|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 07 Dec 2009
Posts: 97
GMAT Date: 12-03-2014
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
 31 Dec 2014, 05:51
I was stuck between D and E.
Didn't go for E as the option was bringing in new Information ie 3 new plants
I thought we could bring in new info only for weaken/strengthen questions. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Many thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 795
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
31 Dec 2014, 15:51
This question is essentially acting as a weaken question because it asks you to complete the part that describes why the result is "unlikely". We need to introduce new information to show why it is unlikely. KW Posted from my mobile device
_________________
Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah
Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Posts: 23
Location: United States
GPA: 3.3
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Mar 2017, 14:26
KyleWiddison wrote: lfcfan wrote: Kyle, thank you very much for your answers.
Just for me to understand, on the latter,
Answer E makes clearly the assumption that the drop of coffee consumption is caused by the increase of coffee price. In answer D, why is the assumption that the coffee consumption drop is caused by people switching to herbal tea and juice wrong ?
You say that "there isn't a direct connection to say that coffee drinkers have switched to juices and teas" and I agree. But there is none either that says that people are not paying for the price difference coming from the steady increase of coffee price. There issue isn't with the assumption, it's with the answer choice. The answer choice says that there has been an increase in consumption of juice and caffeine-free herbal teas. If we are trying to attack the conclusion (the decrease in coffee usage stems from the anti-caffeine publicity) we need information to explain a decrease in coffee that is not related to caffeine. This answer choice actually supports instead of attacks the conclusion - they stopped drinking coffee and started drinking non-caffeine drinks to get away from unhealthy caffeine. If the answer choice said that people preferred the taste of juices and non-caffeine teas (unrelated to the health benefits) and switched from drinking coffee, then we would have an answer choice that would attack the conclusion. KW Hi Kyle, Thanks for your clarification. Originally, I was confused between Choice D and E. I thought this was a paradox question. Hence, I focused to the "paradox" that the emission from Woodco links to the high rate of respiratory ailment (RA), yet the reduction of the emission from Woodco is unlikely to decline the rate of RA before the regulations go into effect? After you pointed out this is a weaken the argument question. I focused more on the assumptions this passage made. Assumption A: RA is mainly caused by emission from Woodco. This passage is talking about the RA caused by air pollution caused by Woodco. Therefore, RAs are not caused by airborne pollutants is out of scope. (Choice D ) Assumption B: Before the regulations go into effect, the reduction of air pollution causing RAs is all contributed to Woodco. And the amount of air pollution from other company or source remain the same. Therefore, choice E attacks to this assumption that connects the premises. But I am still confused why this question is a weaken the argument rather than a paradox question. I still feel that this question is eligible to be a paradox question. Is it because this passage contains conclusion? Is it the way that this statement "it is unlikely that the rate of respiratory ailment will decline before the regulations go into effect" presented is a prediction rather than a fact. Do I need to focus on assumptions as well for paradox questions? Does paradox passage contain assumptions at all? Thx for your time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 10 Apr 2015
Posts: 195
GPA: 3.31
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
24 Mar 2017, 08:09
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 _____________ . Ask is - Woodco plans to cut its emissions in half two years ahead of schedule, but STILL, rate of respiratory ailments won't decline. why? (A) the number of facilities capable of treating respiratory ailments is not likely to increase - No mention.(B) reducing emissions even further than planned would necessitate decreasing production at Woodco even further than planned ? No mention. (C) it is difficult to make accurate, long-term predictions about emissions No mention. May/ may not be.(D) not all respiratory ailments are caused by airborne pollutants. There might be other source. but it does not support the argument that -
links the high rates of respiratory ailments in Groverston to airborne pollutants released by the Woodco plywood (E) three new plywood manufacturing plants are about to go into production in Groverston. This is most obvious. Certainly it will increase pollutants.
Correct.E is better than D- E addresses that the type of pollutants is same (airborne pollutants- Woodco emissions), whereas D introduces new assumption which is NOT related to the premise- Woodco emissions causes respiratory problems.
Hence E.
Assumption based on the argument wins the race.
_________________
In case you find my posts helpful, give me Kudos. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2016
Posts: 51
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
24 Sep 2017, 02:12
soodia wrote: KyleWiddison wrote: This question is essentially acting as a weaken question because it asks you to complete the part that describes why the result is "unlikely". We need to introduce new information to show why it is unlikely.
KW
Posted from my mobile device If we focus on the question stem a bit carefully, we can remove option D. Let me try to explain.  Which 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 _____________ . Focus on the underlined part and now let us read Option D.
(D) not all respiratory ailments are caused by airborne pollutantsNow assume that there is another reason X that cause respiratory ailments. And this exists before and after the regulation. So some ailments are caused by airbourne disease and some are caused by reason X. Now the author assumes that before the regulation comes into the picture there would not a decline, let us understand, why? Say airborne disease causes 100 ailments and after two years it causes 50 ailments. And reason X also causes 100 ailments. Initially, there are total 200 ailments Woodco reduces to 50 after two years, but there is no change in the number of ailments from X, so the total ailments ideally should be 150. But as per the author, there should not be any decrease in the ailments...so what really happened here??
This means that something else must have happened to increase the ailments. Option E, gives me that reason, if new companies open, then the ailments would increase instead of decreasing and total ailments would be 150 + (the ailments caused by the other companies) > = 200 The point that I am trying to make is, even if there are other causes, they would remain the same even before and after the regulation, so if Woodco reduces the emission, then there should definitely be a reduction even before the regulation comes into the picture. The only reason there won't be a reduction if something additional comes up and causes more ailments. Hope this helps.
_________________
Work Hard! Have Fun! Create History!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 30 Jan 2018
Posts: 17
Location: India
GMAT 1: 660 Q50 V29 GMAT 2: 740 Q49 V41
GPA: 3.17
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 Feb 2018, 23:21
betterscore wrote: Which 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 I have a question regarding the wording used in the questions above. For option E to be the valid answer, shouldn't the phase "before the regulations go into effect" not be included in the question as if E is the OA then even after the regulations are put into effect there will not be a decrease in the rates of respiratory ailments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2033
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
01 Mar 2018, 16:28
abhigulia3006 wrote: betterscore wrote: Which 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 I have a question regarding the wording used in the questions above. For option E to be the valid answer, shouldn't the phase "before the regulations go into effect" not be included in the question as if E is the OA then even after the regulations are put into effect there will not be a decrease in the rates of respiratory ailments. Why can't the rates of respiratory ailments go down after the regulations are put into effect? Sure, there will be more plants, but if they are all subject to "strict regulations on emissions", then the combined emissions of the three plants could be less than current emissions of Woodco. Regardless, we need to explain why "it is unlikely that the rate of respiratory ailments will decline before the regulations go into effect." We don't care about what happens after the regulations are put into effect. Woodco is cutting its emissions in half, but there will soon be three new plants. BEFORE the regulations go into effect, those new plants can emit as much pollution as they want. So, even though Woodco is going to reduce its emissions, it is unlikely that the total amount of airborne pollution will decrease until the regulations go into effect. I hope that helps!
_________________
GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs
Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction
YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset
SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS
Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?
Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Dec 2016
Posts: 90
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Mar 2018, 20:31
egmat wrote: 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 ? Are we not assuming, E will produce certain amount of smoke * 3 plants How can you be sure these new plants are not perhaps smoke free ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 24 Mar 2018
Posts: 90
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
21 Jul 2018, 22:24
KyleWiddison wrote: To answer this question, you need to find an answer choice that correctly describes why ailments will not decrease in spite of emmission reductions. It's okay to bring in new information, but that information needs to stay true to the stated premises in the argument.
A-We're concerned about the number of ailments, not the treatment "post-ailment".
B-How Woodco acheives its reduction in emmissions is irrelevant because that reduction is already a given premise.
C-Irrelevant information. This does not explain why ailments would increase despite decreased emmissions.
D-Interesting point, but irrelevant because the first premise states that the ailments are connected to airborne emmissions. Granted there could be other ailments, but the ones we care about result from airborne pollutants.
E-This is right on! If new plants go into production in Groverston, the emmissions from the 3 new plants will overwhelm the emmissions acheived in the Woodco plant.
KW As per my understanding new info is not allowed in such question. Can you please clearify ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2033
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments
[#permalink]
Show Tags
26 Jul 2018, 15:02
teaserbae wrote: KyleWiddison wrote: To answer this question, you need to find an answer choice that correctly describes why ailments will not decrease in spite of emmission reductions. It's okay to bring in new information, but that information needs to stay true to the stated premises in the argument.
A-We're concerned about the number of ailments, not the treatment "post-ailment".
B-How Woodco acheives its reduction in emmissions is irrelevant because that reduction is already a given premise.
C-Irrelevant information. This does not explain why ailments would increase despite decreased emmissions.
D-Interesting point, but irrelevant because the first premise states that the ailments are connected to airborne emmissions. Granted there could be other ailments, but the ones we care about result from airborne pollutants.
E-This is right on! If new plants go into production in Groverston, the emmissions from the 3 new plants will overwhelm the emmissions acheived in the Woodco plant.
KW As per my understanding new info is not allowed in such question. Can you please clearify ? As a test-taker, it's generally a terrible idea for you to bring in your own outside knowledge when you're answering GMAT CR questions. But depending on how the question is constructed, the correct answer might be something that did not actually appear in the passage. For example, think about an assumption question. The correct answer will always be an assumption that the author made in the passage -- so by definition, the correct answer is NOT something that was stated in the passage. The same is true of this passage, and I think that's what Kyle was saying in his explanation. Check out that last line of the passage again: "..it is unlikely that the rate of respiratory ailments will decline before the regulations go into effect, since _____________ ." The correct answer will strengthen the idea that "it is unlikely that respiratory ailments will decline before regulations go into effect." And of course, that "strengthener" will be an additional piece of information that was not already mentioned in the passage. I hope that helps!
_________________
GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs
Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction
YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset
SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS
Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?
Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: A recent government study links the high rates of respiratory ailments &nbs
[#permalink]
26 Jul 2018, 15:02
|
|
|
|
|
Go to page
Previous
1 2
[ 30 posts ]
|
|
|
|
|
|
close
