12bhang wrote:
A study of high blood pressure treatments found that certain meditation techniques and the most commonly prescribed drugs are equally effective if the selected treatment is followed as directed over the long term. Half the patients given drugs soon stop taking them regularly, whereas eighty percent of the study's participants who were taught meditation techniques were still regularly using them five years later. Therefore, the meditation treatment is the one likely to produce the best results.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. People who have high blood pressure are usually advised by their physicians to make changes in diet that have been found in many cases to reduce the severity of the condition.
B. The participants in the study were selected in part on the basis of their willingness to use meditation techniques.
C. Meditation techniques can reduce the blood pressure of people who do not suffer from high blood pressure.
D. Some of the participants in the study whose high blood pressure was controlled through meditation techniques were physicians.
E. Many people with dangerously high blood pressure are unaware of their condition.
The conclusion states that since people who choose meditation are less likely to abandon it, meditation is the one likely to produce better results.
I wanted to ask you about other potential weakeners:
1) Meditation takes more than 10 years to show results , but most people who practice meditation are unlikely to continue for so long.
2)The people who discontinued their medication treatment did so because they were relieved of their symptoms.
3) The recommended duration for meditation is 10 years,almost twice as long as that of medications.
Hi 12bhang
Thanks for raising good questions!
In order to "evaluate" your potential options, let analyze the original stimulus first:
ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:Fact: meditation techniques and the most commonly prescribed drugs are equally effective to treat high blood pressure if the selected treatment is followed as directed over the long term.
Fact: Half the patients given drugs soon stop taking them regularly, whereas eighty percent of the study's participants who were taught meditation techniques were still regularly using them five years later.
Conclusion: The meditation treatment is the one likely to produce the best results.
Assumption: The more people use the selected treatment for long term, the better results the selected treatment produces.To weaken the conclusion, you need to show that more people use meditation for long time is not because the treatment produces better results. (probably, because people like using it, or are willing to follow....)
YOUR POTENTIAL OPTIONS:1) Meditation takes more than 10 years to show results , but most people who practice meditation are unlikely to continue for so long.This options wants to say almost people cannot follow the meditation techniques until it shows results. Does it weaken the conclusion?
- In order to weaken the conclusion, you should demonstrate "more people following the treatment
does not mean the treatment is the best". However, this option just shows that almost people cannot follow the treatment. The "good" weakener is the one which still sticks to the stimulus (people are able to follow the treatment for long term - the first sentence clearly says "a study found that....") and show the weakness of the conclusion. This option, however, says "people
cannot follow.." ==> It violates the stimulus. So I would say this option is not a weakener per GMAT standards.
- In addition, GMAT hardly considers an extreme option (option with most, almost, all, every...) a correct answer.
2)The people who discontinued their medication treatment did so because they were relieved of their symptoms.Does not help to weaken the conclusion, because it's out scope. The fact that "people discontinued their meditation
because they were relieved.." does not attack the conclusion at all.
3) The recommended duration for meditation is 10 years, almost twice as long as that of medications.This option is also not a weakener. This option does not attack the point "The more people use the selected treatment for long term, the selected treatment is the best". It just says how long each treatment will take. what if meditation is "really" good, so a lot of people will follow it for 10 years. Otherwise, drugs even take half time, but produce worst result, so a lot of people discontinue using them. ==> If that's the case (meditation
is actually better than drugs), (3) cannot be a weakener.
Hope it helps.
close
Updated on: 08 Jul 2017, 06:44
25%
(medium)
24%
(02:14)
wrong 
