GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 25 May 2019, 01:00

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

From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo

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

Hide Tags

 
Senior RC Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: Preparing GMAT
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 2751
Location: Pakistan
GPA: 3.39
From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 30 Mar 2019, 12:46
1
3
Question 1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 210 sessions

51% (03:13) correct 49% (03:04) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 210 sessions

78% (00:55) correct 22% (01:11) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 207 sessions

42% (01:21) correct 58% (01:21) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 4
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 205 sessions

35% (00:43) correct 65% (00:55) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 5
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

based on 200 sessions

85% (00:41) correct 15% (01:16) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act have been the subject of controversy among some elements of the health community and the pharmaceutical industry. The Amendments added a new requirement for Food and Drug Administration approval of any new drug: The drug must be demonstrated to be effective by substantial evidence consisting of adequate and well controlled investigations. To meet this effectiveness requirement, a pharmaceutical company must spend considerable time and effort in clinical research before it can market a new product in the United States. Only then can it begin to recoup its investment. Critics of the requirement argue that the added expense of the research to establish effectiveness is reflected in higher drug costs, decreased profits, or both, and that this has resulted in a “drug lag. ”The term drug lag has been used in several different ways.

It has been argued that the research required to prove effectiveness creates a lag between the time when a drug could theoretically be marketed without proving effectiveness and the time when it is actually marketed. Drug lag has also been used to refer to the difference between the number of new drugs introduced annually before 1962 and the number of new drugs introduced each year after that date. It is also argued that the Amendments resulted in a lag between the time when new drugs are available in other countries and the time when the same drugs are available in the United States. And drug lag has also been used to refer to a difference in the number of new drugs introduced per year in other advanced nations and the number introduced in the same year in the United States. Some critics have used drug lag arguments in an attempt to prove that the 1962 Amendments have actually reduced the quality of healthcare in the United States and that, on balance, they have done more harm than good. These critics recommend that the effectiveness requirements be drastically modified or even scrapped.

Most of the specific claims of the drug lag theoreticians, however, have been refuted. The drop in new drugs approved annually, for example, began at least as early as 1959, perhaps five years before the new law was fully effective. In most instances, when a new drug was available in a foreign country but not in the United States, other effective drugs for the condition were available in this country and sometimes not available in the foreign country used for comparison. Further, although the number of new chemical entities introduced annually dropped from more than 50 in 1959 to about 12 to 18 in the 1960s and 1970s, the number of these that can be termed important—some of them of “breakthrough” caliber—has remained reasonably close to 5 or 6 per year. Few, if any, specific examples have actually been offered to show how the effectiveness requirements have done significant harm to the health of Americans. The requirement does ensure that a patient exposed to a drug has the likelihood of benefiting from it, an assessment that is most important, considering the possibility, always present, that adverse effects will be discovered later.

1. The author is primarily concerned with

(A) outlining a proposal
(B) evaluating studies
(C) posing a question
(D) countering arguments
(E) discussing a law


2. The passage states that the phrase “drug lag” has been used to refer to all of the following situations EXCEPT

(A) a lag between the time when a new drug becomes available in a foreign country and its availability in the United States
(B) the time period between which a new drug would be marketed if no effectiveness research were required and the time it is actually marketed
(C) the increased cost of drugs to the consumer and the decreased profit margins of the pharmaceutical industry
(D) the difference between the number of drugs introduced annually before 1962 and the number introduced after 1962
(E) the difference between the number of new drugs introduced in a foreign country and the number introduced in the United States


3. The author would most likely agree with which of the following statements?

(A) Whatever “drug lag” may exist because of the 1962 Amendments is justified by the benefit of effectiveness studies.
(B) The 1962 Amendments have been beneficial in detecting adverse effects of new drugs before they are released on the market.
(C) Because of the requirement of effectiveness studies, drug consumers in the United States pay higher prices than consumers in foreign countries.
(D) The United States should limit the number of new drugs which can be introduced into this country from foreign countries.
(E) Effectiveness studies do not require a significant investment of time or money on the part of the pharmaceutical industry.


4. The author points out the drop in new drugs approved annually before 1959 in order to

(A) draw an analogy between two situations
(B) suggest an alternative causal explanation
(C) attack the credibility of an opponent
(D) justify the introduction of statistics
(E) show an opponent misquoted statistics


5. The author implies that the non availability of a drug in the United States and its availability in a foreign country is not necessarily proof of a drug lag because this comparison fails to take into account

(A) the number of new drugs introduced annually before 1959
(B) the amount of research done on the effectiveness of drugs in the United States
(C) the possible availability of another drug to treat the same condition
(D) the seriousness of possible unwanted side effects from untested drugs
(E) the length of time needed to accumulate effectiveness research



Source: Master GMAT (115)
Difficulty Level: 700

_________________
New Project RC Butler 2019 - Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday
Final days of the GMAT Exam? => All GMAT Flashcards.
This Post Helps = Press +1 Kudos
Best of Luck on the GMAT!!

Originally posted by SajjadAhmad on 09 May 2018, 14:21.
Last edited by SajjadAhmad on 30 Mar 2019, 12:46, edited 6 times in total.
Updated
MBA Section Director
User avatar
V
Affiliations: GMATClub
Joined: 22 May 2017
Posts: 2521
GPA: 4
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2018, 21:06

+1 kudos to the posts containing answer explanations of all questions


_________________
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 90
Concentration: Leadership, Strategy
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2018, 22:37
Could someone provide explanation of Q4?IMO C.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 90
Concentration: Leadership, Strategy
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2018, 01:55
5. The author implies that the non availability of a drug in the United States and its availability in a foreign country is not necessarily proof of a drug lag because this comparison fails to take into account

(A) the number of new drugs introduced annually before 1959
(B) the amount of research done on the effectiveness of drugs in the United States
(C) the possible availability of another drug to treat the same condition
(D) the seriousness of possible unwanted side effects from untested drugs
(E) the length of time needed to accumulate effectiveness research

"In most instances, when a new drug was available in a foreign country but not in the United States, other effective drugs for the condition were available in this country and sometimes not available in the foreign country used for comparison."
Thus C
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 90
Concentration: Leadership, Strategy
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2018, 01:57
2. The passage states that the phrase “drug lag” has been used to refer to all of the following situations EXCEPT

(A) a lag between the time when a new drug becomes available in a foreign country and its availability in the United States
(B) the time period between which a new drug would be marketed if no effectiveness research were required and the time it is actually marketed
(C) the increased cost of drugs to the consumer and the decreased profit margins of the pharmaceutical industry
(D) the difference between the number of drugs introduced annually before 1962 and the number introduced after 1962
(E) the difference between the number of new drugs introduced in a foreign country and the number introduced in the United States

IMO C.C is nowhere mentioned in the passage.
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 90
Concentration: Leadership, Strategy
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2018, 02:05
1. The author is primarily concerned with

(A) outlining a proposal
(B) evaluating studies
(C) posing a question
(D) countering arguments
(E) discussing a law

Firstly amendments to the act are discussed.Drug lag is discussed and then author countered the given arguments.Thus, IMO D.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 28 May 2018
Posts: 74
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2018, 02:33
Can anyone please explain Q-3 .
From where it is inferred that option A is correct.
Thanks
Manager
Manager
avatar
S
Joined: 21 Jul 2012
Posts: 90
Concentration: Leadership, Strategy
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2018, 02:36
guptakashish02 wrote:
Can anyone please explain Q-3 .
From where it is inferred that option A is correct.
Thanks


I got it from POE.
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 02 Aug 2015
Posts: 155
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Sep 2018, 06:47
1
prashant6923 wrote:
Could someone provide explanation of Q4?IMO C.


Hi Prashant,

Quoting from the para

Some critics have used drug lag arguments in an attempt to prove that the 1962 Amendments have actually reduced the quality of healthcare in the United States and that, on balance, they have done more harm than good. These critics recommend that the effectiveness requirements be drastically modified or even scrapped. Most of the specific claims of the drug lag theoreticians, however, have been refuted. The drop in new drugs approved annually, for example, began at least as early as 1959. perhaps five years before the new law was fully effective, perhaps five years before the new law was fully effective

The author says that reduction in number of drugs was caused back in 1959 and not in 1962. Author is giving an alternate cause for the reduction in no.of drugs. Hence B.

Cheers!
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 11
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q47 V31
GMAT 2: 640 Q47 V31
GPA: 3
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2018, 09:05
prashant6923 wrote:
Could someone provide explanation of Q4?IMO C.


I think B is a better option than C because C uses the word 'opponent', which is not correct though the author does counter the argument.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 11
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q47 V31
GMAT 2: 640 Q47 V31
GPA: 3
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2018, 09:12
guptakashish02 wrote:
Can anyone please explain Q-3 .
From where it is inferred that option A is correct.
Thanks



The author concludes that the benefits of the act overshadow the drug lag effect.
benefits (in the last line)
drug lag (explained as a whole)
CR Forum Moderator
avatar
V
Joined: 25 Apr 2018
Posts: 546
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Oct 2018, 18:06
workout

please explain Q3.

Thanks!
_________________
Please give kudos if you found my posts helpful!

Project CR Butler - 2 CR's everyday
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Posts: 637
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.95
WE: Operations (Real Estate)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Nov 2018, 21:25
4. The author points out the drop in new drugs approved annually before 1959 in order to

(A) draw an analogy between two situations
(B) suggest an alternative causal explanation
(C) attack the credibility of an opponent
(D) justify the introduction of statistics
(E) show an opponent misquoted statistics

Only B and C are contenders ... Both seem credible to me.
B - It does look like an alternative explanation
C- as per the function of the paragraph in the passage as a whole, it seems like he is mentioning the stats to limit the credibility of the arguments made by the critics.

COuld you please explain the difference??
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Posts: 637
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.95
WE: Operations (Real Estate)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Nov 2018, 21:28
VeritasKarishma GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo DmitryFarber @mikemcgaryy broall

4. The author points out the drop in new drugs approved annually before 1959 in order to

(A) draw an analogy between two situations
(B) suggest an alternative causal explanation
(C) attack the credibility of an opponent
(D) justify the introduction of statistics
(E) show an opponent misquoted statistics

Only B and C are contenders ... Both seem credible to me.
B - It does look like an alternative explanation
C- as per the function of the paragraph in the passage as a whole, it seems like he is mentioning the stats to limit the credibility of the arguments made by the critics.

COuld you please explain the difference??
Veritas Prep Representative
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 408
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 05 Nov 2018, 21:06
1
Top Contributor
AdityaHongunti wrote:
as per the function of the paragraph in the passage as a whole, it seems like he is mentioning the stats to limit the credibility of the arguments made by the critics.


I think you nailed it there actually - the author is trying to undermine the credibility of one side of the argument...but that's not that same as attacking the credibility of an opponent (the person making that argument). C falls victim to that precise language...it's not about the opponent, it's about the argument.

And note on this - it's so easy for the testmaker to use our own personal biases against us. We kind of seek out drama (look at reality TV, Twitter trolls, etc.), so we'll gravitate toward "attack," "criticize," etc. in these Function questions (i.e. "the author does X in order to Y"). But that's really rare in the text itself...we get a little bored with the subject matter so we're looking for interpersonal drama, but more often than not the author stays within the scope of the argument and doesn't really attack or criticize the people who make it.
_________________
Brian

Curriculum Developer, Instructor, and Host of Veritas Prep On Demand

Save $100 on live Veritas Prep GMAT Courses and Admissions Consulting

Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews

Originally posted by VeritasPrepBrian on 05 Nov 2018, 18:38.
Last edited by VeritasPrepBrian on 05 Nov 2018, 21:06, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Posts: 637
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.95
WE: Operations (Real Estate)
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Nov 2018, 18:43
1
VeritasPrepBrian wrote:
AdityaHongunti wrote:
as per the function of the paragraph in the passage as a whole, it seems like he is mentioning the stats to limit the credibility of the arguments made by the critics.


I think you nailed it there actually - the author is trying to undermine the credibility of one side of the argument...but that's not that same as <b>attacking</b> the credibility of an <b>opponent</b> (the person making that argument). C falls victim to that precise language...it's not about the opponent, it's about the argument.

And note on this - it's so easy for the testmaker to use our own personal biases against us. We kind of seek out drama (look at reality TV, Twitter trolls, etc.), so we'll gravitate toward "attack," "criticize," etc. in these Function questions (i.e. "the author does X in order to Y"). But that's really rare in the text itself...we get a little bored with the subject matter so we're looking for interpersonal drama, but more often than not the author stays within the scope of the argument and doesn't really attack or criticize the people who make it.



So basically, option C can mean that the author is criticizing the critics themselves and not their arguments... By saying "attacking the credibility of the opponent" , the author is instead trying to criticise the character of the opponent rather than the argument he makes...

Got it... Thank you so much for pointing this out... Ambiguity can be a ..... (You know)

Posted from my mobile device
Veritas Prep Representative
User avatar
S
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Posts: 408
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 05 Nov 2018, 21:12
1
Top Contributor
Yep, exactly - and really when it says "opponent" that's talking about the person (or people) and not the argument itself.

I'm always super skeptical about answers that say the author's reason for doing something is to criticize/attack a person (or opponent, scientist, whatever). It's just so rarely justified by the text (and kind of hard to fit in a dense passage that also allows for specific detail questions) but it's so tempting to us when we're non-experts on a subject.

Anyway...you're right that ambiguity can be a ***** but here "opponent" I'd say is pretty specific that it's attacking a person, and that's something to look out for (not that it appears a ton, but when it does it should stand out as a likely trap).
_________________
Brian

Curriculum Developer, Instructor, and Host of Veritas Prep On Demand

Save $100 on live Veritas Prep GMAT Courses and Admissions Consulting

Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Aug 2012
Posts: 87
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 620 Q43 V33
GMAT 2: 690 Q47 V38
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Nov 2018, 18:30
2. The passage states that the phrase “drug lag” has been used to refer to all of the following situations EXCEPT

(A) a lag between the time when a new drug becomes available in a foreign country and its availability in the United States
(B) the time period between which a new drug would be marketed if no effectiveness research were required and the time it is actually marketed
(C) the increased cost of drugs to the consumer and the decreased profit margins of the pharmaceutical industry
(D) the difference between the number of drugs introduced annually before 1962 and the number introduced after 1962
(E) the difference between the number of new drugs introduced in a foreign country and the number introduced in the United States

E is the wrong answer. The passage is comparing new drugs in the US and those same drugs in foreign countries and is not comparing number vs number.
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Dec 2018
Posts: 192
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Mar 2019, 00:45
VeritasPrepBrian wrote:
Yep, exactly - and really when it says "opponent" that's talking about the person (or people) and not the argument itself.

I'm always super skeptical about answers that say the author's reason for doing something is to criticize/attack a person (or opponent, scientist, whatever). It's just so rarely justified by the text (and kind of hard to fit in a dense passage that also allows for specific detail questions) but it's so tempting to us when we're non-experts on a subject.

Anyway...you're right that ambiguity can be a ***** but here "opponent" I'd say is pretty specific that it's attacking a person, and that's something to look out for (not that it appears a ton, but when it does it should stand out as a likely trap).


Nice explanation. Could you please explain Q3 as well.Stuck between A and B.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo   [#permalink] 30 Mar 2019, 00:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by

From the time they were first proposed, the 1962 Amendments to the Foo

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


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.