It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 17:13

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

Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 178

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Location: Hyderabad
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2005, 11:11
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:41) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

1. The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors.

-----

2. Which of the following inferences about the conse-quences of instituting the new tests is best supported by the passage above?

(A) The incidence of new cases of NANB hepatitis is likely to go up by 10 percent.
(B) Donations made by patients specifically for their own use are likely to become less frequent.
(C) The demand for blood from blood banks is likely to fluctuate more strongly.
(D) The blood supplies available from blood banks are likely to go down.
(E) The number of prospective first-time donors is likely to go up by 5 percent.

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 178

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Location: Hyderabad
CR - National Family Policy [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2005, 11:12
Please give your reasons as well

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 198

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

Location: New York
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2005, 12:29
It is a tough one...

Last edited by celiaXDN on 26 Sep 2005, 12:56, edited 2 times in total.

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 211

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2005, 12:52
2. easy D because less number of donors
1. my guess is A; the reason why still 10% of donors still supply hepatitis is bacause they may not have other infections

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 984

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

Location: South Korea
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2005, 16:56
My guess is (E) and (A).


1. (E)

The author specifies a number - 10%. If the donors with NANB-contaminated blood donate blood more frequently, it won't be 10% any more. Therore, the average frequency has to remain unchanged.

2. (A)

It is (A) because the article is talking about NANB incidence...

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

SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1700

Kudos [?]: 473 [0], given: 0

Location: Dhaka
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2005, 00:53
I got C and A.
_________________

hey ya......

Kudos [?]: 473 [0], given: 0

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2004
Posts: 1112

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

Location: London, UK
Schools: Tuck'08
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2005, 01:00
E and D

but looking at your answers guys and I feel that the second one should be A. Nevermind, I keep my original choice :P

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

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Posts: 330

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 12

GMAT ToolKit User
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2005, 15:35
A and A for me.

The first half of the argument talks about screening. The conclusion states that "about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood." If the contaminated donors need to supply blood the author is assuming that there are no other screening tests and these guys can donate blood. If we negate A, these donors can be screened out and there might be less than 10% of the hepatitis guys who actually donate blood.


GA

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 12

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 23 Jun 2005
Posts: 840

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

GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2005, 19:29
I'll go with gamjatang on this one too, but these questions have me in tangles. :roll:

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Aug 2005
Posts: 102

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2005, 22:58
E and D for me....

For the second question A seems to be wrong as it states that the incidence is likely to go up by 10%....I think this 10% is not justified....

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

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2005, 05:57
A and D.

In 1. E is wrong, the argument states what percentage of donors have the disease, regardless of how often they donate. E is irrelevant.
D is wrong, we do not know wether donors are the only persons infected by the disease, we cannot tell wether D is right.
A is right because if there are 15% donors infected, 5% are ruled out by the new test and still 10% are doning, it means that none of them has been ruled out by any other cause.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 478

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Location: Chicago
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2005, 06:13
1) A, if the donors with NANB have other disease in large percentage, then their blood sample will be rejected for that and 10% will not qualify...

2) D, is the only sensible choice, since they can figure out 5% of donors have NANB and cannot donate, it will surely hurt the supply to the blood banks..
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Posts: 3

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 02:19
I go for 1.A and 2.D.

My reasons are same as ranga41's.

BTW, what's the OA?

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

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 178

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Location: Hyderabad
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 03:02
The OAs are E and A :(

For first one, even I'm not sure how its E !! can some one explain it why?
I dont have the OE with me.

KRishna

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Aug 2005
Posts: 102

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

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 03:24
I don't agree with the second one.

IF 10% of the blood donars supply NANB contaminated blood , the number of new incidence is not necessary increase by 10%........

Suppose in a population there are 100 NANB contaminated people every year.
Out of that X went for blood donation.....two third of them gave the blood so it means the new incidence will be increased by two third X....how it can be 10%...it can be any.....

Pleqase if anyone can explain.....

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

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2005
Posts: 134

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 03:59
I do not agree with any of the answers,Which is the source of the questions?

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 178

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Location: Hyderabad
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 04:15
source of these questions is "GMAT语法"

Now, not sure what this means.....probably, from some chinese site

wud be great if some one finds out what this is??

Even I'm not sure if the answers they gave are authentic..moveover, none of them have explanations...

KRishna

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Jun 2005
Posts: 211

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 06:23
crisnas wrote:
The OAs are E and A :(

For first one, even I'm not sure how its E !! can some one explain it why?
I dont have the OE with me.

KRishna


Please check the OA, they are A & D

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2005
Posts: 178

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Location: Hyderabad
 [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 08:29
Hi Guys,

sorry guys,
Seems like the answers with me are wrong :( ( I always suspected thier correctness)

gotoknow3, thanks for the update...

Thanks,
KRishna

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 43

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

Re: CR - NANB hepatitis [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2005, 09:54
crisnas wrote:
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

1. The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors.

-----

2. Which of the following inferences about the conse-quences of instituting the new tests is best supported by the passage above?

(A) The incidence of new cases of NANB hepatitis is likely to go up by 10 percent.
(B) Donations made by patients specifically for their own use are likely to become less frequent.
(C) The demand for blood from blood banks is likely to fluctuate more strongly.
(D) The blood supplies available from blood banks are likely to go down.
(E) The number of prospective first-time donors is likely to go up by 5 percent.


1. I go with E b/c it assumes equal contribution from all donors.
2. I go with B b/c the stimulus is about donatiosn.
OA???

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

Re: CR - NANB hepatitis   [#permalink] 29 Sep 2005, 09:54

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 21 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB

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


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®.