Antibiotics are chemical substances that kill or inhibit the growth of

Hi kkrrsshh. OE for 2 and 3.Hope this helps

2.
This is a GMAT inference question, which means that the correct answer is not
explicitly stated in the passage, but can be reasonably concluded or deduced based
on the given information. The correct choice is always a likely or probable
conclusion: if an answer choice requires you to assume too much or make a large
leap of faith, it is incorrect.
(A) We are not given any information as to the government’s standards regarding
sanitation. Although the passage states that antibiotics are used “to compensate for
overcrowded or unsanitary conditions,” the word “unsanitary” could refer to a wide
range of conditions considered unsanitary by the author and not necessarily those
that do not meet government standards. In addition, the fact that antibiotics are
“routinely” administered to compensate for such conditions could imply that such
conditions described as “unsanitary” by the author may be the norm and may
actually fall within government guidelines.
(B) The passage does not state that non-therapeutic use of antibiotics is the sole
cause of antibiotic resistance. Hence, it is not reasonable to conclude that halting
such use would prevent new types of resistant bacteria from developing.
(C) The passage says nothing to imply that conditions for European livestock and
poultry are generally better than those for their American counterparts.
(D) While this may be true in general, the passage does not state anything from
which such an inference can be made. It is not reasonable to conclude that hospitals
are better learning to cope with the problem simply because the problem is
becoming worse and they are forced to deal with it.
(E) CORRECT. In the first paragraph, the passage discusses how antibiotic resistant
bacteria are becoming a problem for the treatment of infectious diseases in humans.
The third paragraph, however, discusses a practice that promotes the spread of
antibiotic resistance in animals, and the conclusion of the passage calls for the ban
of this specific practice. In addition, in the third paragraph, the author makes a point
to specifically mention that some of those antibiotics are used to treat humans. If it
were not possible for the resistant bacteria in animals to infect humans, then there
would be no link between the animal bacteria and the author’s concern for human
health; the policy that is subsequently advocated would be moot. Hence, it is a
reasonable inference that antibiotic resistant bacteria in livestock and poultry can
indeed be spread to humans.
3.
While it is helpful to know that the dictionary definition of the adjective “prophylactic”
is “acting to defend against or prevent something, especially disease; protective,”
this knowledge is not necessary; the intended meaning of the phrase “prophylactic
measure” can be inferred from the context of the passage.
The beginning of the first sentence of the third paragraph specifically points out that
the antibiotics are used “not as a cure for ongoing maladies” and the last sentence of
the paragraph describes such use as “non-therapeutic.” In addition, the phrase “to
compensate for … unsanitary conditions” implies that the antibiotics were used to
counteract an environment replete with bacteria. Hence, it is reasonable to infer that
the antibiotics were applied as a preventive measure to protect the animals from
catching an infectious disease in such an environment.
(A) The passage specifically points out that the antibiotics are not used “as a cure for
ongoing maladies” and describes such use as “non-therapeutic.”
(B) The passage is not concerned with genetic diseases.
(C) CORRECT. Since the use of antibiotics in the farm industry is specifically
described to be “non-therapeutic,” it cannot be used as a curative measure and,
therefore, is most likely used as a pre-emptive measure in order to prevent or protect
the animals from developing infectious diseases.
(D) The passage states that the antibiotics are administered to the animals in their
feed. Hence, it is clearly not used as a surface disinfectant.
(E) The antibiotics are orally administered to the animals in their feed. There is
nothing in the passage to suggest that a “physical barrier” is involved in any way.

We can answer question #7 by reading the second paragraph only.

(A) If bacteria did not contain antibiotic-resistant plasmids, then they would be incapable of developing resistance to antibiotics.

Refereed text:

Most commonly, bacteria share with each other genetic material called resistance plasmids; these shared plasmids, which contain the genetic code enabling antibiotic resistance

A is extreme to consider.

(B) Human involvement is necessary in order for bacteria to develop resistance to antibiotics.

Referred text:

In the absence of human involvement, however, bacteria in the wild rarely develop resistance to antibiotics.

The text above shows that there still chances even without the involvement of humans. This is also extreme answer choice.

(C) The United States should ban the use of antibiotics for non-therapeutic uses.

Out of context

(D) If bacteria were not able to adapt quickly to new environments, it would be more difficult for bacteria to develop resistance to antibiotics.

Perfect:

Referred text:

Bacteria can develop antibiotic resistance because they have the ability to adapt quickly to new environmental conditions.

(E) Critically ill patients with infections due to antibiotic-resistant bacteria are more likely to die.

Extreme.

Answer: D

Hi Guys!

Great passage, got all of the questions right but the last one. I'm confused -

How is D the answer? D explains how the resistance trait spreads and not how it is developed. IMO option C explains how the overuse of anti-biotics causes bacteria to adapt and thus develop this resistance.

Your thoughts?

Hi deep14,

As the entire passage mentions about the bacteria within the animal. The reason for elimination of E, D can't be by considering "coming from outside" as literally from outside the animal. I think knowing the meaning of 'prophylactic' would make it convenient for anyone to solve this question. If the meaning is not know, one has to closely look at the part (those sentence/s)of the passage.

Bunuel Skywalker18 I just got two questions we can add to this post.

According to the passage, why are antibiotic-resistant bacteria problematic for humans?

(A) Antibiotics are no longer effective in treating disease.

(B) Some diseases are harder to treat because some antibiotics are less able to fulfill their prescribed function.

(C) Bacteria spread more easily in a hospital setting due to the close proximity of many patients who may harbor different bacteria.

(D) Bacteria can infect both humans and animals.

(E) Bacteria gain resistance via the exchange of plasmids.



Which of the following can be inferred about antibiotic-resistant bacteria?

(A) If bacteria did not contain antibiotic-resistant plasmids, then they would be incapable of developing resistance to antibiotics.

(B) Human involvement is necessary in order for bacteria to develop resistance to antibiotics.

(C) The United States should ban the use of antibiotics for non-therapeutic uses.

(D) If bacteria were not able to adapt quickly to new environments, it would be more difficult for bacteria to develop resistance to antibiotics.

(E) Critically ill patients with infections due to antibiotic-resistant bacteria are more likely to die.

GMATNinja
I have a query regarding question number 5

Since the question asks that "how the bacteria develops the drug resistance", the correct answer should be the one that specifies the initiating process of developing drug resistance. But the option D, which is OA, mentions how the whole strain of bacteria becomes drug resistant and that will happen once the process of drug resistance has already initiated.
I think the correct answer should be C.

I THOUGHT THE EXACT SAME THING, AND THEY MENTIONED THAT THEY NEED HUMAN INVOLVEMENT, SO... DUHHHH IT SHOULD BE THE ANSWER. BUT THERE'S THE SCIENCE IN OPTION D, MECHANISM DEFINED IN PARA 2

Yeh, I noticed that too. I don't think exam questions will have this kind of discrepancy.


P.S Can someone explain Q3 and how you reach the correct answer? Prophylactic is used for this like contraceptives and condoms. There's no clear evidence in passage to narrow down the option. How did people reach the option marked?

can anyone help explain Q7 i'm confused between C and D, I guess C is wrong because it says banning use for non-therapeutic uses, but passage only says europe banned use on animals, whereas C doesn't say anything like that whether only animals or humans. whereas D is clearly there in the passage and says this will make more difficult, not an extreme statement, so i guess D should be the answer,

anyone having better explanation for Q7?

Could someone please explain how the correct option for question 1 is D?

1. Based on the information in the passage, to which of the following practices would the author most likely be opposed?

A. Hospitals are hiring higher numbers of infectious disease specialists than ever before.
B. Many health insurance policies do not or only partially reimburse patients for prescriptions of the newest and most effective antibiotics.
C. The industrial farm industry contributes more than $100 million to incumbent members of Congress each year.
D. Physicians routinely prescribe antibiotics to patients with viral diseases, even though antibiotics have no effect on viruses.
E. Hospitals are enforcing more stringent “hand-hygiene” standards in an effort to reduce infections.

Barfi First, note that the wording in the stem, "would", signals that this is a hypothetical, and might not appear explicitly in the passage. This is sometimes referred to as an "Application" question type.

As always, we must understand what's being asked: what would the author "oppose"?

In the first paragraph, the author explains that antibiotics work against BACTERIA: "Antibiotics are chemical substances that kill or inhibit the growth of bacteria. The success of antibiotics against disease-causing bacteria is one of modern medicine’s great achievements."

However, D is talking about antibiotics being prescribed for "VIRAL diseases, even though antibiotics have no effect on viruses"; in other words, antibiotics do not work against viruses. Therefore, the author would oppose this practice.

GMATCoachBen Thank you so much for clarifying my doubt! I now understand the reasoning behind the correct answer option.

2.Based on the information in the passage, which of the following statements can be inferred?

A. Most industrial farms do not meet the standards for sanitation required by the United States government. (Key word is Most here. Nowhere does it say that MOST farms do not meet standards. This is TOO extreme. Eliminate)

B. If the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics were halted worldwide, there would be no new resistant strains of antibiotic resistant bacteria.
(Again, we are making too big of a leap in this question. Infer as little as possible)

C. European livestock and poultry are raised in more sanitary conditions than are those in the United States.
There is no such comparison mentioned. Just that Europeans banned the usage of antibiotics.

D. Hospitals are better learning to cope with the growing spread of antibiotic resistant bacteria.
Again, this is completely out of scope.

E. It is possible for antibiotic-resistant bacteria in animals to be passed on to humans.

There is a reason for the whole drama with the court is mentioned. That Europeans have already banned them and that USA should follow. The reason why there is so much concern is because humans are affected.

6. According to the passage, why are antibiotic-resistant bacteria problematic for humans?

(A) Antibiotics are no longer effective in treating disease.
(No, this is too extreme of an assumption. The passage states "many infectious diseases are now much more difficult to treat than they were just a few decades ago." Difficult is not equal to no longer effective in treating.

(B) Some diseases are harder to treat because some antibiotics are less able to fulfill their prescribed function.
Yes, difficult equates to harder.

(C) Bacteria spread more easily in a hospital setting due to the close proximity of many patients who may harbor different bacteria.
Out of scope.
(D) Bacteria can infect both humans and animals.
Does not mention in the passage. Out of scope. But even if it were true, the question is why is it problematic for humans. Because they can infect animals? does not make sense.

(E) Bacteria gain resistance via the exchange of plasmids.
But that is a mere fact. They can gain resistance in other ways and still it would be problematic. This is limited scope.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.