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

 It is currently 17 Jun 2018, 15:23

### 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
Joined: 17 Mar 2009
Posts: 272
In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Aug 2009, 02:10
3
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

77% (01:09) correct 23% (01:59) wrong based on 377 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.

OA:

Intern
Joined: 30 Dec 2008
Posts: 26

### Show Tags

15 Aug 2009, 04:54
15
A. is incorrect, since we only have info about the total consumption of poultry/fish. What if two families ate something like 2 tons of chicken and 1000 families ate something like 2 pounds of fish every day?

B. the passage does not provide info about the quantities of fish/poultry consumed, it just points out their respective gains.

C. is correct. Look at it mathematically:
population in 2000 = x
population in 2005 = 106% *x

poultry in 2000 = y
poultry in 2005 = 109% *y

per capita poultry consumption in 2000 = y/x
per capita poultry consumption in 2005 = 109%y/106%x = y/x * 109/106 > y/x

D. no info to establish this

E. profits are not discussed here. Indeed, the amount sold was greater, but what if costs increased significantly, say by 20%? Then the profits go down...
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Mar 2009
Posts: 272

### Show Tags

15 Aug 2009, 23:25
nicely explained dana... kudos..
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 317

### Show Tags

16 Aug 2009, 22:08
2
seldom see such CRs... test on maths..
Director
Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 652

### Show Tags

17 Aug 2009, 10:12
DanaJ wrote:
A. is incorrect, since we only have info about the total consumption of poultry/fish. What if two families ate something like 2 tons of chicken and 1000 families ate something like 2 pounds of fish every day?

B. the passage does not provide info about the quantities of fish/poultry consumed, it just points out their respective gains.

C. is correct. Look at it mathematically:
population in 2000 = x
population in 2005 = 106% *x

poultry in 2000 = y
poultry in 2005 = 109% *y

per capita poultry consumption in 2000 = y/x
per capita poultry consumption in 2005 = 109%y/106%x = y/x * 109/106 > y/x

D. no info to establish this

E. profits are not discussed here. Indeed, the amount sold was greater, but what if costs increased significantly, say by 20%? Then the profits go down...

nice explanation. thanks +1 for ya.
Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Posts: 160
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GPA: 3.7
WE: Account Management (Consumer Products)
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jan 2012, 21:35
at first i thought it was D, but looking a it again we can see that the % increase in population is lower than the % increase in the consumption of poultry so we should see an increase in poultry consumption per capita.
Also, the stimulus only talks about percentages never actual numbers so our answer should reflect only based on percentages not actual figures.
_________________

DETERMINED TO BREAK 700!!!

Intern
Joined: 28 Feb 2011
Posts: 48
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jan 2012, 23:08
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. Though percentage increase in Eastland's population (6%) is higher than percentage increase in fish consumption (4.5%), it is possible that some of existing population have reduced consumption of fish despite higher/same consumption of fish from new entrants in Eastland. Incorrect

B) In 2005, the residents of Eastland consumed twice as much poultry as fish.nothing in the stimulus state about relative amount of fish and poultry consumption. It states about percent increase in consumption which does not translate directly into amount. Incorrect

C) The per capita consumption of poultry in Eastland was higher in 2005 than it was in 2000. Suppose in year 2000, consumption of poultary was X while population was Y, thus percapita consumption was Y/X. Now in 2005 , Poultry consumption increased by 9 percent, thus amount poultry consumption was 1.09 X. Similarly, population increased by 6%, therefore new population is 1.06 Y. Combining these two data, in 2005, per capita consumption is 1.09X/1.06 Y > X/Y (IN 2000). IMO Correct answer

D) Between 2000 and 2005, both fish and poultry products were a regular part of the diet of a significant proportion of Eastland residents.nothing in the stimulus states this fact. Incorrect

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.out of scope. stimulus doesn't states profit anywhere.Incorect
Manager
Joined: 22 Feb 2009
Posts: 195
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2014, 00:08
C
Total consumption of poultry increase 9% > population increase 6%
If you divide two number, total consumption/ population = per capita consumption has to increase since 9% > 6%
_________________

.........................................................................
+1 Kudos please, if you like my post

Manager
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Posts: 58
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Aug 2014, 08:52
Superb explanation DanaJ!

Really helped to crack the inference question.

This is how maths is used in inference CR.
_________________

'The best way to thank or appreciate efforts on this forum is to give Kudos.'

Manager
Joined: 21 Jul 2017
Posts: 113
Location: India
GMAT 1: 650 Q47 V33
GPA: 4
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2017, 19:55
IMO C

a) we dont know that for sure. what if existing people stopped eating fish and started eating poultry.

b) we cannot infer anything from their amounts.

c) This is true, the per capita consumption of poultry products increased.

d) we cannot infer this.

e) profits is out of problem's scope.
Re: In Eastland, from 2000 to 2005, the total consumption of   [#permalink] 20 Sep 2017, 19:55
Display posts from previous: Sort by