ordinance to mandate wearing the helmet will considerably reduce the injuries and this WEAKEN'S the one cycling enthusiast argument of marginally decrease the number of serious injuries- Correct
_________________

Become a GMAT Club Premium member to avail lot of discounts

Kudos [?]: 1458 [0], given: 270

GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10121

Kudos [?]: 262 [0], given: 0

Premium Member
Re: A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 May 2016, 18:34
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.

Kudos [?]: 262 [0], given: 0

Re: A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet   [#permalink] 06 May 2016, 18:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A proposed ordinance requires all cyclists wear a helmet

  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®.