City Official: At City Hospital, uninsured patients tend to have short

"the uninsured patients are mot receiving proper medical care".

This is the conclusion of the hospital's critics.




"this conclusion is almost certainly false".
This is the conclusion of the city official.


A. The first states the conclusion of the city official's argument; the second provides support for that conclusion. You can eliminate this after the first sentence because the first is the conclusion of the critics not the city official.


B. The first is used to support the conclusion of the city official's argument; the second states that conclusion. Again you can eliminate this after the first sentence because the first is not used to support the city official's argument. The first is actually the critic's conclusion.


C. The first was used to support the conclusion drawn by hospital critics; the second states the position that the city official's argument opposes. The second states the city official's argument, not the argument he opposes. Eliminate this.

D. The first was used to support the conclusion drawn by hospital critics; the second provides support for the conclusion of the city official's argument. The first part is right, but the second certainly does not support the city official's argument because it IS the argument.


E. The first states the position that the city official's argument opposes; the second states the conclusion of the city official's argument. The first is the critic's conclusion and we know the city official opposes this position. Therefore, the first part of this is correct. The second part does in fact state the city official's argument. So this is correct too.

E it is

A. The first states the argument of the critic, not the official. OUT
B. The first is the critic's conclusion, not a supporting statement. OUT
C. The first is not a supporting statement, it is a conclusion. OUT
D. The first is not a supporting statement, it is a conclusion. OUT
E. The first is the critic's conclusion, which is indeed opposed by the official in the next sentence. The second does in fact state the position of the official, which is that the critic is wrong. CORRECT

Easy "E" what is the question?

Critics of the hospital have concluded that the uninsured patients are most receiving proper medical care. -> this is a position. Whose? CRITICS

However, this conclusion is almost certainly false. -> This is a position. Whose? OFFICER

B,C,D gone. E is the answer

+1 for E.

A beginner Bold face question.

Crick

Bumping for review and further discussion
New GmatClub project Click here

D. Same as C.
E. CORRECT. This properly states our summary above.
Note: if the argument quotes someone else in its introduction, it is extremely likely that the whole purpose of the argument is to take down that person's quote, or to rebut that person's argument.
That's exactly what happened here: the argument states what the critics have said, and then the argument's main conclusion exists solely to contradict what the critics said.

City Official: At City Hospital, uninsured patients tend to have shorter stays and fewer procedures performed than do insured patients, even though insured patients, on average, have slightly less serious medical problems at the time of admission to the hospital than uninsured patients have. Critics of the hospital have concluded that the uninsured patients are most receiving proper medical care. However, this conclusion is almost certainly false. Careful investigation has recently shown two things: insured patients have much longer stays in the hospital than necessary, and they tend to have more procedures performed than are medically necessary.

Hi

While the answer can be determined from the argument as it is given, I suppose the first BF is somewhat weird. Is it really correct? Do the critics really speak about "uninsured patients"? The author opposes the conclusion, but he or she goes on to talk about "insured patients". I aren't sure whether taking that support that address a different group, the author's reasoning stands firm. Or I am missing out something here?

Thanks

GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo gmat1393 GMATNinja nightblade354

You might be overthinking this one... or maybe I just don't fully understand your question?

We are told that "critics of the hospital have concluded that the uninsured patients are most receiving proper medical care." This gives us the position of the hospital critics. The author then states, "this conclusion is almost certainly false." So, just from that, we know that the city official opposes the position of the hospital critics.

The city official then provides evidence to support the statement that the conclusion of the hospital critics is almost certainly false: "Careful investigation has recently shown two things: insured patients have much longer stays in the hospital than necessary, and they tend to have more procedures performed than are medically necessary."

The statement that the conclusion of the hospital critics is almost certainly false IS the conclusion of the city official's argument.

I hope that helps!
_________________

SajjadAhmad / nightblade354 can you correct the language of the question? Should be "The uninsured patients are not receiving proper medical care".

Updated. Thank you for pointing this out.
_________________

The two boldface portions are part of two sentences. A closer look at the portions of these sentences that are not highlighted indicates the nature of the boldface portions.

The first boldface portion is part of a sentence that begins by stating “Critics of the hospital have concluded…”. This indicates that the first boldface portion is the conclusion drawn by the critics of the hospital.

The second boldface portion is part of a sentence that begins with the word “However”. This word indicates that the statement contradicts the previous sentence. This boldface portion is followed by information elicited by an investigation. So, the second boldface portion is the conclusion drawn by the City Official.

As can be seen from the analysis above, the first boldface portion is the conclusion of the critics, not the City official. So, Option A can be eliminated.

The two boldface portions do not support each other. The second boldface portion clearly states that the conclusion drawn by the critics is false. So, Option B can be eliminated.

The first boldface portion doesn’t merely support the conclusion; it states the conclusion. So, Option C can also be eliminated.

Option D also states that the first highlighted portion supports the conclusion, but it actually is the conclusion drawn by the critics. The second boldface portion is the conclusion drawn by the City Official. So, Option D can be eliminated.

Option E clearly states the role played by the two boldface portions.

Therefore, E is the most appropriate option.

Jayanthi Kumar.
_________________

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.
_________________