GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 20 Oct 2019, 07:26

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

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Retired Moderator
User avatar
G
Joined: 11 Aug 2016
Posts: 370
Reviews Badge
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2018, 11:14
1
According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is good for cardiac health.


(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is
No referent for 'they'. Drop it.

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be
seems to be fine. Keep it.

(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be
that: makes comparison incompatible. Drop it.

(D) total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be
Comparison: fat with livestock; incompatible. Drop it.

(E) total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is
wordy comparison. also, no referent for 'they'. Drop it.

Answer: B
_________________
~R.
If my post was of any help to you, You can thank me in the form of Kudos!!
Applying to ISB ? Check out the ISB Application Kit.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 09 Jun 2014
Posts: 352
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Oct 2018, 07:19
1
Quote:
D. total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be

This comparison is very clearly wrong: “total fat… is less than livestock.” You could, I suppose, also argue that the “they” isn’t 100% clear – but the illogical comparison is the most straightforward issue. (D) is out, too.

Quote:
E. total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is

There’s a lot of clunkiness here, but the biggest issue is the word “they”: the only possible referents are “wild animals”, “livestock”, or “studies.” And none of those are likely to “think [that fat] is good for cardiac health.” (E) is gone, and (B) is the best answer.[/quote]



Hello GMATNinja.

I am clear with the POE as explained but I am skeptical about the usage of with here.To me it seemed liked an adverbial modifer in option D and E.

Can you please help me understand the same.
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Posts: 634
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.95
WE: Operations (Real Estate)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Oct 2018, 19:50
1
mikemcgarry GMATNinja daagh

This is a sentence I found in an article in nytimes . I have few doubts please help me out

"The banks also suggested that Uber could list its shares for trading on the stock market earlier than its original plans for late 2019 "

In this sentence, I understand that comparison is between times "earlier and late 2019" .but what I don't understand is the comparison structure and the respective elements. I mean in the above example here we are comparing action " could list its shares" to " original plans for late 2019".
Now as per my ubder

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Oct 2018
Posts: 63
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
Reviews Badge
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Mar 2019, 05:51
A is out. ‘they’ has to refer to a plural noun and the only ones here are ‘studies’ and ‘wild animals’, neither of which make sense in context.

B seems to be clear.

C is badly constructed. ‘that’ can only really refer to ‘total fat’ but then the sentence becomes odd and repetitive.

D clearly has a comparison issue, ‘total fat’ is compared to ‘livestock’

E has the same problem as A, except for the pronoun ‘their.

So B is far and away the most suitable option.
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 569
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Mar 2019, 13:32
2
Hello Everyone!

This is a great example of a GMAT question that includes a comparison! Let's start off by looking at the original question and highlighting any major differences between the options in orange:

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is good for cardiac health.

(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is
(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be
(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be
(D) total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be
(E) total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is

After looking over the options quickly, a few key differences pop out:

1. starting off the comparison with "wild animals" vs. "total fat" (meaning/clarity)
2. than do livestock / than livestock / than that of livestock (parallelism)
3. more of a kind of fat / more fat of a kind (meaning/clarity)
4. pronouns toward the end = make sure they're clear

Since we know we're dealing with a comparison question, let's start by checking that the comparisons are parallel. This is the basic format they should follow:

X less than Y

Let's save the ones that are parallel for later, and rule out the ones that aren't:

(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is --> PARALLEL

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be --> PARALLEL

(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be --> NOT PARALLEL (Comparing wild animals to "that of" livestock; what is "that of" referring to? We don't know, but we do know it's not parallel.)

(D) total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be --> NOT PARALLEL (Compares "total fat" to "livestock," which are not parallel things.)

(E) total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is --> NOT PARALLEL (Compares wild animals to "that of" livestock, which isn't parallel.)

We can eliminate options C, D, & E because the comparisons made were not parallel.

Now that we have this narrowed down to 2 options, let's take a closer look at each to find any potential problems:

(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is

This is INCORRECT because it has a vague pronoun! Who/what is "they" referring to? It's not clear at all! This is a great example of the "Mysterious they." The sentence never refers to WHO conducted the studies mentioned in the beginning - in fact, there are no people in this sentence at all! So let's toss this option out.

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

This is CORRECT! The comparison is parallel, and there are no problems with vague or misleading pronouns!


There you have it - option B is the correct choice!


Don't study for the GMAT. Train for it.
_________________
"Students study. GMAT assassins train."
Image


The Course Used By GMAT Club Moderators To Earn 750+

souvik101990 Score: 760 Q50 V42 ★★★★★
ENGRTOMBA2018 Score: 750 Q49 V44 ★★★★★
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 23 Jul 2014
Posts: 81
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2019, 12:40
Raihanuddin wrote:
Pags wrote:
Isn't B ambiguous?
I mean, it could both mean:
wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain have
or
wild animals have less total fat than wild animals livestock fed on grain

Logically, we know that the first one is correct, but it is still ambiguous.




wild animals have less total fat than wild animals livestock fed on grain

In the above sentence, do you get any logical meaning? What are you comparing with?

A comparison becomes ambiguous only if it gives two logical meaning.

Example- Farhan has more fascination to money than his wife

Two meaning-- 1. Farhan has more fascination to money than his wife has fascination to money
2. Farhan has more fascination to money than he has fascination to his wife
In the example both the sentences give logical meaning. So, the main sentence is ambiguous.

But--- If we say -- Farhan eats more fruits than his wife
1. Farhan eats more fruits than his wife eats fruits
2. Farhan eats more fruits than he eats his wife---- Illogical.
So this sentence is not ambiguous.

For the same reason B is not incorrect.


So, do you basically mean to say that if something is ambiguous, it is wrong but if it so ambiguous that it is absurd, it is not wrong? :P
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 18 Nov 2018
Posts: 27
GMAT 1: 650 Q46 V34
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 May 2019, 05:54
A. wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is

what i want to know is "wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain" - is this part correct grammatically ?

What is the rule for "do" ? where should it be used ?
VP
VP
User avatar
P
Joined: 27 Mar 2010
Posts: 1479
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GPA: 3.31
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 May 2019, 07:21
nlx23 wrote:
A. wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is

what i want to know is "wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain" - is this part correct grammatically ?

What is the rule for "do" ? where should it be used ?

Hi nlx23, do in option A correctly substitutes for have.

Note that do, does and did are all forms of the verb to do. These forms of to do verbs are very flexible; they can stand for the main verb in the sentence.

p.s. Our book EducationAisle Sentence Correction Nirvana discusses to do verbs, their application and examples in significant detail. If you or someone is interested, PM me your email-id; I can mail the corresponding section.
_________________
Thanks,
Ashish
EducationAisle, Bangalore

Sentence Correction Nirvana available on Amazon.in and Flipkart

Contact us for Classroom sessions in Bangalore and Private Tutoring worldwide
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Apr 2017
Posts: 80
GPA: 3.99
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Jun 2019, 05:17
1
can anyone explain this?

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock (have) fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be


more of a kind of fat VS more fat of a kind
Do both carry different meaning?

I read this as,
more of a kind of fat = more of a type of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.
[ more fat of a kind = more fat of a type thought to be good for cardiac health.
_________________
If you found my post useful,

KUDOS
are much appreciated. Giving Kudos is a great way to thank and motivate contributors, without costing you anything.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Feb 2018
Posts: 91
Reviews Badge
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jun 2019, 03:05
GMATNinja wrote:

Quote:
B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

There’s no pronoun here, so that’s cool. And I think the meaning works: “wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain” is fine. The second part seems fine, too: “wild animals have… more of a kind of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.”

I don’t see any huge issues, so let’s keep (B).

Quote:
C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be

As described in our rambling guide to the word “that”, “that” is a singular pronoun in this type of situation. In (C), I guess it has to refer to “total fat,” but that doesn’t really make sense: “wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock fed on grain…”
the most straightforward issue.

Please help me explain this question...
why the comparison in C is wrong? wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock. this compares the total fat of both animals. on Contrary, B compares total fat with the number of livestock.
comparison in B looks illogical whereas in C looks correct.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Posts: 51
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2019, 02:40
GMATNinja wrote:
A few of my best students have gotten their asses thoroughly kicked by this one, so please don’t feel badly if you struggled with it. (And most of the early responses look great!) Success on this question is mostly about your ability to be incredibly literal with the meaning, particularly as it relates to the pronouns in the sentence. (For more on pronouns, check out our good old YouTube webinar on the topic.)

Quote:
A. wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is

“They” has to refer back to a plural noun, but our only options are “studies” (which makes no sense, because studies can’t think) or “wild animals” (which also makes no sense, unless you think wild animals moonlight as nutritionists. (A) is out.

Quote:
B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

There’s no pronoun here, so that’s cool. And I think the meaning works: “wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain” is fine. The second part seems fine, too: “wild animals have… more of a kind of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.”

I don’t see any huge issues, so let’s keep (B).

Quote:
C. wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be

As described in our rambling guide to the word “that”, “that” is a singular pronoun in this type of situation. In (C), I guess it has to refer to “total fat,” but that doesn’t really make sense: “wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock fed on grain…”

That’s kind of a mess. Wild animals have less fat than livestock, but it wouldn’t make sense to say that “wild animals have less total fat.. than the total fat…” That comparison is thoroughly wrong. (C) is out.

Quote:
D. total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be

This comparison is very clearly wrong: “total fat… is less than livestock.” You could, I suppose, also argue that the “they” isn’t 100% clear – but the illogical comparison is the most straightforward issue. (D) is out, too.

Quote:
E. total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is

There’s a lot of clunkiness here, but the biggest issue is the word “they”: the only possible referents are “wild animals”, “livestock”, or “studies.” And none of those are likely to “think [that fat] is good for cardiac health.” (E) is gone, and (B) is the best answer.


Dear GMATNinja,

Thanks for detailed explanation.

"Dear Team,
I have a doubt in option B. Comparison is done between ""wild animals have less total fat"" and ""livestock"" which is illogical. It should be ""livestock's "". Kindly suggest

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.

Thanks in advance

bb generis
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 05 Jul 2018
Posts: 420
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V26
GRE 1: Q162 V149
GPA: 3.6
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Jun 2019, 03:39
GMATNinja VeritasKarishma
Quote:
B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

I struck off B as it had a passive voice construction. Where am i going wrong in thinking that "passive construction is almost always wrong on GMAT". I reasoned that since we do not know here who does the thinking in "kind of thought to be", hence (B) can't be the right answer choice.
_________________
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
V
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9704
Location: Pune, India
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jun 2019, 03:21
1
saukrit wrote:
GMATNinja VeritasKarishma
Quote:
B. wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

I struck off B as it had a passive voice construction. Where am i going wrong in thinking that "passive construction is almost always wrong on GMAT". I reasoned that since we do not know here who does the thinking in "kind of thought to be", hence (B) can't be the right answer choice.


Passive voice is not wrong. In writing, active voice is preferred over passive voice but passive voice has its uses (when the impact of the action is more important than the doer of the action) e.g.
"The tattoo was removed."
instead of "The doctor removed the tattoo."

You don't care who removed the tattoo. The important thing is that it was removed.

You cannot ignore an option just because it uses passive voice.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 05 Jul 2018
Posts: 420
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V26
GRE 1: Q162 V149
GPA: 3.6
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jun 2019, 03:32
VeritasKarishma wrote:
Passive voice is not wrong. In writing, active voice is preferred over passive voice but passive voice has its uses (when the impact of the action is more important than the doer of the action) e.g.
"The tattoo was removed."
instead of "The doctor removed the tattoo."

You don't care who removed the tattoo. The important thing is that it was removed.

You cannot ignore an option just because it uses passive voice.


VeritasKarishma Thanks a lot. You demystified my wrong perception of passive construction. Kudos!!
_________________
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 25 Jan 2017
Posts: 51
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jun 2019, 09:46
egmat wrote:
Ridhimajain96 wrote:
how could B be the answer , fat of wild animals is compared with livestock
it should be "WILD ANIMALS HAVE LESS TOTAL FAT THAN LIVE STOCK FED ON GRAIN HAVE "



Hello Ridhimajain96,

I will be glad to help you out with this one. :-)

Following is the excerpt from the passage that presents the comparison in Choice B:

...wild animals have less total fat than livestock...

In the above structure, wild animals have been correctly compared to livestock.

The thing is the verb have or the helping verb do in place of have is understood after than because such omission does not lead to any ambiguity in comparison.

In total, there are three nouns in the above-mentioned structure - wild animals, livestock, and total fat. Needless to say that only the first two noun entities can be logically compared in the context of this sentence. Wild animals cannot be logically compared to total fat.

Such omissions are NOT allowed when doing so leads to ambiguous comparison.

You may go through our elaborate article named HOW FAR ELLIPSIS IS PERMISSIBLE IN COMPARISON to understand in which sentences we must use the helping verb in the second part of the comparison and in which sentence we not in the following link:

https://gmatclub.com/forum/how-far-ellipsis-is-permissible-in-comparison-148973.html


Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha


Dear egmat, I found your views very useful and also the link on ellipsis is very informative. Thanks for sharing them. In order to enhance my understanding on ellipsis, I have a query regarding option D.
Option D: total fat of wild animals is less than (total fat of) livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be.

Also, "they" can refer to "wild animals" which is correct.
Kindly suggest.

Thanks in advance
GMATNinja
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Jul 2018
Posts: 57
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jun 2019, 02:28
Hi,

I am having trouble in identifying what are being compared especially in D.
D states that "total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed of grain"---> Doesnt this mean that total fat of wild animals is less than total fat of livestock.
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 569
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jun 2019, 14:35
krishnabalu wrote:
Hi,

I am having trouble in identifying what are being compared especially in D.
D states that "total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed of grain"---> Doesnt this mean that total fat of wild animals is less than total fat of livestock.


Hello krishnabalu!

In option D, it is comparing fat to animals, which isn't parallel. An easy way to check for this is to eliminate any prepositional phrases you can find. Prepositional phrases are there to add extra information - but they can also confuse readers! Here is what it looks like if we cross them out:

total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed of grain

If we eliminate the extra information, we can clearly see that this option is trying to compare total fat to livestock, which is NOT parallel! It should compare fat to fat, or animal to animal.

If we look at the correct option, we see a parallel comparison:

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain

This option is comparing animals to animals, which is parallel. The basis for comparison is their total fat, which is clearly indicated here.

I hope this helps!
_________________
"Students study. GMAT assassins train."
Image


The Course Used By GMAT Club Moderators To Earn 750+

souvik101990 Score: 760 Q50 V42 ★★★★★
ENGRTOMBA2018 Score: 750 Q49 V44 ★★★★★
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
D
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2864
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2019, 19:19
1
bae wrote:
can anyone explain this?

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock (have) fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be


more of a kind of fat VS more fat of a kind
Do both carry different meaning?

I read this as,
more of a kind of fat = more of a type of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.
[ more fat of a kind = more fat of a type thought to be good for cardiac health.

I think your interpretation is spot on here. Nice job!

priyanshu14 wrote:
Dear GMATNinja,

Thanks for detailed explanation.

"Dear Team,
I have a doubt in option B. Comparison is done between ""wild animals have less total fat"" and ""livestock"" which is illogical. It should be ""livestock's "". Kindly suggest

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be good for cardiac health.

Thanks in advance

bb generis

kanthaliya wrote:
Please help me explain this question...
why the comparison in C is wrong? wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock. this compares the total fat of both animals. on Contrary, B compares total fat with the number of livestock.
comparison in B looks illogical whereas in C looks correct.

The issue stems from the use of the verb "have". If we wanted to compare the total fat of one animal to the total fat of another animal, we would say something like, "the total fat of wild animals IS less than the total fat of livestock fed on grain."

Consider the following examples:

  • "I have less wine than you (have)." - The second "have" is implied. This sentence clearly communicates that the amount of wine that I have is less than the amount of wine that you have. This is analogous to choice (B): "wild animals have less total fat than livestock (have)."
  • "I have less wine than your wine (has?)." - This one doesn't make sense. Your wine doesn't HAVE some amount of wine. YOU have some amount of wine. This is analogous to choice (C): "wild animals have less total fat than the total fat of livestock fed on grain".

The total fat of livestock fed on grain does not have some amount of total fat. The livestock has some amount of total fat. So we want to say that "wild animals HAVE less total fat than livestock (have)." And that's why (B) makes more sense than (C).

I hope this helps!
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: Series 1: SC & CR Fundamentals | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset | Series 3: Word Problem Bootcamp + Next-Level SC & CR

SC 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?

RC, CR, 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

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; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 09 Apr 2017
Posts: 80
GPA: 3.99
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Jun 2019, 20:38
thank you gmat ninja for the confirmation :angel:

Posted from my mobile device

the other reason why i wrote this was because, i noticed that horizontal scanning is useful, when everyone else are debating / explaining on the ellipsis of the comparison.

when performing horizontal scan, i noticed that
this answer choice c has a different way of wording "fats" , and thus, it led me to suspect there might be differences in meaning between c and the original answer choice .

i learn that Gmat is looking for the best fit of all answer choices.

btw, thanks for your clear and crisp explanation on this question in your earlier post.
_________________
If you found my post useful,

KUDOS
are much appreciated. Giving Kudos is a great way to thank and motivate contributors, without costing you anything.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 24 Sep 2018
Posts: 99
Location: India
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jul 2019, 03:47
775.According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is good for cardiac health.


(A) wild animals have less total fat than do livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat they think is

They is ambiguous. We are not sure to whom its referring. Is it referring to studies. But studies can’t think. So WRONG

(B) wild animals have less total fat than livestock fed on grain and more of a kind of fat thought to be

CORRECT. Not as I got some clue. But I did not find any flaw in this answer. So let’s KEEP.

(C) wild animals have less total fat than that of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be

Than that of. That is referring to total fat. Ok. READ THIS SENTENCE AGAIN.

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals, wild animals have less total fat than total fat of livestock fed on grain and have more fat of a kind thought to be

have less total fat than total fat of livestock fed : Make no sense correct. SO WRONG


(D) total fat of wild animals is less than livestock fed on grain and they have more fat of a kind thought to be

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat from wild animals and meat from domesticated animals,

Comparing the nutritional value of meat from X and meat from Y, Now there is comparison is happening so this clause should start with either X or Y.

Again They is ambiguous So WRONG

(E) total fat is less in wild animals than that of livestock fed on grain and more of their fat is of a kind they think is

Same issue of THAT and THEY So WRONG
_________________
Thanks,
Bijaya

If this post is helpful for you please press the kudos button
GMAT Club Bot
Re: According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr   [#permalink] 13 Jul 2019, 03:47

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4    Next  [ 66 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

According to recent studies comparing the nutritional value of meat fr

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne