It is currently 23 Oct 2017, 03:19

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of

Author Message
VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1207

Kudos [?]: 825 [0], given: 0

Location: Taiwan
Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2005, 00:01
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:23) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of mesothelioma, a slow-developing cancer, researchers believe that infection by the SV40 virus is a contributing cause, since in the United States 60 percent of tissue samples from mesotheliomas, but none from healthy tissue, contain SV40. SV40 is a monkey virus; however, in 1960 some polio vaccine was contaminated with the virus. Researchers hypothesize that this vaccine was the source of the virus found in mesotheliomas decades later.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the researchersâ€™ hypothesis?

A. SV40 is widely used as a research tool in cancer laboratories.

B. Changes in the technique of manufacturing the vaccine now prevent
contamination with SV40.

C. Recently discovered samples of the vaccine dating from 1960 still show traces of the virus.

D. In a small percentage of cases of mesothelioma, there is no history of exposure to asbestos.

E. In Finland, where the polio vaccine was never contaminated, samples from mesotheliomas do not contain SV40.

Kudos [?]: 825 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 391

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Location: Bangalore, India

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2005, 00:14
I am getting it as C.

If the samples still show the traces of the virus, it supports the fact "however, in 1960 some polio vaccine was contaminated with the virus" and thus the final conclusion too.

Await OA.

chunjuwu wrote:
Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of mesothelioma, a slow-developing cancer, researchers believe that infection by the SV40 virus is a contributing cause, since in the United States 60 percent of tissue samples from mesotheliomas, but none from healthy tissue, contain SV40. SV40 is a monkey virus; however, in 1960 some polio vaccine was contaminated with the virus. Researchers hypothesize that this vaccine was the source of the virus found in mesotheliomas decades later.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the researchersâ€™ hypothesis?

A. SV40 is widely used as a research tool in cancer laboratories.

B. Changes in the technique of manufacturing the vaccine now prevent
contamination with SV40.

C. Recently discovered samples of the vaccine dating from 1960 still show traces of the virus.

D. In a small percentage of cases of mesothelioma, there is no history of exposure to asbestos.

E. In Finland, where the polio vaccine was never contaminated, samples from mesotheliomas do not contain SV40.

_________________

Awaiting response,

Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 05 Jul 2004
Posts: 893

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 Feb 2005, 06:33
yes (C) it is..

All other choices are not at all related to Conclusion.

Welcome back Chandra!!

Where have u been??

Kudos [?]: 65 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2231

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2005, 09:10
I'm thinking it is (E): In Finland, where the polio vaccine was never contaminated, samples from mesotheliomas do not contain SV40.

The hypothesis is that the SV40 in the mesotheliomas came from the polio vaccine. If SV40 came from other sources we should be able to find SV40 at least in some samples in Finland.

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 1788

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

Location: NewJersey USA

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2005, 09:28
HongHu wrote:
I'm thinking it is (E): In Finland, where the polio vaccine was never contaminated, samples from mesotheliomas do not contain SV40.

The hypothesis is that the SV40 in the mesotheliomas came from the polio vaccine. If SV40 came from other sources we should be able to find SV40 at least in some samples in Finland.

Well choice (E) can make or break the argument.
if (E) is true then the mesotheliomas must have been result of something else. Same reason can be applied to the case of mesotheliomas in US and say that SV40 is not the reason for the disease.

Just that X (mesotheliomas) and Y (SV40) exists may mean thet X caused Y or Y caused X.
I believe choice (E) refutes the argument.

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 1480

Kudos [?]: 412 [0], given: 0

Location: Germany

### Show Tags

22 Feb 2005, 09:36
E) !

C) there is no connection to the mesotheliomas => it is too vague

E) the analogy to the disease in finland is stronger

OA ?

Kudos [?]: 412 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 1207

Kudos [?]: 825 [0], given: 0

Location: Taiwan

### Show Tags

25 Feb 2005, 23:54
Hello, guys , OA is C

I'm so honored to pick the same wrong answer with HongHu.

Kudos [?]: 825 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2231

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2005, 00:00
Oops! :-D

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2231

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2005, 00:09
Ok the hypothesis is: this vaccine was the source of the virus found in mesotheliomas decades later.

What (C) shows is: first, the vaccine in 1960 IS contaminated by the virus. Second, the virus is long lived.

It doesn't tell us if the vaccine was the source of the virus found in mesotheliomas. I know it is a monkey virus but how do we know if the virus couldn't get in human body through some other channels?

If this answer is not from ETS, I'm not gonna buy it.

Last edited by HongHu on 19 Mar 2005, 22:17, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 378 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2004
Posts: 391

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Location: Bangalore, India

### Show Tags

26 Feb 2005, 10:26
'Finland' makes it clearly out of scope.

HongHu wrote:
Ok the hypothesis is: this vaccine was the source of the virus found in mesotheliomas decades later.

What (C) shows is: first, the vaccine in 1960 IS contaminated by the virus. Second, the virus is long lived.

It doesn't tell us if the vaccine was the source of the virus found in mesotheliomas. I know it is a monkey virus but how do we know if the virus could get in human body through some other channel? :p

If this answer is not from ETS, I'm not gonna buy it.

_________________

Awaiting response,

Thnx & Rgds,
Chandra

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 19 Nov 2004
Posts: 556

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Location: SF Bay Area, USA

### Show Tags

18 Mar 2005, 22:40
I think it is E.
C does not even talk about mesothelioma. I think the OA is wrong!

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

18 Mar 2005, 22:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by