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

 It is currently 26 May 2020, 09:58

### 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

# Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

BSchool Forum Moderator
Joined: 29 Jan 2015
Posts: 1484
Location: India
WE: General Management (Consumer Products)
Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 13 Jul 2019, 03:43
1
14
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

37% (02:01) correct 63% (02:01) wrong based on 339 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Advertisement: Do you want to be more energetic, vigorous, and physically fit? Take a daily supplement of Vita-plus, a vitamin combination containing additional proprietary ingredients. Our studies using hundreds of volunteers show that after just one week of taking 2 capsules daily, participants report being more energetic and alert on average than the average level reported by the National Institutes of Health survey of all Americans.

Which of the following would most strengthen the advertisement’s claim that Vita-Plus supplements make one more energetic and alert?

(A) Those who voluntarily chose to take more than 2 capsules daily reported energy levels even greater than those who took only 2 capsules.

(B) The volunteers were randomly selected from all those who answered a newspaper advertisement and were willing to pay for the cost of the Vita-Plus capsules.

(C) At the beginning of the study, the volunteers’ reports on alertness showed levels on average no different from the average level reported by the National Institutes of Health.

(D) Some of the volunteers were given capsules that solely contained cellulose, an inert substance with no vitamins or other health inducing substances. Those volunteers also reported increased levels of alertness and energy.

(E) Some of the volunteers were given capsules that solely contained cellulose, an inert substance with no vitamins or other health inducing substances. Those volunteers reported no increase in alertness or energy.

Source: Nova GMAT
Difficulty Level: 750

Originally posted by rohan2345 on 14 May 2017, 05:23.
Last edited by SajjadAhmad on 13 Jul 2019, 03:43, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Joined: 27 Dec 2012
Posts: 127
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 May 2017, 21:13
Can someone please clear why the OA is E?
The assumption in the argument is that the participants already did not had higher energy and alertness level than the national average at the start of the study.
C correctly attacks that assumption.
E leaves open the possibility that the participants who took the supplements already had high energy and alertness level.
Intern
Joined: 06 Sep 2012
Posts: 7
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 May 2017, 22:36
1

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 12
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 May 2017, 01:53
Hello experts,

could you please advise as why e is wrong. imo it attacks the assumption that the levels of the members were similar to that of the average.
Intern
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 21
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 17 May 2017, 08:53
Aketa wrote:
Hello experts,

could you please advise as why e is wrong. imo it attacks the assumption that the levels of the members were similar to that of the average.

same question, why would E be wrong? Wouldn't it strengthen more if we know everyone started from the same baseline?

Edit: Meant to say why is C wrong?

Originally posted by jy295 on 17 May 2017, 07:35.
Last edited by jy295 on 17 May 2017, 08:53, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2016
Posts: 77
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2017, 08:45
Hi..

How is E strengthening the argument. In fact C clearly proves the increase in alertness is due to the consumption of capsule.
Intern
Joined: 09 Apr 2017
Posts: 30
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V38
GMAT 2: 720 Q48 V41
GPA: 3.5
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2017, 12:08
IMO.
E says that alertness and energy improvement noticed was definitely because of the capsule since those who didn't consume the capsule saw no improvement.

Both C and E strengthen the argument but E strengthen it more.
Intern
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 21
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2017, 19:09
skysailor wrote:
IMO.
E says that alertness and energy improvement noticed was definitely because of the capsule since those who didn't consume the capsule saw no improvement.

Both C and E strengthen the argument but E strengthen it more.

All the reading says though is that "participants report being more energetic and alert on average than the average level reported by the National Institute of Health survey for all Americans". It does not say that participants report being more energetic and alert than before they took the pill. Technically, if they only had participants who started off well above the national average, and if in fact, participants' energy on average declined, but declined such that they were still above the national average, the advertisement's claim would still be true, though definitely wouldn't strengthen.

"E" does not point out that people's energy levels definitely increased. It only points out that people who took cellulose didn't feel an increase. We have no idea if anyone even felt an increase in energy levels. One scenario could be that the participants started off on average above the national baseline, and no one felt any increase in energy levels, regardless of being fed cellulose or not. In this scenario, E would be true, participants fed cellulose didn't report any increase, and the reading would still be true, which is that participants on average were more alert than the national baseline (but only because they started off above already!).

"C" to me takes the guesswork out of the equation. Because everyone in the study started off no better than the national average, it implies that the pills brought study participants above the national average. Of course, there could be external non-pill related factors at play, but "C" to me eliminates a lot of the guesswork around whether the study was rigged etc.
Intern
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 19
GMAT 1: 600 Q49 V23
GMAT 2: 660 Q50 V30
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 May 2017, 22:59
1
jy295 wrote:
skysailor wrote:
IMO.
E says that alertness and energy improvement noticed was definitely because of the capsule since those who didn't consume the capsule saw no improvement.

Both C and E strengthen the argument but E strengthen it more.

All the reading says though is that "participants report being more energetic and alert on average than the average level reported by the National Institute of Health survey for all Americans". It does not say that participants report being more energetic and alert than before they took the pill. Technically, if they only had participants who started off well above the national average, and if in fact, participants' energy on average declined, but declined such that they were still above the national average, the advertisement's claim would still be true, though definitely wouldn't strengthen.

"E" does not point out that people's energy levels definitely increased. It only points out that people who took cellulose didn't feel an increase. We have no idea if anyone even felt an increase in energy levels. One scenario could be that the participants started off on average above the national baseline, and no one felt any increase in energy levels, regardless of being fed cellulose or not. In this scenario, E would be true, participants fed cellulose didn't report any increase, and the reading would still be true, which is that participants on average were more alert than the national baseline (but only because they started off above already!).

"C" to me takes the guesswork out of the equation. Because everyone in the study started off no better than the national average, it implies that the pills brought study participants above the national average. Of course, there could be external non-pill related factors at play, but "C" to me eliminates a lot of the guesswork around whether the study was rigged etc.

Hi

Kindly refer to below issues in C
2. Most Important is to note here that: In C it says that the "average" of the participants alertness level was similar to national average. Here one can clearly infer that the few participants had above average alertness level while others had lower. So the representative sample of participants is not correct.

While in E
1. The option has clarified that other substance was not able to increase the level of alertness showing that 1. Vita plus is better 2.It can be inferred that the since other substance did not increase the performance the actual level of performance was known or low enough.

In conclusion the Process of elimination is the best approach to handle such question so we can identify the best strengthener

Regards
Intern
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 21
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V40
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 May 2017, 19:06
BS55 wrote:
jy295 wrote:
skysailor wrote:
IMO.
E says that alertness and energy improvement noticed was definitely because of the capsule since those who didn't consume the capsule saw no improvement.

Both C and E strengthen the argument but E strengthen it more.

All the reading says though is that "participants report being more energetic and alert on average than the average level reported by the National Institute of Health survey for all Americans". It does not say that participants report being more energetic and alert than before they took the pill. Technically, if they only had participants who started off well above the national average, and if in fact, participants' energy on average declined, but declined such that they were still above the national average, the advertisement's claim would still be true, though definitely wouldn't strengthen.

"E" does not point out that people's energy levels definitely increased. It only points out that people who took cellulose didn't feel an increase. We have no idea if anyone even felt an increase in energy levels. One scenario could be that the participants started off on average above the national baseline, and no one felt any increase in energy levels, regardless of being fed cellulose or not. In this scenario, E would be true, participants fed cellulose didn't report any increase, and the reading would still be true, which is that participants on average were more alert than the national baseline (but only because they started off above already!).

"C" to me takes the guesswork out of the equation. Because everyone in the study started off no better than the national average, it implies that the pills brought study participants above the national average. Of course, there could be external non-pill related factors at play, but "C" to me eliminates a lot of the guesswork around whether the study was rigged etc.

Hi

Kindly refer to below issues in C
2. Most Important is to note here that: In C it says that the "average" of the participants alertness level was similar to national average. Here one can clearly infer that the few participants had above average alertness level while others had lower. So the representative sample of participants is not correct.

While in E
1. The option has clarified that other substance was not able to increase the level of alertness showing that 1. Vita plus is better 2.It can be inferred that the since other substance did not increase the performance the actual level of performance was known or low enough.

In conclusion the Process of elimination is the best approach to handle such question so we can identify the best strengthener

Regards

Thanks! This helps. I think that both answers require some sort of assumption to be made that isn't supported in the reading, but missed the part that C doesn't talk about energetic and only alertness. I can see why that would tilt the choice in favor of E. Appreciate the response!
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 267
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 May 2017, 11:59
Source: Nova's GMAT Prep Course
_________________
Intern
Joined: 30 Jan 2020
Posts: 22
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2020, 18:55
Intern
Joined: 16 Feb 2020
Posts: 5
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Mar 2020, 00:10
Can you please explain why the ans is not C and E
Re: Here-and-There Import Company has always shown a quarterly loss   [#permalink] 31 Mar 2020, 00:10