F: We ought not to test the safety of new drugs on sentient animals, s

Hi experts,

Why is A wrong?
Since G said "we would irresponsively sacrifice the human lives that could have been saved by the drugs," I thought it is unreasonable to test cosmetics, which do not save human lives, on animals.

Thanks in advance!

I have the same doubt. GMATNinja can you helpp us here!@

This one is a bit convoluted, so it's important to really understand the exact positions that F and G are arguing and the exact question that we have to answer.

To start with the question itself: we're asked which answer choice "is the best objection that could be made from F's point of view to counter G's point." In other words, if F and G continue their discussion, what can F say to defeat G's argument?

Here's a breakdown of F and G's positions:

• F concludes that "we ought not to test the safety of new drugs on sentient animals." He/she supports this conclusion by saying that animal testing causes the animals pain.
• G concludes that "we must carry out such tests." His/her support is that "otherwise, we would irresponsibly sacrifice the human lives that could have been saved by the drugs."

Notice here that G assumes that there is no way to get life-saving drugs to humans unless the drugs are tested on sentient animals. G thinks, "No animal testing? Then no life-saving drugs."

How could F defeat this argument? Look at (E) first:

This is a beautiful counterpoint to G's argument. If F said this, he/she would expose the faulty assumption that G made. It IS possible to save human lives without testing on sentient animals.

(E) is a good objection to G's point, so keep (E).

Compare that to (A):

G doesn't care about drugs that are not necessary for people to use. He/she only cares about drugs that could potentially save human life. So, answer choice (A) doesn't raise an objection to G's argument -- in fact, G might well agree that it's wrong to test cosmetics on sentient animals! We simply don't know.

We DO know that G cares deeply about life-saving drugs. This answer choice doesn't offer a rebuttal for G's argument concerning these drugs. If F said the info in (A), it would not effectively defeat G's argument that testing certain drugs on sentient animals is necessary for saving human lives.

Eliminate (A).

I hope that helps!

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.