A society’s infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that

Question

A society’s infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that society’s general health status. Even though in some localities in the United States the rate is higher than in many developing countries, in the United States overall the rate has been steadily declining. This decline does not necessarily indicate, however, that babies in the United States are now, on the average, healthier at birth than they were in the past.

Which one of the following reasons, if true, most strongly supports the claim made above about the implications of the decline?

(A) The figure for infant mortality is compiled as an overall rate and thus masks deficiencies in particular localities.

(B) Low birth weight is a contributing factor in more than half of the infant deaths in the United States.

(C) The United States has been developing and has achieved extremely sophisticated technology for saving premature and low-birth-weight babies, most of whom require extended hospital stays.

(D) In eleven states of the United States, the infant mortality rate declined last year.

(E) Babies who do not receive adequate attention from a caregiver fail to thrive and so they gain weight slowly.

Source: LSAT

shashankism · Accepted Answer

Short Story : 1. S infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that S’s general health status
2. In some localities in the United States the rate is higher than in many developing countries
3. Overall the rate has been steadily declining in US.
4. Decline does not necessarily indicate, however, that babies in the United States are now, on the average, healthier at birth than they were in the past.

So, the conclusion is that the decline in infant mortality rate  may or may not  indicate that the child at birth is healthier than they were in the past.

Now we have to find the argument which strengthens the conclusion.

(A) The figure for infant mortality is compiled as an overall rate and thus masks deficiencies in particular localities. 
The figure may be higher for certain region and lower for other regions, and hence overall rate masking deficiencies in particular localities weakens the conclusion.

(B) Low birth weight is a contributing factor in more than half of the infant deaths in the United States. 
Though this may be right but it doesn't strengthen or weaken the conclusion.

(C) The United States has been developing and has achieved extremely sophisticated technology for saving premature and low-birth-weight babies, most of whom require extended hospital stays. 
Now this one is the right answer which says that US has developed extremely sophisticated technology for saving premature and low birth weight babies. So, even though the babies might now be born healthier, the technology is able to save the life, hence reducing the infant mortality rate.

(D) In eleven states of the United States, the infant mortality rate declined last year. 
No idea about other states. Also this doesn't relate to the conclusion.

(E) Babies who do not receive adequate attention from a caregiver fail to thrive and so they gain weight slowly. 
No relation with the conclusion.

So, according to me C is correct. Waiting for official answer.

krish182 · Answer

IMO Option C which tells that babies may still be born unhealthy and its actually the advances in technology that have brought down the infant mortality rate.

sony1000 · Answer

C claims that technology has been developed but it is not clear werher this technology has been applied in many hospitals...it could be a clinical esssay not readily available....

Prashant10692 · Answer

+C. 
Alternate Reasoning.

If is because of the the technology that the doctors are able to save the babies and this does not mean that the babies are safer from past.
If technology would not have been a factor, the health of kids might be same as in the past.

rever08 · Answer

1) infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that society’s general health status.

2) United States overall the rate has been steadily declining.

3)decline does not necessarily indicate, however, that babies in the United States are now, on the average, healthier at birth than they were in the past.

babies in US are not healthier than babies born elsewhere.Yet mortality rate is declining.

Only C correctly explains why mortality rate is declining.
Since US has sophisticated technology for saving premature and low-birth-weight babies,it is able to save many babies and thus reduce mortality rate.

chesstitans · Answer

A,D and E are out of scope.
B does not correlate strongly with the argument.
C offers an alternative cause.

Skywalker18 · Answer

Premise:
US infant mortality rate has been steadily declining.

Conclusion:
The decline does not necessarily mean that US babies are healthier at birth

(C) says "babies that are unhealthy at birth are being saved by technology." This strengthens the conclusion above by suggesting that many babies are still unhealthy at birth; they are avoiding death not because of healthy births, but because of technology.

nikitathegreat · Answer

Can someone explain why option A is wrong? It can happen that more babies are born in good locality and as a result the infant mortality in US is steadily declining.

GMATNinja   karishma

GMATNinja · Answer

The passage points out that the "overall" rate of infant mortality has been declining in the United States. But then, it tells us this doesn't necessarily mean that babies are now, " on average ," healthier at birth. The right answer should support this statement.

Let's now consider (A):

How does (A) impact the statement in the passage? Well, the passage already tells us that the infant mortality rate in the U.S. is an "overall" rate, and that certain areas have high infant mortality (i.e. higher than many developing countries). So (A) doesn't really add anything new.

From another angle -- it's true, as the passage says, that some localities in the U.S. have higher rates of infant mortality than many developing countries. So it's possible that babies in  those specific localities  are not healthier than babies were in the past. But we also know that despite that, the "overall" rate of infant mortality is declining. So the fact that  some localities  have deficiencies still wouldn't explain why babies " on average " in the U.S. are no more healthy, despite the "overall" declining infant mortality rate.

For both those reason, (A) is incorrect.

I hope that helps!

Dooperman · Answer

The passage conclusion compares  the average health status of babies at PRESENT  with  the average health status of babies in PAST. 
Although the overall infant mortality rate has declined. But the average health status of babies at PRESENT may not be any better than the average health status of babies in PAST.

MEANING: More babies are surviving now. But these babies may not be necessarily healthier than the babies born in past .

The correct option should support this conclusion.

C does this. More babies are surviving now. Not because they are healthy but mostly because of the  extremely sophisticated technology . More unhealthy babies are surviving now, contributing to the decline in infant mortality rate.

unraveled · Answer

A society’s infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that society’s general health status. Even though in some localities in the United States the rate is higher than in many developing countries, in the United States overall the rate has been steadily declining. This decline does not necessarily indicate, however, that babies in the United States are now, on the average, healthier at birth than they were in the past.

Which one of the following reasons, if true, most strongly supports the claim made above about the implications of the decline?

(A) The figure for infant mortality is compiled as an overall rate and thus  masks deficiencies in particular localities . - WRONG. Not really a strengthener but at best a weakener, though needs an assumption for that too.
 
(B)  Low birth weight is a contributing factor  in more than half of the infant deaths in the United States. - WRONG. A good candidate actually. Basically it gives another reason but again how. We are not sure how low the weight has been, whether it has gone up(strengthens) or down(weakens). This goes in either way which makes is weaker choice relatively.

(C) The United States has been developing and has  achieved extremely sophisticated technology for saving premature and low-birth-weight babies , most of whom require extended hospital stays. - CORRECT. Alternative reasoning for depreciating decline.

(D) In  eleven states  of the United States, the infant mortality rate declined last year. - WRONG. So what.!!! Nothing can be ascertained. Strengthens at first look but its conditional.

(E) Babies  who do not receive adequate attention  from a caregiver fail to thrive and so they gain weight slowly. - WRONG. Out of context/scope timeline-wise.

Answer C.

HRX273 · Answer

so basically this trying to say that when all developing countries where extending the stay they were working on the tech too improve child health and that is why imo---c

I choose b then, I re--read the stem and I got it.

A society’s infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A society’s infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards