It is currently 17 Dec 2017, 13:43

### 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 the United States, injuries to passengers involved in

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Posts: 257

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Location: Bangalore
In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2003, 02:46
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

60% (00:45) correct 40% (01:06) wrong based on 3 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in automobile accidents are typically more severe than in Europe, where laws require a different kind of safety belt. It is clear from this that the United States needs to adopt more stringent standards for safety belt design to protect automobile passengers better.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument above EXCEPT:
(A) Europeans are more likely to wear safety belts than are people in the United States.
(B) Unlike United States drivers, European drivers receive training in how best to react in the event of an accident to minimize injuries to
themselves and to their passengers.
(C) Cars built for the European market tend to have more sturdy construction than do cars built for the United States market.
(D) Automobile passengers in the United States have a greater statistical chance of being involved in an accident than do passengers in
Europe.
(E) States that have recently begun requiring the European safety belt have experienced no reduction in the average severity of injuries
suffered by passengers in automobile accidents.

[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 93

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

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2003, 06:15
A

Autor argues that safety belts are the primary cause in reducing the severity of injuries in accidents. A supports this assumption
All other undermine the argument
_________________

Brainless

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

CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3452

Kudos [?]: 929 [0], given: 781

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2003, 10:35
Brainless wrote:
A

Autor argues that safety belts are the primary cause in reducing the severity of injuries in accidents. A supports this assumption
All other undermine the argument

Brain

A weakens the argument...its says that its not the seat belt, its the
tendency not to wear seat belts that causes the accidents.

I think D

We dont know what statistical basis is used for this statement...

Kudos [?]: 929 [0], given: 781

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Posts: 257

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Location: Bangalore
Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2003, 05:53
good D is correct.
At first i thought statement weakens the argument.

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 25 Jun 2003
Posts: 93

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

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2003, 16:38
praetorian123 wrote:
Brainless wrote:
A

Autor argues that safety belts are the primary cause in reducing the severity of injuries in accidents. A supports this assumption
All other undermine the argument

Brain

A weakens the argument...its says that its not the seat belt, its the
tendency not to wear seat belts that causes the accidents.

I think D

We dont know what statistical basis is used for this statement...

I still feel choice A gives more than enough info to support the assumption made by author , that, not wearing a properly designed safety belt(in US) is as good in resulting more severe injuries as 'wearing an improperly designed safety belt'

As far as D is concerned, It merely emphasizes a stastistical report that there are more accidents in US than in Europe, but does not make one believe that how many of these accidents actually resulted in severe injuries for not wearing a safety belt. Therfore it neither strengthens nor weakens the argument.

_________________

Brainless

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

Manager
Joined: 19 Oct 2003
Posts: 72

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

Location: USA
Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Oct 2003, 19:31
Vicky wrote:
In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in automobile accidents are typically more severe than in Europe, where laws require a different kind of safety belt. It is clear from this that the United States needs to adopt more stringent standards for safety belt design to protect automobile passengers better.
Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument
above EXCEPT:
(A) Europeans are more likely to wear safety belts
than are people in the United States.
(B) Unlike United States drivers, European drivers
receive training in how best to react in the
event of an accident to minimize injuries to
themselves and to their passengers.
(C) Cars built for the European market tend to
have more sturdy construction than do cars
built for the United States market.
(D) Automobile passengers in the United States
have a greater statistical chance of being
involved in an accident than do passengers in
Europe.
(E) States that have recently begun requiring the
European safety belt have experienced no
reduction in the average severity of injuries
suffered by passengers in automobile
accidents.

level of "injuries to passengers" is implied to depend on "standards for safety belt". A shows that it is not. According to A, the reason is "more likely to wear safety belts". so A undermines the argument.
D has nothing to do with argument. so D is ok
_________________

I have 2 month for gmat.

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

Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Posts: 73

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Location: california
Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Oct 2003, 13:01
brain,

i think you just answered you own question in your last post....A is wrong b/c:

the issue: Europe has less severe accidents b/c it has stringent safety belt laws (better type of belt or whatever...),....then the argument says that the US needs to adopt this type of safety belt standard to better protect passengers....

we need to find something that doesn't weaken this argument...and the best way to do that is to eliminate everything that does weaken this argument...and in order to weaken the argument, we just need to show that the even if the safety belt standards were adopted in the US, the accidents would still be severe...or in other words...there is another reason that the accidents in Europe are less severe

A:clearly weakens the argument b/c it shows that Europeans are more likely to wear safety belts...remember that the argument says that better safety belts would make injuries less severe in the US...well, if the Europeans are more likely to wear them, then that destroys the argument...b/c even though the US might have better belts, they're not going to wear them so the argument is moot....

and if you read closely B, C, and E all give "other" reasons why the accidents in Europe are less severe...and remember as I said before, an alternate cause is what we need to show lack of support for the conclusion....

consequently, the only choice left is D...and as you said Brainless, D neither supports or weakens the argument....which is what makes it the correct answer...remember, we are not looking for an answer that supports the conclusion...the question merely asks, which one does NOT WEAKEN the argument....and that would be D....precisely b/c it does nothing...it just gives us some useless information....we don't care what else it does to the argument, it could support it or not...BUT AS LONG AS IT DOES NOT WEAKEN THE ARGUMET, it is the answer...hope that makes sense...

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 22 Aug 2015
Posts: 10

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

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Apr 2016, 05:07
I would go with option D as well.

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

Re: In the United States, injuries to passengers involved in   [#permalink] 14 Apr 2016, 05:07
Display posts from previous: Sort by