It is currently 17 Dec 2017, 00:24

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Aug 2008
Posts: 229

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 0

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Nov 2008, 07:18
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  85% (hard)

Question Stats:

47% (01:02) correct 53% (01:19) wrong based on 454 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking antipsychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years. That is greater than the increase in the number of adults taking antipsychotic medicines during the same period.

Lucy: But the use of antipsychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on antipsychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children.

Lucy’s argument relies on the assumption that ______.

(A) normal levels of antipsychotic drug use are rarely exceeded.

(B) the percentage of adults taking antipsychotic medication is always higher than the percentage of children on such medication.

(C) the use of antipsychotic medication in children is no different from the use of such medications in adults.

(D) Antoine is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents.

(E) a rapid increase in the number of children taking antipsychotic drugs generates more fear of random violence by adolescents than does knowledge of the absolute number of children on such medications.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by hazelnut on 23 Sep 2017, 22:19, edited 2 times in total.
Edited the question.

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 0

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1402

Kudos [?]: 454 [0], given: 1

Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Nov 2008, 14:08
I m torn between B & C.

What is the Conclusion? To me this argument does not state the conclusion. I thought that it was number of adults per 1000 using APD is > number of children per 1000 using APD.

If I negate B, the % age is not always higher that means the conclusion of adults > children will fall apart.

What is the OA and OE?

Kudos [?]: 454 [0], given: 1

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 12 Oct 2008
Posts: 538

Kudos [?]: 628 [0], given: 2

Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Dec 2008, 20:17
IMO C....B is the same as what Lucy is saying, I guess Lucy is comparing both stats because she is assuming the same effect of the APD on both adults and children...thererfore I will go with C

Kudos [?]: 628 [0], given: 2

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Aug 2008
Posts: 229

Kudos [?]: 55 [1], given: 0

Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Dec 2008, 00:29
1
This post received
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
OA: C.


OE:Antoine is alarmed that the number of children on antipsychotic medication has increased by 73 percent. Lucy begins her reply with “but,” indicating that she is about to counter either Antoine’s facts or his alarm; she accepts his facts but addresses his alarm. If the number of children taking antipsychotic medication is still within the normal range, the rate at which the total number has increased is not cause for alarm. Lucy uses information about adult use of such drugs to imply that the lower rate of antipsychotic drug use in children must also be normal.

(A) Lucy’s argument is about a normal level of antipsychotic drug use; how rarely or frequently that level is exceeded is outside the scope of her argument.

(B) Lucy uses the percentage of adults taking antipsychotic medication to illustrate normal levels of the use of such drugs. It happens that the percentage of children taking such medication last year was lower than the percentage of adults, but her argument does not require the assumption that that will always be the case.

(C) CORRECT. If there is no difference between children and adults on the matter of antipsychotic drug use, then Lucy can legitimately use information about adult use of such drugs to imply that the lower rate of antipsychotic drug use by children must also be normal. On the other hand, if this assumption were not valid – for example, if children responded differently to the drugs, or if the rate of the drug use by adults is considered too high for children – then Lucy’s statement would not be enough to address Antoine’s alarm.

(D) Lucy’s argument is not based on the figure Antoine cites and does not assume its accuracy or inaccuracy. Rather, her argument uses the relative adult and child rates of antipsychotic drug use to point out that Antoine’s statistic is not inconsistent with a normal rate of such use in children.

(E) The fear of random violence by adolescents is not part of Lucy’s argument; this statement is irrelevant.

Kudos [?]: 55 [1], given: 0

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 116

Kudos [?]: 119 [1], given: 0

Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Dec 2008, 11:48
1
This post received
KUDOS
I think the explanation needs to be clarified. Lucy's conclusion, which is not directly stated, is: It is NOT alarming that antipsychotic drug use among children increased more than among adults over the past 4 years. (Note that you have to read the other person's argument in order to see what her conclusion is. This is fairly common in this type of question.) Her single piece of evidence for this conclusion is the fact that the rate of antipsychotic drug use among children is still much lower than the rate among adults.

What assumption does her argument depend on? Clearly, it depends on assuming that the "normal" or "appropriate" rate of use of this type of medication is the same for children for adults -- or at least, that the "normal" rate for children is not lower. Choice C provides this assumption.

Choice A is irrelevant. The argument turns on what the normal level for children IS. If the normal level is actually much lower than the level for adults, then the actual level of use may exceed it, and Antoine is correct. If the normal level is about the same, then the actual level probably doesn't exceed it, and Lucy is correct. So either the normal level is exceeded or it isn't, regardless of A.

Choice B is the opposite of what is needed. It says that the level for adults is "always" higher. If this is true, then it contradicts the assumption that Lucy needs, which is that the level should be about the same.
_________________

Grumpy

Kaplan Canada LSAT/GMAT/GRE teacher and tutor

Kudos [?]: 119 [1], given: 0

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 578

Kudos [?]: 568 [0], given: 75

Concentration: International Business, Technology
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V27
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Feb 2015, 06:18
grumpyoldman wrote:
I think the explanation needs to be clarified. Lucy's conclusion, which is not directly stated, is: It is NOT alarming that antipsychotic drug use among children increased more than among adults over the past 4 years. (Note that you have to read the other person's argument in order to see what her conclusion is. This is fairly common in this type of question.) Her single piece of evidence for this conclusion is the fact that the rate of antipsychotic drug use among children is still much lower than the rate among adults.

What assumption does her argument depend on? Clearly, it depends on assuming that the "normal" or "appropriate" rate of use of this type of medication is the same for children for adults -- or at least, that the "normal" rate for children is not lower. Choice C provides this assumption.

Choice A is irrelevant. The argument turns on what the normal level for children IS. If the normal level is actually much lower than the level for adults, then the actual level of use may exceed it, and Antoine is correct. If the normal level is about the same, then the actual level probably doesn't exceed it, and Lucy is correct. So either the normal level is exceeded or it isn't, regardless of A.

Choice B is the opposite of what is needed. It says that the level for adults is "always" higher. If this is true, then it contradicts the assumption that Lucy needs, which is that the level should be about the same.


OE :
Antoine is alarmed that the number of children on antipsychotic medication has increased by 73 percent. Lucy begins her reply with “but,” indicating that she is about to counter either Antoine’s facts or his alarm; she accepts his facts but addresses his alarm. If the number of children taking antipsychotic medication is still within the normal range, the rate at which the total number has increased is not cause for alarm. Lucy shows that even though the total number of children on such medications has increased, children still take antipsychotic drugs at an even lower rate than do adults, and the current adult rate is considered normal.
(B) CORRECT. This statement properly identifies the conclusion to which Lucy’s argument is leading.
Hence B .
_________________

Thanks,
Lucky

_______________________________________________________
Kindly press the Image to appreciate my post !! :-)

Kudos [?]: 568 [0], given: 75

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Feb 2015
Posts: 28

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 244

Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Feb 2015, 05:38
Lucy: But the use of antipsychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on antipsychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children.

Should be C because Lucy is trying to show that the use of drugs in children is somehow okay (or lower) compared to adults. Hence, she must assume that the use of drugs in adults and children is the same.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 244

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Mar 2016
Posts: 41

Kudos [?]: 16 [1], given: 112

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Krannert '20
GMAT 1: 640 Q50 V26
GRE 1: 313 Q166 V147
GPA: 3.3
WE: Other (Consulting)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Sep 2017, 11:26
1
This post received
KUDOS
Antoine is alarmed that the number of children on antipsychotic medication has increased by 73 percent. Lucy begins her reply with “but,” indicating that she is about to counter either Antoine’s facts or his alarm; she accepts his facts but addresses his alarm. If the number of children taking antipsychotic medication is still within the normal range, the rate at which the total number has increased is not cause for alarm. Lucy uses information about adult use of such drugs to imply that the lower rate of antipsychotic drug use in children must also be normal.

(A) Lucy’s argument is about a normal level of antipsychotic drug use; how rarely or frequently that level is exceeded is outside the scope of her argument.

(B) Lucy uses the percentage of adults taking antipsychotic medication to illustrate normal levels of the use of such drugs. It happens that the percentage of children taking such medication last year was lower than the percentage of adults, but her argument does not require the assumption that that will always be the case.

(C) CORRECT. If there is no difference between children and adults on the matter of antipsychotic drug use, then Lucy can legitimately use information about adult use of such drugs to imply that the lower rate of antipsychotic drug use by children must also be normal. On the other hand, if this assumption were not valid – for example, if children responded differently to the drugs, or if the rate of the drug use by adults is considered too high for children – then Lucy’s statement would not be enough to address Antoine’s alarm.

(D) Lucy’s argument is not based on the figure Antoine cites and does not assume its accuracy or inaccuracy. Rather, her argument uses the relative adult and child rates of antipsychotic drug use to point out that Antoine’s statistic is not inconsistent with a normal rate of such use in children.

(E) The fear of random violence by adolescents is not part of Lucy’s argument; this statement is irrelevant.
_________________

9 Kudos left to unlock next level. Help me by Contributing one for cause :) .. Please

My GMAT experience ... https://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-bad-experience-640-need-suggestions-on-verbal-improvement-251308.html

Kudos [?]: 16 [1], given: 112

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 30 Aug 2017
Posts: 89

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 181

Location: Korea, Republic of
GMAT 1: 660 Q51 V26
GPA: 3.68
Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Dec 2017, 21:28
C : the use of antipsychotic medication in children is no different from the use of such medications in adults.



It`s neither true nor right assumption.

"no difference" is both not important and irrelevant in this conclusion.

Point is that the rate of child is "lower" than that of adult.



How could C is the right answer.

Kudos [?]: 2 [0], given: 181

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 07 Jun 2015
Posts: 87

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 9

WE: Design (Aerospace and Defense)
Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Dec 2017, 02:53
Quote:
(C) the use of antipsychotic medication in children is no different from the use of such medications in adults.

Come on guys...what do you mean by .. is no differet.... It is pointing to the percentage of kids under drugs per 1000 kids.It can never be C..the best option is B but "always" in that is not a good word though

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 9

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 09 Mar 2017
Posts: 259

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 469

Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Organizational Behavior
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Dec 2017, 07:10
What's the source of the question?
_________________

------------------------------
"Trust the timing of your life"
Hit Kudus if this has helped you get closer to your goal, and also to assist others save time. Tq :)

Kudos [?]: 93 [0], given: 469

Re: Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo   [#permalink] 03 Dec 2017, 07:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.