It is currently 22 Oct 2017, 20:04

### 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
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Posts: 331

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 0

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

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2005, 20:04
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (01:18) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 3 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 researcher's 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 do not contain SV40.

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 984

Kudos [?]: 215 [0], given: 0

Location: South Korea

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2005, 21:07
P1. Primary cause of mesothelioma = exposure to asbestos
P2. Contributing cause of mesothelioma = infection by SV40 virus
P3. In 1960 some polio vaccine was contaminated with SV40 virus.

Con. The vaccine contaminated in 1960 was the source of the virus found in mesotheliomas decades later.

(C) Recently discovered samples of the vaccine dating from 1960 still show traces of the virus.
>> Yeah, it says, as is said in the article, the vaccine is contaminated by the virus, but so what? The mere fact that the vaccine is contaminated doesn't necessarily mean that the vaccine is THE SOURCE of the virus found in mesotheliomas.

(E) In Finland, where the polio vaccine was never contaminated, samples do not contain SV40.
>> No contaminated vaccine, no SV40 in tissue samples. Good.

Kudos [?]: 215 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 794

Kudos [?]: 75 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2005, 21:12
E it is!
_________________

Cheers, Rahul.

Kudos [?]: 75 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Posts: 331

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2005, 21:18
I find this confusing because the researchers are making two claims:

1) SV40 is a contributing factor in cases of mesothelioma.

2) the contaminated polio vaccine is the source of the SV40 virus found in mesotheliomas in the United States.

The OA is E. But here's what's confusing me. Statemnent E only supports the second claim, while actually weakening the first. Because if mesotheliomas are found in Finland without SV40, then it implies that SV40 is less likely to be a cause of mesothelioma, doesn't it?

The question never specifies which hypothesis we're supposed to strengthen. I guess that's what's throwing me. Can anyone shed any light?

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 20 Sep 2005
Posts: 1016

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2005, 17:28
I choose E.

CLF,
The way that I think ( hindsight ) is that the samples that option E talks about are polio vaccine samples and not meso samples. Subtle !

coffeeloverfreak wrote:
I find this confusing because the researchers are making two claims:

1) SV40 is a contributing factor in cases of mesothelioma.

2) the contaminated polio vaccine is the source of the SV40 virus found in mesotheliomas in the United States.

The OA is E. But here's what's confusing me. Statemnent E only supports the second claim, while actually weakening the first. Because if mesotheliomas are found in Finland without SV40, then it implies that SV40 is less likely to be a cause of mesothelioma, doesn't it?

The question never specifies which hypothesis we're supposed to strengthen. I guess that's what's throwing me. Can anyone shed any light?

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 840

Kudos [?]: 86 [0], given: 1

GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2005, 21:22
lhotseface wrote:
I choose E.

CLF,
The way that I think ( hindsight ) is that the samples that option E talks about are polio vaccine samples and not meso samples. Subtle !

coffeeloverfreak wrote:
I find this confusing because the researchers are making two claims:

1) SV40 is a contributing factor in cases of mesothelioma.

2) the contaminated polio vaccine is the source of the SV40 virus found in mesotheliomas in the United States.

The OA is E. But here's what's confusing me. Statemnent E only supports the second claim, while actually weakening the first. Because if mesotheliomas are found in Finland without SV40, then it implies that SV40 is less likely to be a cause of mesothelioma, doesn't it?

The question never specifies which hypothesis we're supposed to strengthen. I guess that's what's throwing me. Can anyone shed any light?

good hindsight, lhotseface, but that still doesn't answer CLF's question or does it?

Kudos [?]: 86 [0], given: 1

Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Posts: 331

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2005, 21:28
But if E is talking about polio vaccines, then I still don't get how it strengthens the hypothesis.

In fact, this makes it worse, because not only does it not strengthen the first hypothesis (that mesotheliomas are caused partially by SV40 virus) but it also doesn't strengthen the second hypothesis (that contaminated polio vaccine is the source of SV40 virus in mesotheliomas).

Help???

Kudos [?]: 194 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1112

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2005, 01:39
it was between B and E for me

I go for C

Kudos [?]: 51 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 19 Jul 2005
Posts: 54

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

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2005, 03:54
coffeeloverfreak 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 researcher's 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 do not contain SV40.

The assumption is no contamination of vaccine, no SV40 and hence will not become source of virus SV40.

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

Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2005
Posts: 86

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

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2005, 05:57
C for me.

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

Director
Joined: 09 Jul 2005
Posts: 589

Kudos [?]: 64 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2005, 09:29
IMO E

Kudos [?]: 64 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1700

Kudos [?]: 474 [0], given: 0

Location: Dhaka

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2005, 11:01
my pick was C too.....
_________________

hey ya......

Kudos [?]: 474 [0], given: 0

21 Sep 2005, 11:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Although exposure to asbestos is the primary cause of

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.