Last visit was: 06 Sep 2026, 16:02 It is currently 06 Sep 2026, 16:02
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   
555-605 (Medium)|   Humanities|   Short Passage|                                       
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 7,399
Own Kudos:
71,574
 [6]
Given Kudos: 2,182
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,399
Kudos: 71,574
 [6]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 14 May 2021, 20:14
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 1


mSKR
It is surprising to find out that not many were confused on Q1.

Quote:
1. The passage suggests that WIDC differed from WTUL in which of the following ways?

(A) WIDC believed that the existing safety regulations were adequate to protect women's health, whereas WTUL believed that such regulations needed to be strengthened.
(C) WIDC believed that lead poisoning in white lead factories could be avoided by controlling conditions there, whereas WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced.
(E) At the time that WIDC was opposing legislative attempts to restrict women's labor, WTUL had already ceased to do so.

I was confused among A vs C over E.

Although the Women's Industrial Defense Committee (WIDC), formed in 1892 in response to earlier legislative attempts to restrict women's labor, did not discount the white lead trade's potential health dangers, it opposed the proposal,

didn't discount means = didn't consider?
so is this reason to say A and C wrong because in options it is mentioned WIDC believed. So we don't know what they actually believed?
Can I say 2nd part in A and C are right about WTUL?

Please confirm VeritasKarishma GMATNinja :please: is my understanding correct?
Show more
To discount something is to disregard that thing, or to believe that it's unimportant.

So, if someone DOESN'T discount something, it means that they DO think that that thing is important. The passage tells us that the WIDC "did not discount the white lead trade's potential health dangers," so we know that the WIDC thought that white lead WAS dangerous for the health of workers.

Here's (A):
Quote:
(A) WIDC believed that the existing safety regulations were adequate to protect women's health, whereas WTUL believed that such regulations needed to be strengthened.
Show more
We don't hear directly about WIDC's thoughts on existing safety regulations. However, we know that the WIDC DID believe that white lead was dangerous to health -- but that despite this belief, the group opposed the legislation. So, we certainly can't conclude that the WIDC "believed that the existing safety regulations were adequate to protect women's health." The group just thought that opposing the restrictive legislation overrode their concerns about health.

In addition, the WTUL had an issue with how the existing safety regulations were (or were not) enforced, not necessarily with the regulations themselves. So there's not solid evidence that (A) captures the WTUL's position, either.

Eliminate (A).

Here's (C):
Quote:
(C) WIDC believed that lead poisoning in white lead factories could be avoided by controlling conditions there, whereas WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced.
Show more
The first piece of information is supported by the passage: "SPEW contended, and WIDC concurred, that controllable conditions in such factories were responsible for the development of lead poisoning."

From this, we know that WIDC believed that lead poisoning was caused by controllable factors. This suggests that WIDC would think that lead poisoning can be avoided by changing these conditions.

Where (C) goes wrong is in the second piece: "WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced."

At the end of the passage, we learn that WTUL supports the legislation because safety regulations were not enforced, and there was no pressure from unions to make employers uphold these standards. So, as mentioned about in (A), WTUL's problem is with the enforcement of the regulations, not with the regulations themselves. We really don't know how the WTUL feels about how effective the regulations are -- perhaps if they were enforced, the WTUL would be happy with the level of protection provided to workers.

Because we don't know whether the WTUL thinks the regulations would be effective if they were enforced, (C) is out.

Quote:
(E) At the time that WIDC was opposing legislative attempts to restrict women's labor, WTUL had already ceased to do so.
Show more
WIDC opposed legislation that attempted to restrict women's labor in 1892. WTUL ceased opposing such legislation in the late 1880's.

(E) is the correct answer to question 1.

I hope that helps!
avatar
Sajal12
avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2021
Last visit: 06 Aug 2022
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
9
Given Kudos: 3
Location: India
Schools: ISB'22 Stanford '23
GPA: 3.94
WE:Analyst (Consulting)
Schools: ISB'22 Stanford '23
Posts: 10
Kudos: 9
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 17 Jun 2021, 09:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi experts,

Please explain E option of this question, I am not able to eliminate E:

2. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly support the contention attributed to SPEW in highlighted text?

(A) Those white lead factories that most strongly enforced regulations concerning worker safety and hygiene had the lowest incidences of lead poisoning among employees.
(B) The incidence of lead poisoning was much higher among women who worked in white lead factories than among women who worked in other types of factories.
(C) There were many household sources of lead that could have contributed to the incidence of lead poisoning among women who also worked outside the home in the late nineteenth century.
(D) White lead factories were more stringent than were certain other types of factories in their enforcement of workplace safety regulations.
(E) Even brief exposure to the conditions typically found in white lead factories could cause lead poisoning among factory workers.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 7,399
Own Kudos:
71,574
Given Kudos: 2,182
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,399
Kudos: 71,574
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 26 Jun 2021, 07:27
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 2


Sajal12
Hi experts,

Please explain E option of this question, I am not able to eliminate E:

2. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly support the contention attributed to SPEW in highlighted text?

(A) Those white lead factories that most strongly enforced regulations concerning worker safety and hygiene had the lowest incidences of lead poisoning among employees.
(B) The incidence of lead poisoning was much higher among women who worked in white lead factories than among women who worked in other types of factories.
(C) There were many household sources of lead that could have contributed to the incidence of lead poisoning among women who also worked outside the home in the late nineteenth century.
(D) White lead factories were more stringent than were certain other types of factories in their enforcement of workplace safety regulations.
(E) Even brief exposure to the conditions typically found in white lead factories could cause lead poisoning among factory workers.
Show more
Before diving into (E), first get some context from the passage to understand SPEW's contention.

First, we learn that workers in white lead factories are becoming ill. The government says, "Cool! Let's ban women from those workplaces!" :facepalm_man:

Then, the WTUL and the SPEW say "no way, that's some BS. You're just trying to limit women's work opportunities."

The SPEW does a bit of digging, and finds out that controllable conditions are causing factory workers to get sick. If the workers just practice good hygiene and the factories follow the rules, then there won't be so much illness.

So, does (E) support the SPEW's contention that workers' illnesses are caused by controllable conditions in the factory?
Quote:
(E) Even brief exposure to the conditions typically found in white lead factories could cause lead poisoning among factory workers.
Show more
(E) tells us that the "typical" conditions currently found in white lead factories are terrible and can cause illness.

However, it doesn't give us any insight into how controllable these conditions are -- is the issue caused by lax adherence to the rules and poor hygiene? Or is it just incredibly dangerous to work with white lead, and no amount of washing up/following the rules will help?

Because (E) doesn't tell us whether the conditions are controllable, it doesn't support the SPEW's contention.

Compare that to (A):
Quote:
(A) Those white lead factories that most strongly enforced regulations concerning worker safety and hygiene had the lowest incidences of lead poisoning among employees.
Show more
(A) provides us with a nice piece of evidence that the SPEW is correct. Workers are less likely to get sick when work safety and hygiene rules are enforced. So, these controllable conditions ARE at the root of illnesses at white lead factories, and simply adhering to the rules will improve worker safety.

(A) is the correct answer to question 2.

I hope that helps!
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,464
Kudos: 2,506
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 29 Jun 2021, 11:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
Vyshak
Hi GMATNinja,

Why is B better than E for Q3. Can you please provide your explanation?

What's the meaning of contrast here?
Quote:
86. The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation
(B) contrasting the reasoning of various groups concerning their positions on certain proposed legislation
(C) tracing the process whereby certain proposed legislation was eventually enacted
(D) assessing the success of tactics adopted by various groups with respect to certain proposed legislation
(E) evaluating the arguments of various groups concerning certain proposed legislation
The problem with (E) is that the author does not evaluate the arguments of the various groups. The author simply explains those arguments and the reasoning behind them, without assessing (or "evaluating") their validity.

The author contrasts the reasoning behind those arguments by comparing them and explaining their differences. Thus, choice (B) is the best answer.
Show more
GMATNinja Thank you sir for explanation. Which types of sign indicates that the author is evaluating the system/process/method, etc.? My thinking says about the evaluating that the author puts both positive and negative tone of the system/process/method and eventually s/he put his/her own opinion. Is my thinking right? or, is there anything else other than my thinking for the word evaluating?
avatar
TheUltimateWinner
avatar
Schools: Harvard '24 Judge '23 LBS '24 McCombs '24 Mendoza Tepper '24 Ross '24 Cox Marshall '24 Fisher Kelley '24 Jones McDonough '24 Owen '24 Terry BU Simon '24 Katz GWU Mason Babson Gabelli Foster '24 Goizueta '24 Scheller Stern '23 CBS '23 Booth '23 Haas '25 Wharton '25 Stanford '26 Johnson'23 Fuqua '23 Kellogg '23 Kenan-Flagler'23 INSEAD Aug 22 intake Olin '23 Said '23 Sloan '23 Carey Arizona "22 Yale '23 UC Davis Madison '23 Anderson '23 Carroll Carlson '23 Darden '23
Posts: 2,464
Kudos: 2,506
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 29 Jun 2021, 12:06
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja

Quote:
The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation
(B) contrasting the reasoning of various groups concerning their positions on certain proposed legislation
(C) tracing the process whereby certain proposed legislation was eventually enacted
(D) assessing the success of tactics adopted by various groups with respect to certain proposed legislation
(E) evaluating the arguments of various groups concerning certain proposed legislation


(A) is a bit convoluted!

Start at the end of the answer choice: "...the motives of those proposing certain legislation."

"Those proposing certain legislation" are the people mentioned at the beginning of the passage who wanted to prevent women from working in white lead factories. So, the "motives" of these people are the reasons that they want to enact this rule. For instance, maybe they really did want to keep women safe. Or perhaps they actually hated the idea of women in the workforce, and their true motive was to limit jobs for women.

Here's the whole of (A): "presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation." The "various groups" are WIDC, SPEW, and WTUL. In the passage, we certainly hear about these groups' views -- but does the passage discuss their views on the motives of the people enacting the new rules?

Nope. The passage tells us about how these groups viewed the new legislation itself (WIDC and SPEW opposed it, while WTUL supported it), but we never hear about how these groups view the motives of the people behind the legislation.

You can eliminate (A) for question 3.

I hope that helps!
Show more
GMATNinja Thank you sir for distinct explanation. I've a query for the same sort of thing that you explained above.
----
Suggest and present a suggestion are not the same thing! Present a suggestion means somebody else made the suggestion. Suggest means author is going to suggest. In the primary purpose question, we always consider the author's part (not the somebody/other guys part).
Quote:
(A) presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation
Show more

So, in choice A, presenting various groups' views is something like other guys views (not the author's view at all)? Should I cross out choice A as this is not the part of the author?
I am facing the problem in this sorts of answer option (e.g., presenting blah blah blah). Hope you understand my question.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 16,645
Own Kudos:
81,204
 [3]
Given Kudos: 491
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,645
Kudos: 81,204
 [3]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi Updated on: 20 Jul 2026, 02:07
Originally posted by KarishmaB on 29 Jun 2021, 21:59.
Last edited by Bunuel on 20 Jul 2026, 02:07, edited 1 time in total.
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
These are the highlights of the passage:

Home Secretary proposed in 1895 that Parliament enact legislation that would prohibit women from holding most jobs in white lead factories.

Although WIDC did not discount the white lead trade's potential health dangers, it opposed the proposal, viewing it as yet another instance of limiting women's work opportunities.

Also opposing the proposal was SPEW, which attempted to challenge it by investigating the causes of illness in white lead factories.

SPEW contended, and WIDC concurred, that controllable conditions in such factories were responsible for the development of lead poisoning. SPEW provided convincing evidence that lead poisoning could be avoided

However, WTUL supported the eventually enacted proposal, in part because safety regulations were generally not being enforced in white lead factories, where there were no unions (and little prospect of any) to pressure employers to comply with safety regulations.



3. The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation

Various groups' views of the motives of Home Secy are not given.

(B) contrasting the reasoning of various groups concerning their positions on certain proposed legislation

Correct. It contrasts the reasons why various groups held the position they did on the proposed legislation. e.g. WIDC opposed it because it saw the legislation as yet another instance of limiting women's work opportunities. etc. SPEW also opposed. In contrast, WTUL supported because regulations were not enforced.

(C) tracing the process whereby certain proposed legislation was eventually enacted

The process is not given. Only the positions of various groups and reasons behind those positions.

(D) assessing the success of tactics adopted by various groups with respect to certain proposed legislation

Only SPEW's efforts are discussed briefly.

(E) evaluating the arguments of various groups concerning certain proposed legislation

The author doesn't evaluate the groups' arguments. He only gives the positions held by the groups. The author doesn't say "WIDC had a good point" etc.

Answer (B)
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 16,645
Own Kudos:
81,204
 [1]
Given Kudos: 491
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,645
Kudos: 81,204
 [1]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 29 Jun 2021, 22:16
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
1. The passage suggests that WIDC differed from WTUL in which of the following ways?

(A) WIDC believed that the existing safety regulations were adequate to protect women's health, whereas WTUL believed that such regulations needed to be strengthened.

WTUL did not believe that current regulations were not sufficient. They believed that the regulations were not fully enforced.

(B) WIDC believed that unions could not succeed in pressuring employers to comply with such regulations, whereas WTUL believed that unions could succeed in doing so.

Not given that WIDC believed that unions could not succeed in pressuring employers to comply with such regulations.

(C) WIDC believed that lead poisoning in white lead factories could be avoided by controlling conditions there, whereas WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced.

Not given that WTUL believed that lead poisoning could not be avoided even by enforcing safety regulations. We are only given that WTUL believed that regulations were not being enforced especially if there were no unions.

(D) At the time that the legislation concerning white lead factories was proposed, WIDC was primarily concerned with addressing health conditions in white lead factories, whereas WTUL was concerned with improving working conditions in all types of factories.

Not known.

(E) At the time that WIDC was opposing legislative attempts to restrict women's labor, WTUL had already ceased to do so.

Correct.
WIDC, formed in 1892 in response to earlier legislative attempts to restrict women's labor, ... opposed the proposal...
WTUL, which had ceased in the late 1880s to oppose restrictions on women's labor, supported the eventually enacted proposal...

WIDC was formed in 1892 and was opposing the proposal. WTUL had ceased opposing restrictions in 1880s. So when WIDC was opposing the proposal (any time during or after 1892), WTUL had ceased opposing.

Answer (E)
User avatar
AliTariqPrepVista
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jul 2015
Last visit: 09 Nov 2022
Posts: 26
Own Kudos:
11
Given Kudos: 3
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 26
Kudos: 11
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 01 Jul 2021, 04:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I have discussed the Primary Purpose question in detail in this post:

https://gmatclub.com/forum/rc-primary-c ... l#p2815385
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 7,399
Own Kudos:
71,574
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,182
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,399
Kudos: 71,574
 [1]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 05 Jul 2021, 14:53
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 3


TheUltimateWinner

GMATNinja Thank you sir for explanation. Which types of sign indicates that the author is evaluating the system/process/method, etc.? My thinking says about the evaluating that the author puts both positive and negative tone of the system/process/method and eventually s/he put his/her own opinion. Is my thinking right? or, is there anything else other than my thinking for the word evaluating?
Show more
You're on the right track! To "evaluate" something is just to investigate it's value -- so, to evaluate an argument is just to weigh in on the validity of the argument. You don't necessarily need to have an equal number of positive and negative things to say before giving your opinion: the "evaluation" could just be that the argument is absolute crap, or that it is really great.


TheUltimateWinner
Suggest and present a suggestion are not the same thing! Present a suggestion means somebody else made the suggestion. Suggest means author is going to suggest. In the primary purpose question, we always consider the author's part (not the somebody/other guys part).

Quote:
(A) presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation

So, in choice A, presenting various groups' views is something like other guys views (not the author's view at all)? Should I cross out choice A as this is not the part of the author?
I am facing the problem in this sorts of answer option (e.g., presenting blah blah blah). Hope you understand my question.
Show more
The author's purpose could be to explain somebody else's view. Let's say a sports commentator comes up with a new theory about why the Broncos have been so bad for the last 5 years -- I could write an entire article just to share that commentator's view. My "primary purpose" would be to present the view of that commentator.

You really can't use that language to eliminate options for primary purpose questions. Instead of developing such "rules" that don't work all of the time, it's better to take each question on a case-by-case basis. Here, the author doesn't discuss "various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation." (A) is out for question 3.

Question 2


TheUltimateWinner
GMATNinja

Quote:
SPEW provided convincing evidence that lead poisoning could be avoided if workers were careful and clean and if already extant workplace safety regulations were stringently enforced.
The word lowest is too much extreme. The passage does not guarantee that if the quoting part happen then the LOWEST incidence would happen.
Am I missing anything?
Show more
You are missing something. Take a look at what the question is asking:
Quote:
Which of the following, if true, would most clearly support the contention attributed to SPEW in highlighted text?
Show more
Here, we're not looking for something that's mentioned in the passage. Instead, we have to look through the answer choices and determine which one would, if true, support SPEW's contention.

In other words, this is very similar to a critical reasoning question that asks us to strengthen the argument.

(A) does exactly that -- if it were true that enforcing regulations leads to the lowest incidences of lead poisoning among employees, then SPEW's argument would be pretty dang strong.

Because (A) would strengthen SPEW's contention, it's the correct answer to question 2.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
woohoo921
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2020
Last visit: 17 Mar 2023
Posts: 493
Own Kudos:
165
Given Kudos: 611
Posts: 493
Kudos: 165
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 20 Jun 2022, 14:16
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
gmatassassin88
betterscore
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investigating the high incidence in white lead factories of illness among employees, most of who were women, the Home Secretary proposed in 1895 that Parliament enact legislation that would prohibit women from holding most jobs in white lead factories. Although the Women's Industrial Defense Committee (WIDC), formed in 1892 in response to earlier legislative attempts to restrict women's labor, did not discount the white lead trade's potential health dangers, it opposed the proposal, viewing it as yet another instance of limiting women's work opportunities. Also opposing the proposal was the Society for Promoting the Employment of Women (SPEW), which attempted to challenge it by investigating the causes of illness in white lead factories. SPEW contended, and WIDC concurred, that controllable conditions in such factories were responsible for the development of lead poisoning. SPEW provided convincing evidence that lead poisoning could be avoided if workers were careful and clean and if already extant workplace safety regulations were stringently enforced. However, the Women's Trade Union League (WTUL), which had ceased in the late 1880s to oppose restrictions on women's labor, supported the eventually enacted proposal, in part because safety regulations were generally not being enforced in white lead factories, where there were no unions (and little prospect of any) to pressure employers to comply with safety regulations.

Show Spoiler
E
1. The passage suggests that WIDC differed from WTUL in which of the following ways?

(A) WIDC believed that the existing safety regulations were adequate to protect women's health, whereas WTUL believed that such regulations needed to be strengthened.
(B) WIDC believed that unions could not succeed in pressuring employers to comply with such regulations, whereas WTUL believed that unions could succeed in doing so.
(C) WIDC believed that lead poisoning in white lead factories could be avoided by controlling conditions there, whereas WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced.
(D) At the time that the legislation concerning white lead factories was proposed, WIDC was primarily concerned with addressing health conditions in white lead factories, whereas WTUL was concerned with improving working conditions in all types of factories.
(E) At the time that WIDC was opposing legislative attempts to restrict women's labor, WTUL had already ceased to do so.


Show Spoiler
A
2. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly support the contention attributed to SPEW in highlighted text?

(A) Those white lead factories that most strongly enforced regulations concerning worker safety and hygiene had the lowest incidences of lead poisoning among employees.
(B) The incidence of lead poisoning was much higher among women who worked in white lead factories than among women who worked in other types of factories.
(C) There were many household sources of lead that could have contributed to the incidence of lead poisoning among women who also worked outside the home in the late nineteenth century.
(D) White lead factories were more stringent than were certain other types of factories in their enforcement of workplace safety regulations.
(E) Even brief exposure to the conditions typically found in white lead factories could cause lead poisoning among factory workers.


Show Spoiler
B
3. The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation
(B) contrasting the reasoning of various groups concerning their positions on certain proposed legislation
(C) tracing the process whereby certain proposed legislation was eventually enacted
(D) assessing the success of tactics adopted by various groups with respect to certain proposed legislation
(E) evaluating the arguments of various groups concerning certain proposed legislation


Show Spoiler
C
4. According to the passage, the WIDC believed that the proposed legislation resembled earlier legislation concerning women’s labor in that it

(A) caused divisiveness among women’s organizations
(B) sought to protect women’s health
(C) limited women’s occupational opportunities
(D) failed to bolster workplace safety regulations
(E) failed to make distinctions among types of factory work



RC00558-01
RC00558-02
RC00558-06

GMATNinja VeritasKarishma

in Q.3 Why option A is incorrect

Law's motive: Restrict women jobs.

Passage then mention viewpoint of 3 different organisation to 'why law SHOULD NOT RESTRICT WOMEN From participating in jobs.

With this understanding I marked option A.Whereas in B, nowhere i feel contrast has been made


(A) presenting various groups' views of the motives of those proposing certain legislation
(B) contrasting the reasoning of various groups concerning their positions on certain proposed legislation

Option (A) would mean this:

"Home Secretary proposed that would prohibit women from holding most jobs in white lead factories"

Group A - The home secretary is proposing this because he does not want women to be financially independent.
Group B - No, the home secretary is proposing this because he cares about the health of women who are often responsible for running the household
Group C - No, the home secretary is proposing this because he wants to put his own men in their place.

This would be various groups presenting motives of the one proposing this legislation.

This is not what the passage does. It gives the positions various groups hold and their reasons -
WIDC opposed the proposal, viewing it as yet another instance of limiting women's work opportunities
Also opposing the proposal was SPEW which provided convincing evidence that lead poisoning could be avoided if workers were careful and clean
...
Hence (B) is correct.
Show more

KarishmaB
You always help make complicated questions less scary!

I have a quick question on Choice D for #556 (the passage suggests that WIDC differed from WTUL in which of the following ways?), the OG does not mention this part of answer Choice D being incorrect: "whereas WTUL was concerned with improving working conditions in all types of factories". Isn't this incorrect? According to the passage, WTUL worked to "oppose restrictions on women's labor". The passage does not mention if WTUL was concerned with improving working conditions in all types of factories. Thank you for all of your time and help :)
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 05 Sep 2026
Posts: 16,645
Own Kudos:
81,204
 [1]
Given Kudos: 491
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,645
Kudos: 81,204
 [1]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 20 Jun 2022, 21:46
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
woohoo921


KarishmaB
You always help make complicated questions less scary!

I have a quick question on Choice D for #556 (the passage suggests that WIDC differed from WTUL in which of the following ways?), the OG does not mention this part of answer Choice D being incorrect: "whereas WTUL was concerned with improving working conditions in all types of factories". Isn't this incorrect? According to the passage, WTUL worked to "oppose restrictions on women's labor". The passage does not mention if WTUL was concerned with improving working conditions in all types of factories. Thank you for all of your time and help :)
Show more

I wouldn't worry too much about the OG explanation and I certainly wouldn't try to read between the lines (such as, what is not pointed out in OG as an error is correct)

When I read the passage, I see that "WIDC was formed in 1892 in response to earlier legislative attempts to restrict women's labor." (we don't know the kind of industries) Presumably, they were focussing on various different kind of industries. The passage doesn't say that they were working towards improving conditions in white lead factories only.

As for WTUL, they had ceased in the late 1880s to oppose restrictions on women's labor and they supported the eventually enacted proposal...
WTUL was an older organisation and they had already stopped opposing restrictions on women's labor. Again, the passage doesn't mention whether they were involved with only white lead factories or all.

Hence we have no information for option (D).
User avatar
Mansha1412
User avatar
Joined: 19 May 2021
Last visit: 27 Sep 2022
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 4
Posts: 14
Kudos: 1
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 23 Jul 2022, 12:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Experts, please help with Q1.
I feel option C should be correct option choice as it has been mentioned in passage that WTUL did not want women to work as this organization thought that safety measures cannot be followed. And we also know from passage that WIDC was in favour of working women.
User avatar
RonTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 19 Jul 2022
Last visit: 07 Nov 2022
Posts: 429
Own Kudos:
541
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 429
Kudos: 541
 [1]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi Updated on: 20 Jul 2026, 02:06
Originally posted by RonTargetTestPrep on 23 Jul 2022, 12:30.
Last edited by Bunuel on 20 Jul 2026, 02:06, edited 1 time in total.
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mansha1412
Experts, please help with Q1.
I feel option C should be correct option choice as it has been mentioned in passage that WTUL did not want women to work as this organization thought that safety measures cannot be followed. And we also know from passage that WIDC was in favour of working women.
Show more
Question 1:

Nope—in fact, neither part of choice C is supported.

The first part ("WIDC believed that lead poisoning in white lead factories could be avoided by controlling conditions there") is actually supported for SPEW, not for WIDC: SPEW provided convincing evidence that lead poisoning could be avoided if workers were careful and clean and if already extant workplace safety regulations were stringently enforced.
The passage says nothing that could substantiate a similar assertion about WIDC.

The second part ("WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced") is also unsupported.
The end of the passage says that safety regulations were generally not being enforced (FACT) in white lead factories, because there were no entities such as unions that could enforce them. The counterfactual hypothetical scenario "What if they WERE being maximally enforced?", which constitutes the second half of choice C, is not considered.
User avatar
HarunaK
User avatar
Joined: 29 Mar 2022
Last visit: 29 Sep 2024
Posts: 4
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 18
Location: Japan
Schools: HEC (A$)
Schools: HEC (A$)
Posts: 4
Kudos: 1
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 01 Jan 2023, 07:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja

I appreciate your comments a lot, but one point is confusing...

GMATNinja
adkikani
Hi Gmatninja, Gmatninja2,
I have a query regarding understanding of words - contend and concur in this passage.
Contend means to argue and concur means to be in harmony with.
My query is regarding part in bold, if SPEW opposes initial proposal of home secretary that women should be stopped from working in lead factories due to high chance of illness,
How can concur we place another contrasting word concur so adjacent to WIDC which in fact also opposes home secretary's proposal?
Quote:
SPEW contended, and WIDC concurred, that controllable conditions in such factories were responsible for the development of lead poisoning.
In this context, "concur" means to "agree" and "content" means to "argue" or "assert" (as in, to assert something as a position in an argument).

For example, Mike contends that going to the gym is a waste of time, and Charles concurs. In other words, Mike argues that going to the gym is a waste of time, and Charles agrees with Mike (i.e. Charles would also contend that going to the gym is a waste of time).

Referring to the part in bold, SPEW argues that controllable conditions were responsible for the development of lead poisoning, and WIDC agrees with SPEW (i.e. WIDC would also contend that controllable conditions were responsible).

I hope that helps!
Show more

Although we could consider that "WIDC also agrees that controllable conditions in such factories were responsible for the development of lead poisoning", what makes it possible to say that the following choice in #1 should be eliminated?

(C) WIDC believed that lead poisoning in white lead factories could be avoided by controlling conditions there, whereas WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 03 Sep 2026
Posts: 7,399
Own Kudos:
71,574
 [1]
Given Kudos: 2,182
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,399
Kudos: 71,574
 [1]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 05 Jan 2023, 12:56
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post

Question 1


HarunaK
Hi GMATNinja

I appreciate your comments a lot, but one point is confusing...

GMATNinja
adkikani
Hi Gmatninja, Gmatninja2,
I have a query regarding understanding of words - contend and concur in this passage.
Contend means to argue and concur means to be in harmony with.
My query is regarding part in bold, if SPEW opposes initial proposal of home secretary that women should be stopped from working in lead factories due to high chance of illness,
How can concur we place another contrasting word concur so adjacent to WIDC which in fact also opposes home secretary's proposal?
Quote:
SPEW contended, and WIDC concurred, that controllable conditions in such factories were responsible for the development of lead poisoning.
In this context, "concur" means to "agree" and "content" means to "argue" or "assert" (as in, to assert something as a position in an argument).

For example, Mike contends that going to the gym is a waste of time, and Charles concurs. In other words, Mike argues that going to the gym is a waste of time, and Charles agrees with Mike (i.e. Charles would also contend that going to the gym is a waste of time).

Referring to the part in bold, SPEW argues that controllable conditions were responsible for the development of lead poisoning, and WIDC agrees with SPEW (i.e. WIDC would also contend that controllable conditions were responsible).

I hope that helps!

Although we could consider that "WIDC also agrees that controllable conditions in such factories were responsible for the development of lead poisoning", what makes it possible to say that the following choice in #1 should be eliminated?

(C) WIDC believed that lead poisoning in white lead factories could be avoided by controlling conditions there, whereas WTUL believed that lead poisoning in such factories could not be avoided no matter how stringently safety regulations were enforced.
Show more
You're right that the bit about WIDC in (C) is fine.

The issue with this answer choice is the part about WTUL. The WTUL's thoughts are explained in the last sentence of the passage: "However, the Women's Trade Union League (WTUL)[...] supported the eventually enacted proposal, in part because safety regulations were generally not being enforced in white lead factories, where there were no unions (and little prospect of any) to pressure employers to comply with safety regulations."

So, the WTUL doesn't think that poisoning could not be avoided even if safety regulations were enforced, as stated in (C). WTUL just thinks that safety regulations AREN'T being enforced, and there isn't any way to make them be enforced. It's possible that the WTUL thinks that the regulations are amazing and would absolutely prevent poisoning -- but that doesn't really matter if those regulations aren't actually enforced.

We can eliminate (C) because of the part about the WTUL.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
BlackHat098
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2021
Last visit: 04 Aug 2026
Posts: 23
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 1,466
Location: India
Schools: Schulich (A$)
Schools: Schulich (A$)
Posts: 23
Kudos: 2
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 03 Feb 2026, 01:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
hi, does the tags above mean this question appeared in all the official guide of the years mentioned in the header?
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 113,167
Own Kudos:
839,580
Given Kudos: 111,337
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 113,167
Kudos: 839,580
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 03 Feb 2026, 04:21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AarushiSatnalika
hi, does the tags above mean this question appeared in all the official guide of the years mentioned in the header?
Show more

Yes. The tags indicate that this question appears in all the Official Guides listed in the header.
User avatar
Borrat
User avatar
Joined: 30 Dec 2024
Last visit: 30 Aug 2026
Posts: 91
Own Kudos:
21
Given Kudos: 93
Posts: 91
Kudos: 21
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 02 Jun 2026, 11:06
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Context: 1895, Home Secretary proposes banning women from most jobs in white lead factories, following a government committee's findings about high illness rates among mostly female workers.
WIDC (est. 1892) — Opposed. Doesn't deny health risks but sees proposal as restricting women's work opportunities.
SPEW — Opposed. Controllable conditions caused poisoning. Two solutions: worker hygiene/care + enforce existing regulations. WIDC concurs.
WTUL — Supported. Regulations weren't being enforced; no unions present or likely to form.
Outcome: Legislation eventually enacted.

Q1 — WIDC vs WTUL difference
❌ A — WTUL never says regulations need strengthening, only that they weren't enforced. ❌ B — WTUL never claims unions could or couldn't succeed, only that none existed. ❌ C — WTUL never says poisoning is unavoidable regardless of enforcement, unsupported speculation. ❌ D — Completely fabricated distinction, nothing in passage supports it. ✅ E — WIDC was actively opposing restrictions in 1895; WTUL had already stopped doing so in the late 1880s, directly stated in the passage.

Q2 — Support SPEW's contention
SPEW's claim: Controllable conditions caused lead poisoning, so better hygiene and enforced regulations would prevent it.
✅ A — Factories with strongest enforcement had lowest poisoning rates, directly supports the causal link between controlled conditions and reduced poisoning. ❌ B — Comparing women across factory types is irrelevant to whether internal conditions are controllable. ❌ C — Suggests poisoning sources outside the factory, could actually undermine SPEW by shifting cause away from workplace conditions. ❌ D — White lead factories being stricter than others says nothing about whether their regulations actually prevented poisoning. ❌ E — Actually weakens SPEW. If brief exposure causes poisoning, conditions may be inherently uncontrollable, strengthening the case for a ban.

Q3 — Primary Purpose
❌ A — "Motives of proposers" is wrong. Passage focuses on groups' reasoning, not speculation about the Home Secretary's motives. ✅ B — Passage systematically presents WIDC, SPEW and WTUL's differing reasoning on the same legislation, precisely contrasting positions. ❌ C — "Tracing the process" implies detailed legislative progression. Passage only briefly notes it was enacted. ❌ D — Author never assesses whether any group's tactics were effective. ❌ E — "Evaluating" implies the author judges which arguments are stronger. Author stays neutral throughout.
User avatar
Rishab2409
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2026
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 137
Own Kudos:
36
Given Kudos: 157
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 137
Kudos: 36
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 03 Jul 2026, 00:48
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
5.The passage suggests that which of the following most accurately describes the attitudes of SPEW and WIDC toward the safety regulations referred to in lines 28–29?

(A)They disagreed about whether or not unions could successfully pressure employers to comply with such regulations.
(B)They disagreed about the extent to which the proposed legislation would strengthen such regulations.
(C)They agreed that, while adequate for other types of factories, extant workplace safety regulations did not specifically address the conditions unique to white lead factories.
(D)They agreed that, if adequately enforced, such regulations could reduce the incidence of illness among women working in white lead factories.
(E)They agreed that the extant workplace safety regulations had already been effective in reducing the incidence of lead poisoning in many white lead factories.

(D) because the passage clearly mentions that “SPEW provided convincing evidence that lead poisoning could be avoided if workers
were careful and clean and if already extant workplace safety regulations were stringently enforced.”

Hence D is the correct answer.

7.The reference to the absence of unions in white lead factories (lines 28 and 29) serves primarily to explain why[/b]

(A)more women than men worked in white lead factories
(B)previous attempts to restrict women’s labor had been successful
(C)SPEW felt the need to investigate the causes of illness in white lead factories
(D)WTUL ceased to oppose restrictions on women’s labor
(E)WTUL doubted that safety regulations would be enforced in white lead factories

(E) because the passage clearly mentions that “the Women's Trade Union League (WTUL), which had ceased in the late 1880s to oppose restrictions on women's labor, supported the eventually enacted proposal, in part because safety regulations were generally not being enforced in white lead factories, where there were no unions (and little prospect of any) to pressure employers to comply with safety regulations.”

Hence, E is the correct answer.
User avatar
canopyinthecity
User avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2025
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 159
Own Kudos:
106
 [1]
Given Kudos: 25
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 159
Kudos: 106
 [1]
Acting on the recommendation of a British government committee investi 07 Aug 2026, 10:41
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
bb hr1212 - Q6 is same as Q4 - You might want to correct this.
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7399 posts
BhardwajS
Verbal Forum Moderator
46 posts