In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported : Critical Reasoning (CR)

B

samusa

Manager

Joined: 01 Nov 2013

Posts: 246

Own Kudos [?]: 943 [1]

Given Kudos: 410

GMAT 1: 690 Q45 V39

WE:General Management (Energy and Utilities)

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

18 Aug 2015, 14:01

1

Kudos

PathFinder007 wrote:

thelosthippie wrote:

In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported that they knew someone who had been diagnosed with cancer. In 2010, that percentage remained unchanged yet cancer incidence rates in the population increased by over 40% from 1990 to 2010.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain how the percentage of people who knew someone with cancer could have remained unchanged despite the dramatic increase in the incidence of cancer?

A. Improved treatment options dramatically reduced cancer mortality rates from 1990 to 2010.

B. From 1990 to 2010, most new cases of cancer occurred in densely populated urban centers with previously high cancer rates.

C. Many of the new cancer cases from 1990 to 2010 occurred in geographically isolated regions where little or no cancer had been present before.

D. From 1990 to 2010, some of the new cancer cases occurred in people who had previously been diagnosed with another form of cancer.

E. Because of dramatic technological improvements in diagnostic tools from 1990 to 2010, cancer was more likely to be diagnosed in 2010 than in 1990.

hi mikemcgarry

could you please provide your comments on this.

This is an paradox question. according to option C we can say cancer has increased in isolated geographical areas. so we can say very less people know each other. so over all number of cancer patients has increased but still the % is same. could you please clarify this.

Regards

Option C states that there is no history of cancer in the stated geographically isolated regions.
So if in such areas someone develops cancer, then the local people there will come to know about cancer.So, the overall percentage should be more than 80% because new set of people have been added to the category of people who know someone with cancer.But that will be against the premise which states that the percentage remained steady at 80%.

I DONOT MIND KUODS

G

Nevernevergiveup

Retired Moderator

Joined: 18 Sep 2014

Posts: 1015

Own Kudos [?]: 2754 [1]

Given Kudos: 79

Location: India

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

17 Sep 2016, 03:06

1

Kudos

Original Explanation:

This problem contains a paradox that you must explain: how could the number of cancer case increase dramatically, yet the percentage of people who know someone with cancer remain the same. One way is if most new cancer cases occur where people are more likely to already know someone with cancer. Then the number of cases would go up but there would be no new people added who know someone with cancer. Answer choice (B) maps out just that possibility and thus removes the paradox. In answer choice (A), cancer mortality does not relate to the given paradox so (A) is not correct. Answer choice (C) is the opposite of correct answer (B) and increases the paradox. If most of the new cancer cases occurred in places where few people knew someone with cancer, then you would really expect the 80% figure to go up. In (D) the word “some” immediately eliminates it as a possible choice because if only one of the new cases occurred in someone who had it before, it would have no effect on the paradox (remember some can mean anything from one to all). In (E), the likelihood of diagnosis does not affect the paradox at all. Answer is (B).

G

sayantanc2k

CR Moderator

Joined: 14 Dec 2013

Posts: 2413

Own Kudos [?]: 15266 [1]

Given Kudos: 26

Location: Germany

Schools:

GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47

WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

01 Jan 2017, 23:41

1

Kudos

Expert Reply

1Narrative wrote:

ANSWER CHOICE D???????

IS IT NECESSARILY TRUE THAT IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL KNOW EACH OTHER AND HENCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW MANY CANCER PATIENTS WILL BE COMMON?

This is not an inference type question, hence the condition "necessarily true" does not need to be satisfied. But it could possibly be the case that "IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL KNOW EACH OTHER AND HENCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW MANY CANCER PATIENTS WILL BE COMMON". Hence option B could be an explanation of the discrepancy.

You are asked to find the best explanation among the given options, and option B does so the best. D could be an explanation, but it is unlikely that the number of patients who are diagnosed with cancer and had already had some other form of cancer is as high as 40% of the existing cancer patients. "SOME of the new cancer cases occurred.... " does not justify such high percentage. In absence of B, D could be the answer.

B

Mohammad Ali Khan

Manager

Joined: 11 Aug 2017

Posts: 51

Own Kudos [?]: 19 [1]

Given Kudos: 92

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

03 Apr 2019, 05:45

1

Kudos

sayantanc2k wrote:

1Narrative wrote:

ANSWER CHOICE D???????

IS IT NECESSARILY TRUE THAT IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL KNOW EACH OTHER AND HENCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW MANY CANCER PATIENTS WILL BE COMMON?

This is not an inference type question, hence the condition "necessarily true" does not need to be satisfied. But it could possibly be the case that "IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL KNOW EACH OTHER AND HENCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW MANY CANCER PATIENTS WILL BE COMMON". Hence option B could be an explanation of the discrepancy.

You are asked to find the best explanation among the given options, and option B does so the best. D could be an explanation, but it is unlikely that the number of patients who are diagnosed with cancer and had already had some other form of cancer is as high as 40% of the existing cancer patients. "SOME of the new cancer cases occurred.... " does not justify such high percentage. In absence of B, D could be the answer.

Here why are we not assuming that if no.of cases increase in city then the percentage of people knowing cancer patients would also go up.??..please guide.

B

ravi750

Intern

Joined: 16 Dec 2013

Posts: 2

Own Kudos [?]: 1 [1]

Given Kudos: 30

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

03 Apr 2019, 14:38

1

Bookmarks

this is too easy for a 700 level qs

Posted from my mobile device

aditya111

Intern

Joined: 22 Jan 2013

Posts: 30

Own Kudos [?]: 122 [0]

Given Kudos: 28

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

04 May 2013, 04:41

ssbisht wrote:

Fact1 : 1990- nearly 80% of people in the United States reported that they knew someone who had been diagnosed with cancer
Fact2 : 2010- nearly 80% of people in the United States reported that they knew someone who had been diagnosed with cancer
Fact3 : cancer incidence rates in the population increased by over 40% from 1990 to 2010.

Now a way the percentage of people who knew someone with cancer could have remained unchanged despite the dramatic increase in the incidence of cancer is that the cases of new cancer are known to people who already know somebody with cancer.
This is the scenario in Choice B as in a densely populated urban center a lot of people will be knowing each other and hence number of people who knows many cancer patients will be common.

A. Improved treatment options dramatically reduced cancer mortality rates from 1990 to 2010.
Incorrect : Irrelevant

B. From 1990 to 2010, most new cases of cancer occurred in densely populated urban centers with previously high cancer rates.
Correct: In a densely populated urban center a lot of people will be knowing each other and hence number of people who knows many cancer patients will be common.

C. Many of the new cancer cases from 1990 to 2010 occurred in geographically isolated regions where little or no cancer had been present before.
Incorrect: This will increase the people who know a cancer patient.

D. From 1990 to 2010, some of the new cancer cases occurred in people who had previously been diagnosed with another form of cancer.
Incorrect as talks about some of the cancer cases while the increase is around 40%.

E. Because of dramatic technological improvements in diagnostic tools from 1990 to 2010, cancer was more likely to be diagnosed in 2010 than in 1990.
Incorrect : Doesn’t help in knowing why percentage people knowing cancer patient haven’t changed.

B. From 1990 to 2010, most new cases of cancer occurred in densely populated urban centers with previously high cancer rates.
Correct: In a densely populated urban center a lot of people will be knowing each other and hence number of people who knows many cancer patients will be common.

I believe we cannot come to the conclusion that the total number of people one knows will remain common in densely populated areas.

and in C
If a person in isolated area is diagnosed with cancer then no person will get to know about this incident and the 80 percent will remail common

and in D.
If the same person is diagnosed with multiple cancers then the chances are that the total number of people suffering with cancer will remail unchanged and the cancer incidence will increase.

Please give your inputs also for a healthy discussion. :D

IvyLeague56

Intern

Joined: 11 Aug 2012

Status:RusTinPeace

Posts: 27

Own Kudos [?]: 9 [0]

Given Kudos: 43

WE:Sales (Commercial Banking)

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

14 May 2013, 01:51

i ended up answering (C). However i do understand now that the answer is (B). Good question indeed !

jlgdr

VP

Joined: 06 Sep 2013

Posts: 1345

Own Kudos [?]: 2391 [0]

Given Kudos: 355

Concentration: Finance

Schools: Wharton '17 (A) HBS '17 (WA$)

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

26 May 2014, 07:48

Nice question
Stuck between B and D

Any ideas?

Pqhai shed some light over here buddy

Cheers
J

ssriva2

Manager

Joined: 22 Aug 2014

Posts: 100

Own Kudos [?]: 36 [0]

Given Kudos: 49

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

28 Apr 2015, 05:05

thelosthippie wrote:

In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported that they knew someone who had been diagnosed with cancer. In 2010, that percentage remained unchanged yet cancer incidence rates in the population increased by over 40% from 1990 to 2010.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain how the percentage of people who knew someone with cancer could have remained unchanged despite the dramatic increase in the incidence of cancer?

A. Improved treatment options dramatically reduced cancer mortality rates from 1990 to 2010.

B. From 1990 to 2010, most new cases of cancer occurred in densely populated urban centers with previously high cancer rates.

C. Many of the new cancer cases from 1990 to 2010 occurred in geographically isolated regions where little or no cancer had been present before.

D. From 1990 to 2010, some of the new cancer cases occurred in people who had previously been diagnosed with another form of cancer.

E. Because of dramatic technological improvements in diagnostic tools from 1990 to 2010, cancer was more likely to be diagnosed in 2010 than in 1990.

Intially choosen C but now understood why B is correct answer.
Good question.

B

PathFinder007

Manager

Joined: 10 Mar 2014

Posts: 137

Own Kudos [?]: 673 [0]

Given Kudos: 13

Send PM

In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

18 Aug 2015, 11:06

thelosthippie wrote:

In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported that they knew someone who had been diagnosed with cancer. In 2010, that percentage remained unchanged yet cancer incidence rates in the population increased by over 40% from 1990 to 2010.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain how the percentage of people who knew someone with cancer could have remained unchanged despite the dramatic increase in the incidence of cancer?

A. Improved treatment options dramatically reduced cancer mortality rates from 1990 to 2010.

B. From 1990 to 2010, most new cases of cancer occurred in densely populated urban centers with previously high cancer rates.

C. Many of the new cancer cases from 1990 to 2010 occurred in geographically isolated regions where little or no cancer had been present before.

D. From 1990 to 2010, some of the new cancer cases occurred in people who had previously been diagnosed with another form of cancer.

E. Because of dramatic technological improvements in diagnostic tools from 1990 to 2010, cancer was more likely to be diagnosed in 2010 than in 1990.

hi mikemcgarry

could you please provide your comments on this.

This is an paradox question. according to option C we can say cancer has increased in isolated geographical areas. so we can say very less people know each other. so over all number of cancer patients has increased but still the % is same. could you please clarify this.

Regards

1Narrative

Intern

Joined: 09 Aug 2016

Posts: 6

Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]

Given Kudos: 25

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

25 Dec 2016, 03:58

ANSWER CHOICE D???????

IS IT NECESSARILY TRUE THAT IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL KNOW EACH OTHER AND HENCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW MANY CANCER PATIENTS WILL BE COMMON?

B

StoicBread

Manager

Joined: 26 Feb 2015

Posts: 61

Own Kudos [?]: 195 [0]

Given Kudos: 109

GPA: 3.92

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

02 Jan 2017, 23:06

D. From 1990 to 2010, some of the new cancer cases occurred in people who had previously been diagnosed with another form of cancer.

Whenever two answers seem like they could be correct (B and D), I look if one of the potential answers uses a word like some. If so, I go with the other...

P

chesstitans

VP

Joined: 12 Dec 2016

Posts: 1030

Own Kudos [?]: 1779 [0]

Given Kudos: 2562

Location: United States

Schools: Stanford '19 Carroll '19 LBS '19

GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33

GPA: 3.64

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

23 Jun 2017, 20:22

this question focuses on testing the ability to sense the logic behind the explanation. For my money, the question is really interesting.

B

HappyQuakka

Intern

Joined: 10 Aug 2017

Posts: 16

Own Kudos [?]: 6 [0]

Given Kudos: 122

GMAT 1: 720 Q48 V41

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

15 Sep 2017, 05:42

Hmm I was torn between B and D, and decided to go with B.

D sounds ok, but only some of the newly diagnosed cancer happened to people who already had some other form of cancer.
B is better per network theory - high frequency in densely populated area means there already were a lot of people who knew someone with cancer.

Best CR decision I've made today so far XD

P

chesstitans

VP

Joined: 12 Dec 2016

Posts: 1030

Own Kudos [?]: 1779 [0]

Given Kudos: 2562

Location: United States

Schools: Stanford '19 Carroll '19 LBS '19

GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33

GPA: 3.64

Send PM

In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

15 Sep 2017, 08:15

boiled down to B and D.
C is wrong because it makes the situation more complex.
D is out b/c of "some" and D does not relate anything to people who know cancer patients.

S

sunny91

Manager

Joined: 05 Dec 2014

Posts: 181

Own Kudos [?]: 59 [0]

Given Kudos: 289

Location: India

Schools: AIM Manila '20 Fisher '19 Rotman '20 Sauder '20 Schulich Jan 18 Intake Queen's 19 Ivey '19 Kelley '20 IIM-A"19 ESSEC '20 Insead Sept'18 Ross '20 IIMU PGPX

GMAT 1: 660 Q49 V31

GPA: 3.54

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

31 Jan 2018, 01:18

sayantanc2k wrote:

1Narrative wrote:

ANSWER CHOICE D???????

IS IT NECESSARILY TRUE THAT IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL KNOW EACH OTHER AND HENCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW MANY CANCER PATIENTS WILL BE COMMON?

This is not an inference type question, hence the condition "necessarily true" does not need to be satisfied. But it could possibly be the case that "IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER A LOT OF PEOPLE WILL KNOW EACH OTHER AND HENCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO KNOW MANY CANCER PATIENTS WILL BE COMMON". Hence option B could be an explanation of the discrepancy.

You are asked to find the best explanation among the given options, and option B does so the best. D could be an explanation, but it is unlikely that the number of patients who are diagnosed with cancer and had already had some other form of cancer is as high as 40% of the existing cancer patients. "SOME of the new cancer cases occurred.... " does not justify such high percentage. In absence of B, D could be the answer.

Hi sayantanc2k, Nevernevergiveup,

I understood why other options are incorrect. I marked C as OA and understood why C is wrong. But, in B from 1990-2010, within this 20 years the cancer incidents increased by 40%. In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported that they knew someone who had been diagnosed with cancer. So, in a IN A DENSELY POPULATED URBAN CENTER MAY BE A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOWS EACH OTHER, BUT SINCE THE CANCER INCIDENTS INCREASED BY 40%, HOW CAN WE SAY THAT PEOPLE KNOW THE NEW CASES AS WELL, WHO ARE Diagnosed WITH CANCER. Since 80% of the US people know people who are diagnosed with cancer is constant since 1990, then even when the the cancer incidents increased, how come the percentage ie. 80 % people know people who are diagnosed with cancer? Kindly help me to understand.

B

P@PU

Intern

Joined: 07 Aug 2017

Posts: 12

Own Kudos [?]: 2 [0]

Given Kudos: 62

Send PM

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

01 Apr 2019, 19:14

Clearly the option B. Easy reasoning. Was confused whether if there was any underlying twist i was missing, but POE helped to overcome it.

gmatclubot

Re: In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported [#permalink]

01 Apr 2019, 19:14

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

In 1990, nearly 80% of people in the United States reported