Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
05 May 2007, 08:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
Because ethylene dibromide, a chemical used to fumigate grain, was blamed for the high rate of nerve damage suffered by people who work in grain-processing plants, many such plants switched to other chemical fumigants 2 years ago. Since then, however, the percentage of workers at these plants who were newly diagnosed with nerve damage has not dropped significantly. Therefore, either ethylene dibromide was wrongly blamed or else the new chemicals also cause nerve damage.
Which of the following is an assumption on which argument depends?
A. If the new chemicals cause nerve damage, the nerve damage caused would be different from any nerve damage that ethylene dibromide may cause.
B. There are no chemical fumigants that are completely safe for workers in grain-processing plants.
C. If ethylene dibromide causes nerve damage, it does not take 2 years or longer for that damage to become detectable.
D. Workers at grain-processing plants typically continue to work there even after being diagnosed with nerve damage.
E. Workers at grain-processing plants that still use ethylene dibromide continue to have a high rate of nere damage.
I chose C, but basically I kind of guessed.
Which of the following is an assumption on which argument depends?
A. If the new chemicals cause nerve damage, the nerve damage caused would be different from any nerve damage that ethylene dibromide may cause.
B. There are no chemical fumigants that are completely safe for workers in grain-processing plants.
C. If ethylene dibromide causes nerve damage, it does not take 2 years or longer for that damage to become detectable.
D. Workers at grain-processing plants typically continue to work there even after being diagnosed with nerve damage.
E. Workers at grain-processing plants that still use ethylene dibromide continue to have a high rate of nere damage.
I chose C, but basically I kind of guessed.
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 Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
05 May 2007, 08:49
Kudos
Bookmarks
I think your answer (C) is correct. If the new chemical could cause the nerve damage, then the former chemical is not responsible, therefore it doesn't take the old chemical 2 years or more the become detectible.
A. Out of scope, we don't know and it is irrelevant
B. Irrelevant
C. Yes, either the cemicals are not responsible or the new chemical is the source, because the first is not used for 2 years. Best answer!
D. Irrelevant, blablabla
E. True, but irrelevant
A. Out of scope, we don't know and it is irrelevant
B. Irrelevant
C. Yes, either the cemicals are not responsible or the new chemical is the source, because the first is not used for 2 years. Best answer!
D. Irrelevant, blablabla
E. True, but irrelevant
