It is currently 21 Feb 2018, 03:25

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

Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles

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

Hide Tags

1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 12 Nov 2017
Posts: 84
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V28
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
Reviews Badge
Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jan 2018, 07:56
1
This post received
KUDOS
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

35% (01:47) correct 65% (01:49) wrong based on 69 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.

A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos

Please give me kudos.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by ImAnkitKaushik on 08 Jan 2018, 09:18, edited 1 time in total.
Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Math Expert
User avatar
D
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 5658
Re: Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jan 2018, 08:41
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
ImAnkitKaushik wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.

A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos

Please give me kudos.


hi..

you have missed out on word nanoparticles, otherwise there is no reason for nanoparticles to be part of almost all choices..

Now the question..

A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution
that does not make paint more or less harmful and also does not effect the harm done by fumigators

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services
Close but 'mostly' means there may be other who are neutral but still agree to opposition

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone
this means that the harm being done becomes even more when fumigation is done, so the objection is not valid...CORRECT

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos
Out of context

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos
strengthens the opposition

C
_________________

Absolute modulus :http://gmatclub.com/forum/absolute-modulus-a-better-understanding-210849.html#p1622372
Combination of similar and dissimilar things : http://gmatclub.com/forum/topic215915.html


BANGALORE/-

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 12 Nov 2017
Posts: 84
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V28
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
Reviews Badge
Re: Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jan 2018, 09:19
Thanks chetan2u for pointing it out. I've edited the post.
1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 885
CAT Tests
Re: Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jan 2018, 13:54
1
This post received
KUDOS
ImAnkitKaushik wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.

A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos

Please give me kudos.


Hi ImAnkitKaushik,

Please take care of 1 thing bro: mention the source of the question as it helps :)

Secondly, I don't agree with the OA. It should be B. We are worried about the impact of Chlorpyrifos and we are asked to ignore nanoparticles. Now WHY will I consider the impact of both ??

For example: I am told that smoking makes you look cool but it is injurious to health. But someone else comes and says that alcohol makes you look more cool. Now my friend says that ignore the "alcohol" suggestion. Will you assume that the combined effect of alcohol and smoking is more bad than smoking itself? NO.You need a solid reason to ignore the second argument. But if someone comes and tells me that ignore "alcohol" because those people are trying to make an addict then I would definitely think that yes, something is fishy here.

I just can't accept that OA=C.
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Helpful links:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 12 Nov 2017
Posts: 84
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V28
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V35
Reviews Badge
Re: Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jan 2018, 20:42
gmatexam439 wrote:
Please take care of 1 thing bro: mention the source of the question as it helps :)

Secondly, I don't agree with the OA. It should be B. We are worried about the impact of Chlorpyrifos and we are asked to ignore nanoparticles. Now WHY will I consider the impact of both ??

For example: I am told that smoking makes you look cool but it is injurious to health. But someone else comes and says that alcohol makes you look more cool. Now my friend says that ignore the "alcohol" suggestion. Will you assume that the combined effect of alcohol and smoking is more bad than smoking itself? NO.You need a solid reason to ignore the second argument. But if someone comes and tells me that ignore "alcohol" because those people are trying to make an addict then I would definitely think that yes, something is fishy here.

I just can't accept that OA=C.


Hey gmatexam439, the source is The Economist GMAT Test. Maybe experts can help you with OE. I also got this question wrong, so came to the forum for more discussion on the answer.
1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 885
CAT Tests
Re: Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jan 2018, 08:28
1
This post received
KUDOS
ImAnkitKaushik wrote:
gmatexam439 wrote:
Please take care of 1 thing bro: mention the source of the question as it helps :)

Secondly, I don't agree with the OA. It should be B. We are worried about the impact of Chlorpyrifos and we are asked to ignore nanoparticles. Now WHY will I consider the impact of both ??

For example: I am told that smoking makes you look cool but it is injurious to health. But someone else comes and says that alcohol makes you look more cool. Now my friend says that ignore the "alcohol" suggestion. Will you assume that the combined effect of alcohol and smoking is more bad than smoking itself? NO.You need a solid reason to ignore the second argument. But if someone comes and tells me that ignore "alcohol" because those people are trying to make an addict then I would definitely think that yes, something is fishy here.

I just can't accept that OA=C.


Hey gmatexam439, the source is The Economist GMAT Test. Maybe experts can help you with OE. I also got this question wrong, so came to the forum for more discussion on the answer.


Hi ImAnkitKaushik,

I would suggest you to maintain distance from Economist. I don't even read its questions. They are not very good.

As for this question I will forget that I ever saw this one :-D

Regards
_________________

Kudos if my post helps!

Helpful links:
1. Useful Formulae, Concepts and Tricks-Quant
2. e-GMAT's ALL SC Compilation
3. LSAT RC compilation
4. Actual LSAT CR collection by Broal
5. QOTD RC (Carcass)
6. Challange OG RC

Re: Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles   [#permalink] 09 Jan 2018, 08:28
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles

  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®.