It is currently 19 Oct 2017, 13:15

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Status: D-Day is on February 10th. and I am not stressed
Affiliations: American Management association, American Association of financial accountants
Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 255

Kudos [?]: 359 [1], given: 52

Location: Kuwait
Schools: Columbia university
In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2011, 14:40
1
KUDOS
7
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

64% (01:16) correct 36% (01:25) wrong based on 513 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of fish increased by 4.5 percent, and the total consumption of poultry products increased by 9.0 percent. During this time, the population of Eastland increased by 6 percent, in part due to new arrivals from surrounding areas.

Which of the following, if true, can one infer based on the statements above?
A)For new arrivals to Eastland between 2000 and 2005, fish was less likely to be a major part of families’ diet than was poultry.
B)In 2005, the residents of Eastland consumed twice as much poultry as fish.
C)The per capita consumption of poultry in Eastland was higher in 2005 than it was in 2000.
D)Between 2000 and 2005, both fish and poultry products were a regular part of the diet of a significant proportion of Eastland residents.
E)Between 2000 and 2005, the profits of wholesale distributors of poultry products increased at a greater rate than did the profits of wholesale distributors of fish.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Sky is the limit

Kudos [?]: 359 [1], given: 52

Director
Status: Prep started for the n-th time
Joined: 29 Aug 2010
Posts: 672

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 37

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2011, 18:01
This is a very good practice question.

According to the stimulus,

Total fish comsumption = 4.5 percent increase
Total consumption of poultry products = + 9.0 % increase
Total Population = 6 % increase.

Since all the values given in the stimulus are percent increases, and we do not know the base value in 2000, we can eliminate B and D. E is irrelevant because profit is not mentioned anywhere. We can eliminate A as it requires us to assume that most of the population increase was due to the new arrivals.

C is the correct answer and can be proven from the information in the stimulus.

Crick

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 37

BSchool Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 888

Kudos [?]: 718 [0], given: 44

Location: Viet Nam
GMAT Date: 06-06-2014
GPA: 3.07

### Show Tags

13 Dec 2011, 01:19
109% consumption of poultry products/ 106 %population > consumption of poultry products/population = 1

So, choice C is the correct one.
_________________

Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you

The more you like my post, the more you share to other's need

CR: Focus of the Week: Must be True Question

Kudos [?]: 718 [0], given: 44

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10119

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Apr 2015, 09:46
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.

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 19 Sep 2014
Posts: 27

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 3

GPA: 3.96
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jun 2015, 23:25
In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of fish increased by 4.5 percent, and the total consumption of poultry products increased by 9.0 percent. During this time, the population of Eastland increased by 6 percent, in part due to new arrivals from surrounding areas.

Which of the following, if true, can one infer based on the statements above?
A)For new arrivals to Eastland between 2000 and 2005, fish was less likely to be a major part of families’ diet than was poultry.
B)In 2005, the residents of Eastland consumed twice as much poultry as fish.
C)The per capita consumption of poultry in Eastland was higher in 2005 than it was in 2000.
D)Between 2000 and 2005, both fish and poultry products were a regular part of the diet of a significant proportion of Eastland residents.
E)Between 2000 and 2005, the profits of wholesale distributors of poultry products increased at a greater rate than did the profits of wholesale distributors of fish.

Prethink inference-The per capita consumption of poultry was greater in 2005 than in 2005-109/106 in 2005 against 100/100 in 2000. only C matches this hence C is correct

other options
A)For new arrivals to Eastland between 2000 and 2005, fish was less likely to be a major part of families’ diet than was poultry-Likeliness/preference is not an issue here.It may be true but not always have to be true.
B)In 2005, the residents of Eastland consumed twice as much poultry as fish-Same as A
C)Between 2000 and 2005, both fish and poultry products were a regular part of the diet of a significant proportion of Eastland residents-Do not always have to be true same as option A
E)Between 2000 and 2005, the profits of wholesale distributors of poultry products increased at a greater rate than did the profits of wholesale distributors of fish-Profits is not the issue here hence out of scope

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 3

Current Student
Joined: 21 Aug 2014
Posts: 138

Kudos [?]: 224 [1], given: 49

GMAT 1: 610 Q49 V25
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V40
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Jun 2015, 23:36
1
KUDOS
A)For new arrivals to Eastland between 2000 and 2005, fish was less likely to be a major part of families’ diet than was poultry.
Nowhere it is mentioned that only the new arrivals were responsible for the increase in fish consumption.
It could be that the whole of increased population was responsible for the increase.

B)In 2005, the residents of Eastland consumed twice as much poultry as fish.
Yes, the total consumption increased but no where it is mentioned that the residents consumed it.
They could be buying fish to simply feed the bear, dog or just make cod liver oil from that.

C)The per capita consumption of poultry in Eastland was higher in 2005 than it was in 2000.
CORRECT.

D)Between 2000 and 2005, both fish and poultry products were a regular part of the diet of a significant proportion of Eastland residents.
Too many absolute modifiers here:
1) "regular part of the diet" Maybe they use it only during gatherings and functions.
2) "significant proportion" Maybe only a insignificant proportion consume a lot of fish and poultry?

E)Between 2000 and 2005, the profits of wholesale distributors of poultry products increased at a greater rate than did the profits of wholesale distributors of fish.
_________________

Please consider giving Kudos if you like my explanation

Kudos [?]: 224 [1], given: 49

CEO
Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Posts: 2604

Kudos [?]: 394 [0], given: 184

Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.92
WE: General Management (Transportation)
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Feb 2016, 19:36
suppose we have 1,000,000 people
and we have 1 fish/person and 0.5 chicken per person. -> I agree, not a good way to look at it, but good to understand why C is bad.
we have 1 fish and 0.5 chicken per capita. 500k chicken

population increased by 6% we have 1,060,000 people. chicken 9% increase. 545,000 now.
545000/1060000 = 545/1050 slightly more than 1/2

C works fine.

Kudos [?]: 394 [0], given: 184

Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of   [#permalink] 12 Feb 2016, 19:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by