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

It is currently 22 Sep 2019, 03:20

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 the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating

  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: 58095
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2019, 00:55
2
9
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

41% (02:30) correct 59% (02:54) wrong based on 359 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.

Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn


A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade

_________________
Most Helpful Expert Reply
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
D
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9644
Location: Pune, India
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2019, 05:11
7
1
Bunuel wrote:
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.

Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn


A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade



Premises:
- A decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods (effective) of treatment,
- An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments (which are ineffective).

Conclusion: Less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X.

Something that jumps up right away. The premises talk about the percentage of money spent (decreasing percentage). The conclusion talks about the amount of money spent (less money). We can't deduce the conclusion until and unless we know something about the total money spent.
If total money spent is the same or less, then a decreasing percentage means that less money is being spent now.
If total money spent is more than before, a decreasing percentage could still lead to the same amount of money or even more money being spent now.

We need to strengthen the conclusion (actually be able to establish it)

A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade
We don't know anything about special treatments.

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.
Irrelevant. Our point is about the total money being spent on effective vs ineffective methods.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade
We don't know whether the total medical expenditure has increased or decreased. Anyway, we need to establish that less money is being spent. This says that more money is being spent in disease X.

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment
What percentage of money was spent in ether is irrelevant. It is about whether the percentage is increasing or decreasing.

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade
This is what we needed as discussed above. If total money being spent is decreasing and its percentage being spent on effective treatment is also decreasing, then the amount of money being spent is certainly decreasing. A lower percentage of a lower amount is definitely lower.

Answer (E)
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
General Discussion
SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Status: It's near - I can see.
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Posts: 1689
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Operations
Schools: INSEAD Jan '19
GPA: 3.01
WE: Engineering (Real Estate)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2019, 03:10
Bunuel wrote:
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.


Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn

Tough one for me :

I will go with D.


A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade

Passage does not talk about "Varieties of disease X". No mention of "expensive special treatment" in the passage too.

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.

"Most expensive" is too extreme.Also it does not help to draw the conclusion. We only know that non standard treatments are ineffective and more money is being spent on them. This does not mean they are more expensive.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade

Not helpful in drawing conclusion.

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

Less %age of amount spent on effective(standard treatment methods). High %age of money spent on non standard treatment methods. So this has to be true. Best among all the answer choices.

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade

Both the standard and non standard treatments are for disease X. We can't say the total amount of money for treating disease X has declined.







_________________
"Do not watch clock; Do what it does. KEEP GOING."
SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Status: It's near - I can see.
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Posts: 1689
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Operations
Schools: INSEAD Jan '19
GPA: 3.01
WE: Engineering (Real Estate)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2019, 05:24
AkshdeepS wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.


Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn

Tough one for me :

I will go with D.


A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade

Passage does not talk about "Varieties of disease X". No mention of "expensive special treatment" in the passage too.

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.

"Most expensive" is too extreme.Also it does not help to draw the conclusion. We only know that non standard treatments are ineffective and more money is being spent on them. This does not mean they are more expensive.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade

Not helpful in drawing conclusion.

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

Less %age of amount spent on effective(standard treatment methods). High %age of money spent on non standard treatment methods. So this has to be true. Best among all the answer choices.

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade

Both the standard and non standard treatments are for disease X. We can't say the total amount of money for treating disease X has declined.


Indeed disappointed with my effort. :( . I got it wrong.
_________________
"Do not watch clock; Do what it does. KEEP GOING."
SVP
SVP
User avatar
V
Status: It's near - I can see.
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Posts: 1689
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Operations
Schools: INSEAD Jan '19
GPA: 3.01
WE: Engineering (Real Estate)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2019, 05:47
VeritasKarishma wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.

Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn


A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade



Premises:
- A decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods (effective) of treatment,
- An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments (which are ineffective).

Conclusion: Less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X.

Something that jumps up right away. The premises talk about the percentage of money spent (decreasing percentage). The conclusion talks about the amount of money spent (less money). We can't deduce the conclusion until and unless we know something about the total money spent.
If total money spent is the same or less, then a decreasing percentage means that less money is being spent now.
If total money spent is more than before, a decreasing percentage could still lead to the same amount of money or even more money being spent now.

We need to strengthen the conclusion (actually be able to establish it)

A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade
We don't know anything about special treatments.

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.
Irrelevant. Our point is about the total money being spent on effective vs ineffective methods.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade
We don't know whether the total medical expenditure has increased or decreased. Anyway, we need to establish that less money is being spent. This says that more money is being spent in disease X.

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment
What percentage of money was spent in ether is irrelevant. It is about whether the percentage is increasing or decreasing.

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade
This is what we needed as discussed above. If total money being spent is decreasing and its percentage being spent on effective treatment is also decreasing, then the amount of money being spent is certainly decreasing. A lower percentage of a lower amount is definitely lower.

Answer (E)


VeritasKarishma : Should not answer choice E include the word "effective treatment of disease" instead of simply "treating disease" as the conclusion is about effective treatment. But this choice is saying overall treatment expense. What about ineffective treatment expenses as they have increased?
_________________
"Do not watch clock; Do what it does. KEEP GOING."
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
D
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 9644
Location: Pune, India
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Apr 2019, 21:18
1
AkshdeepS wrote:
VeritasKarishma wrote:
Bunuel wrote:
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.

Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn


A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade



Premises:
- A decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods (effective) of treatment,
- An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments (which are ineffective).

Conclusion: Less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X.

Something that jumps up right away. The premises talk about the percentage of money spent (decreasing percentage). The conclusion talks about the amount of money spent (less money). We can't deduce the conclusion until and unless we know something about the total money spent.
If total money spent is the same or less, then a decreasing percentage means that less money is being spent now.
If total money spent is more than before, a decreasing percentage could still lead to the same amount of money or even more money being spent now.

We need to strengthen the conclusion (actually be able to establish it)

A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade
We don't know anything about special treatments.

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.
Irrelevant. Our point is about the total money being spent on effective vs ineffective methods.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade
We don't know whether the total medical expenditure has increased or decreased. Anyway, we need to establish that less money is being spent. This says that more money is being spent in disease X.

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment
What percentage of money was spent in ether is irrelevant. It is about whether the percentage is increasing or decreasing.

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade
This is what we needed as discussed above. If total money being spent is decreasing and its percentage being spent on effective treatment is also decreasing, then the amount of money being spent is certainly decreasing. A lower percentage of a lower amount is definitely lower.

Answer (E)


VeritasKarishma : Should not answer choice E include the word "effective treatment of disease" instead of simply "treating disease" as the conclusion is about effective treatment. But this choice is saying overall treatment expense. What about ineffective treatment expenses as they have increased?


No, you don't need the word effective treatment to draw the conclusion. Actually, if you add the word effective, (E) becomes the same as conclusion.

10 yrs ago:
Total money spent on both = $200
% spent on Effective = 70% ($140)
% spent on ineffective = 30% ($60)

Today:
Total money spent on both = $100 (As per option (E), this has decreased from 10 yrs ago)
% spent on Effective = 60% (argument tells us that this % is decreasing)
% spent on ineffective = 40%

Today, since total amount of money spent is lower and the % going to effective treatment is lower too, the money spent on effective treatment would be $60 which will be lower than the previous $140.
Since you have a smaller whole, and a smaller percentage of that, the number you get will certainly be smaller than before.
_________________
Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Status: As cheeks from my insta feed say: soon...
Joined: 17 Jan 2016
Posts: 40
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2019, 01:51
Bunuel wrote:
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.

Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn


A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade


are there 3 treatments (treatment of diseaseX, standard treatment, and non-standard) in the argument or 2(standard and non-standard)?
Because I don't get what "less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X" means
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 09 Jul 2018
Posts: 4
CAT Tests
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Aug 2019, 02:06
This is an assumption question, which negation actually works on this question type. But not with this case. Please correct me if i'm wrong. The negation says "The total amount of money spent on treating disease X didn't decline during the past decade". This sentence means that the total amount can be the same as it was 10 years ago, and thus doesn't break the author's conclusion.

The question becomes can we select the choice if the negation of that choice doesn't break the conclusion apart?
Intern
Intern
User avatar
B
Joined: 07 Aug 2019
Posts: 15
In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Aug 2019, 23:15
We have to find an assumption that supports "Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago. "

Only contenders are D and E.

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment

percentage/proportion in the past does not matter. even if 99% of the money was spent on nonstandard treatment and now it becomes 10%, the total money spent on treating disease X can increase so much that even 10% is greater than 99% 10 years ago.

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade

If total money decreased and percentage of nonstandard treatment decreased, there is no way more money is being spent now on nonstandard treatment

E
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Jul 2016
Posts: 30
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Sep 2019, 02:10
The conclusion of the argument is: Lesser money is spent on treatment, which is effective over the past decade.
By pre-thinking assumptions there are 2 that come to my mind
1) Non standard treatment is not expensive(Nowhere that is mentioned) but I feel is assumed by the argument to reach the actual assumption
2) Percentage of money on effective decreases but amount can increase, we should be sure that is not the case, and that can happen only when the total amount of money spent decreases.Hence, option E.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Joined: 31 Jan 2019
Posts: 119
Location: Switzerland
Concentration: General Management
Schools: INSEAD
GPA: 3.9
CAT Tests
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Sep 2019, 11:47
Hi everybody,

In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating disease X went to pay for standard methods of treatment, which are known to be effective though they are expensive and painful. An increasing percentage is being spent on non-standard treatments, which cause little discomfort. Unfortunately, the nonstandard treatments have proved to be ineffective. Obviously, less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.

Which of the following, if assumed, allows the conclusion above to be properly drawn

Pre-thinking:
We can easily see that while the conclusion is based on money expressed as a number the data used to support that conclusion talks about money expressed as a %.
We are asked to find a statement that validates this conclusion.
The right way of doing this is to find first a falsification scenario and then negate it.

FS: Let's assume that in the past decade the money spent to treat the disease doubled, tripled etc... And let's imagine that the percentage allocated to st methods decreased by 1%. We can safely see how the total amount of money increased even tough the percentage allocated to st methods decrease.

Assumption: The total amount of money either remained the same or decreased in the past decade.



A. Varieties of disease X requiring expensive special treatment have become less common during the past decade
Out of the scope

B. Nonstandard methods of treating disease X are most expensively now than they were a decade ago.
We are not concerned with how expensive treatments are but with how much money is spent on them. Incorrect

C. Of total medical expenditures, the percentage that is due treatment of disease X increased during the past decade
Out of the scope

D.Most of the money spent on treating disease X during the last decade went to pay for nonstandard treatment
Out of the scope

E. The total amount of money spent on treating disease X declined during the past decade
In line with pre-thinking. Hence correct

It is a good day to be alive, cheers!
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 03 Aug 2019
Posts: 1
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Sep 2019, 12:17
Less money is being spent now on effective treatment than treating disease X than was spent ten years ago.
What does this sentence exactly mean? Isn't money spent on effective treatment a subset of money spent on treating disease X and hence the latter would always be higher>
GMAT Club Bot
Re: In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating   [#permalink] 07 Sep 2019, 12:17
Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the past decade, a decreasing percentage of money spent on treating

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





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