Insurers and doctors are well aware that the incidence of lower back

Insurers and doctors are well aware that the incidence of lower-back injuries among office workers who spend long hours sitting is higher than that among people who regularly do physical work of type known to place heavy stress on lower back. This shows that office equipment and furniture are not properly designed to promote workers' health


Conclusion : The office equipment and furniture are not properly designed to promote worker's health, because long hours of sitting leads to higher incidences of lower back injuries.

To question : Is it really the furniture or other reasons that lead to higher back injuries among office workers ? Why do those who take heavy stress on lower back not have injuries ? Is the latter doing something different ?

To undermine the reasoning, one needs to weaken the reasoning i.e. office furniture may not be the reason for the injuries but something else, such as those who are office goers don't perform much physical work or they already have underlining ailments which supplement back injuries.

Given the options, option E fits our reasoning. Keep it simple, you want to attack the reasoning fully and not half way through.

What is the reasoning? Please explain. I chose C.

Posted from my mobile device

I ruled out E because I felt it was out of scope. Please provide an explanation for E. GMATNinja Bunuel

thanks in advance!

"most undermines" is the keyword here. I got this wrong too :/

(c) people are encouraged
vs
(e) physical exercise is already consistent

Insurers and doctors are well aware that the incidence of lower-back injuries among office workers who spend long hours sitting is higher than that among people who regularly do physical work of type known to place heavy stress on lower back. This shows that office equipment and furniture are not properly designed to promote workers' health

Which one of the following, if true, most undermines the reasoning above?

Highlighted text is the conclusion.
Office equipment and furniture(A) ---> Workers' bad health(B)

In essence, the passage is saying that office workers have lower-back injuries due to long hours of sitting. Other people who do physical work that puts stress on lower back do have lower-back issues. However, the former cases are more than later.
And this is due to (A).

(A) When they are at home, labours ans office workers tend to spend similar amounts of time sitting. - WRONG. It diverts from actual facts and leads to irrelevant things i.e. sitting at home. It does so by using similar words and logic from the passage, and constructing them smartly.

(B) Insurance companies tend to dislike selling policies to companies whose workers often claim to have back pain. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

(C) People who regularly do physical work of a type known to place heavy stress on the lower back are encouraged to use techniques that reduce degree of stress involved. - WRONG. More clear a choice if someone is left with half-cooked analysis. Yes, it does help us know why the people with physical work might have lesser numbers of cases as compared to office workers. However, it doesn't lets us decide whether office equipment and furniture are the reason. It doesn't attack the conclusion.

(D) Most of lower back injuries that office workers suffer occur while they are on the job. - WRONG. Again irrelevant to known when injuries generally happen. Also, what is said here is evident from the passage.

(E) Consistent physical exercise is one of the most effective ways to prevent or recover from lower back injuries. - CORRECT. This does give a reason to us to believe that it is possible to prevent or recover from lower back injuries. Both categories of people have a reason behind getting rid of injuries but office workers problems become bigger not because of office equipment and furniture but because of this reason.

Answer E.

(A) When they are at home, labours ans office workers tend to spend similar amounts of time sitting.
This may be the case however working hours happen throught the office and only a few hors in home therefore out

(B) Insurance companies tend to dislike selling policies to companies whose workers often claim to have back pain.
This is thoroughly out of context and doesn't have any impact

(C) People who regularly do physical work of a type known to place heavy stress on the lower back are encouraged to use techniques that reduce degree of stress involved.
This doesn't address or have any relevance as of why employees are suffering from back pain therefore out
'Devil trap beware'

(D) Most of lower back injuries that office workers suffer occur while they are on the job.
This lends strength to the argument

(E) Consistent physical exercise is one of the most effective ways to prevent or recover from lower back injuries.
This lends strength to weaken the fact that it's not because of the office design but rather the employess inability to look after themselves therefore our choice

Therefore IMO E

I think there should've been a choice better than option E here.

Here's my take on Option E: How did we determine that the office workers are not exercising consistently(is it because of the Long work hours?) and how does it undermine the reasoning that the equipment/chairs are designed poorly?

I think both C and E both weaken the argument, but E is undoubtedly a stronger statement.

Looking at the two side by side:



C tells us that these people are encouraged to use techniques that reduce degree of stress involved. Do they actually end up using techniques that reduce the degree of stress? We can't say -- we would need to assume this is the case. The more assumptions we need to make, the weaker the answer choice is.

E, on the other hand, tells us with certainty that consistent physical exercise is one of the most effective ways to prevent or recover from lower back injuries. There is no doubt here -- we're told it is one of the most effective ways to prevent or recover from lower back injuries.

E is the clear winner.

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.