GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 17 Jan 2020, 15:53

### 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

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

# During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1128
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 13 Jan 2020, 03:18
7
49
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

64% (01:42) correct 36% (01:59) wrong based on 1817 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis of those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.

Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?

(A) Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United States in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas

(B) Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths

(C) Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries

(D) Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths

(E) Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces

Originally posted by jaynayak on 17 Jun 2006, 11:36.
Last edited by Bunuel on 13 Jan 2020, 03:18, edited 5 times in total.
Edited the question.
Intern
Joined: 31 Mar 2014
Posts: 10
Concentration: Operations, General Management
Schools: IIMA (PGPX)
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2014, 09:00
2
3
uring the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis of those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.
Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?
Conclusion: It was not much dangerous to be overseas in army than it was to stay at home.
How he arrived at conclusion : Comparing deaths. (assuming that : Total population of united states is same as number of people serving overseas in army) .
Weaken : We can weaken this by saying that percentage is deaths is way lesser among civilians than it is among armed forces.
KEY: averages, percentage increases, proportion questions you can't simply compare numerators. Death rate=(No.of.deaths in a target group)/ (total number of people) .

(A) Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United States in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas
This completely ignores civilians. ofs
(B) Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths
This would have been correct answer if it had not have the word "difference" . % is the way to compare but not the difference in percentage.
(C) Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries
source of death is out of scope
(D) Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths
This is correct comparision. For every 1000 civilians how many have died. Compare it with how many have died serving in army overseas
(E) Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces.
Again talking about only one side of the comparison that is about army.
##### General Discussion
Director
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 844
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2006, 12:41
2
I agree with D is very sure it is likely to be correct

(A) nobody adds those deaths... the argument is about how likely it is to die overseas or in the US... not armed forces in US though
(B) nothing said about the difference
(C) out of scope... reasons are irrelevant
(D) the total number of civilians is far greater than the number of armed forces overseas, therefore comparing deaths is useless if you don't not the total for each group
(E) again, out of score... reasons are not the case of the argument.
Director
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 802
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2011, 03:45
2
1
Consider two groups A and B.
In A 5 members have died and in B 8 members have died.
Now its obvious to say group is safer.

However, in group A there were 10 people. rate = 5/10 = 50%
in group B there were 100 people rate = 8/100 = 0.8%.

Thus B is much safer.

Similarly, if we compare per 1000 people the rates will be known.
This is the logic used in D.
Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 442
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2011, 03:25
1
udaymathapati wrote:
16. During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members
of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was
not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay
at home as a civilian.
Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?
A. Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths
among members of the armed forces serving overseas
B. Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed
forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths
C. Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat
injuries
D. Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths
E. Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed
forces

Can somebody explain the D in detail. I am not getting how we are getting higher death rates for smaller groups?
"D exposes this absurdity by pointing out the need to compare death rates of the two groups, which would reveal the higher death rate for the smaller group."

Clean D

Supposre the population of civilians is US is 3 Million
out these 375,000 died = ~19%

and armed forces population is 8,00,000
out of these 4,08,000 dies = 51%
so the conclusion "it was
not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay
at home as a civilian." fails

hope this clears
Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2013
Posts: 148
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Tuck
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.6
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2016, 02:13
1
D is better and more accurate than B.
if there are 60 civilian deaths in a population of 10,000 and 40 armed forces deaths in a battalion of 100 army men, then according to B 60% deaths will be from civilian population n 40% deaths will be from military.

whereas if we consider D, death percentage will be ( 60/10000) *100 = 0.6 % for civilian and (40/100)*100 = 40% for armed forces.

so serving army is more dangerous
Intern
Joined: 18 Feb 2018
Posts: 2
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2018, 05:03
1
could you please explain the reasoning. I am not able to deduce the basis on which th comparison is made .
Director
Joined: 06 May 2006
Posts: 502
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Jun 2006, 12:35
D.

a) we are talking overseas armed forces here.
b) not much of a difference from existing stats
c) does not help
d)
e) accidents vs combat ?! nopes
_________________
Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Is the answer A, B, C, D or E?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?
Manager
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 101
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2011, 03:19
Can somebody explain the D in detail. I am not getting how we are getting higher death rates for smaller groups?
"D exposes this absurdity by pointing out the need to compare death rates of the two groups, which would reveal the higher death rate for the smaller group."
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2015
Posts: 416
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q48 V38
GPA: 3.33
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jul 2018, 23:26
+1 for option D. This is essentially a "flaw type" question. The flaw in the reasoning is that the argument only compares numbers ; it should be comparing figures per thousands. Option D clearly states this !
_________________
" The few , the fearless "
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 3086
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170

GRE 2: Q170 V170
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2018, 14:10
ck95 wrote:
could you please explain the reasoning. I am not able to deduce the basis on which th comparison is made .

ck95, did you check out the excellent explanations by amit2k9 (here), sudhir18n (here), and manojkumarmatala (here)? If you have lingering questions after reading those three, let us know.
_________________
GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (we're hiring!) | GMAT Club Verbal Expert | Instagram | Blog | Bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal: RC | CR | SC

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars: all videos by topic

SC articles & resources: How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

RC, CR, and other articles & resources: All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations: All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button; be specific about your question, and tag @GMATNinja. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Manager
Joined: 26 Jan 2016
Posts: 181
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2019, 09:08
Just by comparing the count of deaths at home and at overseas, author assumes the population to be same at both locations and hence conclude that it is safer to be at home than at overseas.
This is what option D says.
Hence D
VP
Joined: 14 Feb 2017
Posts: 1364
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23
GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33
GMAT 4: 650 Q44 V36
GMAT 5: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 6: 600 Q38 V35
GMAT 7: 710 Q47 V41
GPA: 3
WE: Management Consulting (Consulting)
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2019, 18:30
B can be thought of as comparing different numerators with the same denominator or comparing proportions.
The facts don't change.
If total deaths were 1m then we would have ~30% to ~40%

Conversely, D shows us that we can compare a rate (deaths per 1k) that would consider each population as mutually exclusive - enabling a more reasonable comparison.
_________________
Here's how I went from 430 to 710, and how you can do it yourself:
Re: During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite   [#permalink] 01 Dec 2019, 18:30
Display posts from previous: Sort by