rockybalboa123 wrote:
OG – 13. Q # 59Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments in Groverston to airborne pollutants released by the Woodco plywood manufacturing plant there. To address the problem the government imposed strict regulations on emissions which will go into effect in four years. Although Woodco plans to cut its emissions in half two years ahead of schedule, it is unlikely that the rate of respiratory ailments will decline before the regulations go into effect, since _______.
A.the number of facilities capable of treating respiratory ailments is not likely to increase
B.reducing emissions even further than planned would necessitate decreasing production at Woodco
C. it is difficult to make accurate, long-term predictions about emissions
D.not all respiratory ailments are caused by airborne pollutants
E.three new plywood manufacturing plants are about to go into production in Groverston
OA:
EWhy is D not the valid answer? There can be other factors as well which leads to respiratory ailments and these factors will only decline after the government regulations go into effect.
Pls help clarify this doubt. I was very confident of Option ‘D’. Was actually surprised to see that this is not the OA
Hi,
Quite interesting doubts!

I'll be posting my replies separately for each of the questions to limit the length of my posts.
Let's come back to this question:
Consider this:
Disease X is caused by 3 things: A, B and C.
Cause A leads to 10 incidences of disease X per year
Cause B leads to 20 incidences of disease X per year
Cause C leads to 30 incidences of disease X per year
Now, I tell you that measures have been taken to reduce cause A and therefore, the number of incidences of disease X should decline (since the number of incidences due to cause A should decline).
Can you now say that "No, you can't say that. There are other ways to acquire disease X."
No. You can't say that. I never said that we are going to eliminate disease X. I just said disease X should decline. This is going to be true, no matter how many other ways are there to cause Disease X. (unless of course other causes are increasing, which is not given in the passage). If now, cause A is going to cause only 5 incidences, there'll be only 55 incidences of Disease X as compared to 60 incidences previously.
I have addressed a similar doubt in the below question:
http://gmatclub.com/forum/lyme-disease- ... l#p1187429rockybalboa123 wrote:
There can be other factors as well which leads to respiratory ailments and these factors will only decline after the government regulations go into effect.
What other factors do you think will decline only after government regulation go into effect?
The government regulation is only about cutting emissions. Nothing else. These emissions will be cut in half in the next two years by Woodco. Option E says that even if Woodco cuts its emission to half, there are other plants waiting to start which will negate all the decrease in pollution by Woodco.
Did I make sense? Let me know if you understand this.
Thanks

Chiranjeev
Hi - I see A/B/C and D are wrong and E is the right answer ...Not questioning that ...but how can you be sure the three new playwood manufacturing plants to be built will have air pollutants at all ?
How can you be sure these new plants are not perhaps smoke free ?