Last visit was: 20 Nov 2025, 05:26 It is currently 20 Nov 2025, 05:26
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
User avatar
CasperMonday
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Last visit: 06 Sep 2009
Posts: 80
Own Kudos:
737
 [1]
Given Kudos: 31
Posts: 80
Kudos: 737
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
nickesha
Joined: 02 Jul 2009
Last visit: 08 Sep 2011
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 12
Posts: 16
Kudos: 21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
CasperMonday
Joined: 20 Aug 2009
Last visit: 06 Sep 2009
Posts: 80
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 31
Posts: 80
Kudos: 737
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
11MBA
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Last visit: 17 Apr 2011
Posts: 108
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 108
Kudos: 159
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The answer should be A. Nothing else really makes sense. But I do agree that the official explanation is very confusing.

Here is how I see it. It's stated that perioral dermatilis rashes are believed to be caused by reactions to sodium laurel sulfate (SLS). Therefore it shouldn't be used by those who don't want to get perioral dermatilis. However, the premise of the arugument is that since some people don't get a rash right after using it then it must not be the cause of perioral dermatilis.

Answer A states since that many people do not necessarily develop a reaction right away, it is difficult to determine what was the cause of the rash. So a person could have used SLS but did not develop a rash right away, but instead developed the rash at a later time. Therefore SLS was still the cause of the rash even though the person did not develop perioral dermatilis right away which weakens the argument that if no rash is observed after using SLS then it does not cause perioral dermatilis.



Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
189 posts