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

It is currently 18 Oct 2019, 12:40

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

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 58453
In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jun 2018, 20:39
14
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  95% (hard)

Question Stats:

38% (01:59) correct 62% (02:07) wrong based on 558 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.


A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos

_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
S
Joined: 26 Apr 2017
Posts: 45
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jun 2018, 21:21
D? Because option shows that both components are different.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 19 Feb 2017
Posts: 136
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V31
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jun 2018, 21:26
IMO the answer should be B.

If B is true then the opposition faced may not be a reliable way of measuring the accuracy of the studies against paint.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Feb 2018
Posts: 387
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2018, 00:41
Aoart from B and D all are irrelevant.

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services - right. This shows that this is again related to chlorpyrifos. Thus, judging or opposing here is just not right.

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos - this option is incorrect because, we are just told about the molecular structure. This is not enough. We still don't know whether the nanoparticles are more harmful or lesser or not at all.

Sent from my Lenovo K53a48 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Manager
Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 31 Oct 2016
Posts: 105
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2018, 03:15
The answer is B. Since these claims do look like paid-claims of companies with financial interest. To defend their interest.
Why D is wrong? Since we do not know anything about the impact of the different molecular structure, and we can't compare paint with a fumigator
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 15 Oct 2017
Posts: 295
GMAT 1: 560 Q42 V25
GMAT 2: 570 Q43 V27
GMAT 3: 710 Q49 V39
Reviews Badge
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2018, 12:30
IMO C. The claim is made by the "health expert". And if the counter claim that all paints release harmful particles are true, then the combined effect to health will be even more serious. Therefore "these" objections should not be taken into account.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Oct 2017
Posts: 237
GMAT 1: 710 Q44 V41
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Jun 2018, 04:22
I'm a bit confused about this question.

Premise: fumigators remain in a house for a long time and are toxic
Objection: certain paint is equally toxic

Question: Why is the objection not relevant? I'm not sure whether this is question is clear. Shall we prove that fumigators are not toxic or that the comparison with the toxicity of paint is irrelevant?

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services It could be the case that this objection is not objectively true because the studies were funded by the producers of Chlorpyrifos. However, this doesn't weaken the claim that Chlorpyrifos itself is toxic.

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone This just tells us that both produces are toxic. But does this statement make the objection irrelevant?

In conclusion, I understand the arguments but I'm not sure whether they help us to answer the question. To me, B is preferable over C but C is the OA. GMATNinja, can you please explain?
_________________
My goal: 700 GMAT score - REACHED :-) | My debrief - first attempt 710 (Q44,V41,IR7)

If I could help you with my answer, consider giving me Kudos
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 22 Sep 2017
Posts: 166
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Jun 2018, 17:10
Bunuel wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.


A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos


Why D can't be the answer?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 01 Jan 2018
Posts: 154
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jun 2018, 02:22
2
jackspire wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.


A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos


Why D can't be the answer?

Per my understanding D is a complete Shift from original flow. Experts can't refute objections on negative effects of fumigator based on some properties of paint.

Posted from my mobile device
_________________
kudos please if it helped you.
SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1716
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Jul 2018, 17:10
2
1
jackspire wrote:

Why D can't be the answer?


The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.

These are the lines where opposition of the article explained. Clearly it is saying that paint + nano particle is equally harmful. However author suggest not to take that into account. Here we have to understand how objection is working . It suggest that wall paint is also releasing nanoparticles and one should not worry about something like this.

How to explain this situation keeping in mind that article is not correct ? well think of it this way that nanoparticles released from paint are not very harmful. and so does the pesticide but what if some situation make pesticide dangerous. Only C is on those lines and can make us to rethink. Any situation that would have made pesticide more harmful would be our answer. what if answer said that pesticide will be very very dangerous if open alcohol bottles are present in home.

About D , clearly molecular structure is different, so what ? how it is harmful is the line of thinking we need to look for.

Hope it helped.
_________________
Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51 | Time management

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 01 Nov 2017
Posts: 30
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jul 2018, 13:53
I chose A because I had interpreted it to mean that paints are allowed to be distributed, even if they are toxic because they don't have to go through toxic analysis. This would be an irrelevant comparison to oppose the health expert's article because the same may not be true for Chlorpyrifos.

Why is C the answer?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 May 2018
Posts: 1
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2018, 03:57
Bunuel wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.


A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos




Why Not E?
Definitely could be the reason they backed out from opposing the article

Posted from my mobile device
SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1716
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2018, 06:43
JATINM wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.


A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos




Why Not E?
Definitely could be the reason they backed out from opposing the article

Posted from my mobile device


So What is our objective? to weaken >>>> The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs.

Looking at E you can directly eliminate it saying it is not impacting to above line. more or less it is just saying the same thing. Why article is not worthy to be taken into account ? C is on the lines and explaining it correctly . You can read above explanation and raise a specific doubt if you had to.
_________________
Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51 | Time management

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 23 Jun 2018
Posts: 5
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2018, 08:14
Bunuel wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.


A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos



daagh
Sir, Could you please explain why the answer is 'C' ? I marked 'B' by process of elimination.
Retired Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5097
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2018, 08:24
1
Top Contributor
I can't also see how C can be the choice. I will go with B.
_________________
If you can't sync with the vibe of GMAT, you had better think!!!
SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1716
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2018, 08:34

Official Explanation:



This is a "Complete the Argument" format question. The missing argument part follows the reason conjunction since, so it's a premise, which supports the conclusion that preceded it. Therefore, this is a Conclusion Strengthening question:

Premise A: an expert claimed that fumigation damages human health
+
Premise B: Chlorpyrifos, an ingredient in fumigation pesticides, causes lung damage
+
Premise C: objectors claim that wall paints cause the same damage to the lungs as Chlorpyrifos
=
Conclusion: the opposing views should be ignored

Strengthening Data: ?

You are required to complete the argument with data that strengthens the conclusion that the objections to the health expert's claim should be ignored, or detracts from those objections.

This answer choice (C) strengthens the conclusion and therefore logically completes the argument. The fact that wall paint is also harmful doesn't take away the harm caused by the fumigation, it only makes the overall level of harm worse. Therefore, the claim that wall paint is harmful has no effect on the harm caused by fumigation and can be ignored.
_________________
Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51 | Time management

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood
Retired Moderator
User avatar
V
Status: enjoying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 5097
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2018, 09:14
Top Contributor
The OE is debatable. The fumigants are more detrimental because they can diffuse straight into our lungs multiple times faster than the solid Nanos can and therefore, the claim that a solid such as nano is as poisonous as the gassy fumigant is untenable. In any case, that the cumulative effect of the fumigant and the paints are outside the purview of the topic. We are only required to compare X with Y and not X+Y with either of them individually.
Will the objectors volunteer to remain in a fumigant-filled chamber for five minutes to prove their claim?
_________________
If you can't sync with the vibe of GMAT, you had better think!!!
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Apr 2018
Posts: 8
Location: India
Schools: HSG '21
Re: Chlorpyrifos & nanoparticles  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Mar 2019, 22:15
Can anyone address why C wins over B. I thought option B makes more sense
LBS Moderator
User avatar
D
Joined: 04 Jun 2018
Posts: 649
Location: Germany
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GMAT 1: 730 Q47 V44
GPA: 3.4
WE: Analyst (Transportation)
Reviews Badge
Re: In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jun 2019, 08:41
2
Cola manufacturers claim they should not be blamed for peoples unhealthy diets because Cola is often consumed in combination with high-fat foods such as fries or chips.

Maybe the sentence above helps to highlight how flawed the reasoning is. :)
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Posts: 3
In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 21 Sep 2019, 11:20
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used by fumigators remain in a house or office for long periods of time, and not only kill pests, but also damage the health of human inhabitants. For example, Chlorpyrifos, an active ingredient in fumigation pesticides, leads to acute lung damage. The article has met with much opposition including claims that almost all wall paints continually release nanoparticles that are known to be equally harmful to the lungs. These objections to the article should not be taken into account since __________.


A. paints are not always required to undergo toxin level analyses before receiving authorization for distribution

B. they are mostly supported by companies with financial interests in Chlorpyrifos production or fumigation services

C. the combined damage caused by Chlorpyrifos and the nanoparticles is more detrimental than that of the nanoparticles alone

D. the molecular structure of paint nanoparticles is very different to that of Chlorpyrifos

E. the polymers used in some decorative wall paints are actually more likely to cause acute lung damage than Chlorpyrifos

B is an apparent Ad Hominem choice, thus it is wrong.

Originally posted by virrr on 20 Sep 2019, 11:57.
Last edited by virrr on 21 Sep 2019, 11:20, edited 1 time in total.
GMAT Club Bot
In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used   [#permalink] 20 Sep 2019, 11:57

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 26 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In a recent article, a health expert has claimed that the toxins used

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





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne