Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 27 May 2017, 07:50

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

Low Yield Cigarettes

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 27 Nov 2006
Posts: 58
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

06 Oct 2007, 22:58
Switching to "low-yield" cigarettes, those that yield less nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide than regular ciga-rettes. When tested on a standard machine, does not, in general, reduce the incidence of heart attack. This results is surprising, since nicotine and carbon monoxide have been implicated as contributing to heart disease.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

(A) Smoking low-yield cigarettes has become fashionable, as relatively healthier styles of life have become more popular than those that have been identified as risky.
(B) For those who are themselves smokers, inhaling the smoke of others is not generally a significant factor contributing to an increased risk of heart disease.
(C) Nicotine does not contribute as much as to heart disease as does carbon monoxide.
(D) Carbon monoxide and cigarette tar are not addictive substances.
(E) People who switch from high-yield to low-yield cigarettes often compensate by increasing the number and depth of puffs in order to maintain their accustomed nicotine level.

CB
If you have any questions
New!
Director
Joined: 18 Jul 2006
Posts: 526
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

06 Oct 2007, 23:34
Clear E.
Director
Joined: 03 May 2007
Posts: 875
Schools: University of Chicago, Wharton School
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 209 [0], given: 7

Show Tags

06 Oct 2007, 23:54
computer-bot wrote:
Switching to "low-yield" cigarettes, those that yield less nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide than regular cigarettes when tested on a standard machine, does not, in general, reduce the incidence of heart attack. This results is surprising, since nicotine and carbon monoxide have been implicated as contributing to heart disease.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

(A) Smoking low-yield cigarettes has become fashionable, as relatively healthier styles of life have become more popular than those that have been identified as risky.
(B) For those who are themselves smokers, inhaling the smoke of others is not generally a significant factor contributing to an increased risk of heart disease.
(C) Nicotine does not contribute as much as to heart disease as does carbon monoxide.
(D) Carbon monoxide and cigarette tar are not addictive substances.
(E) People who switch from high-yield to low-yield cigarettes often compensate by increasing the number and depth of puffs in order to maintain their accustomed nicotine level.

E. straight and clear.................

suppose if:

consumption when high nicotine and other harmful substances - 1 pkt
consumption when low nicotine and other harmful substances - 2 pkt

so not changes in heart attack.
Manager
Status: Post MBA, working in the area of Development Finance
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Posts: 169
Location: Africa
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 1

Show Tags

07 Oct 2007, 00:05
Only E explains how the consumption of nicotine and carbon monoxide can remain at the same level or increase even with the "low-yield" cigarettes.
VP
Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Posts: 1443
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 285 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

07 Oct 2007, 08:16
computer-bot wrote:
Switching to "low-yield" cigarettes, those that yield less nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide than regular ciga-rettes. When tested on a standard machine, does not, in general, reduce the incidence of heart attack. This results is surprising, since nicotine and carbon monoxide have been implicated as contributing to heart disease.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent discrepancy?

(A) Smoking low-yield cigarettes has become fashionable, as relatively healthier styles of life have become more popular than those that have been identified as risky.
(B) For those who are themselves smokers, inhaling the smoke of others is not generally a significant factor contributing to an increased risk of heart disease.
(C) Nicotine does not contribute as much as to heart disease as does carbon monoxide.
(D) Carbon monoxide and cigarette tar are not addictive substances.
(E) People who switch from high-yield to low-yield cigarettes often compensate by increasing the number and depth of puffs in order to maintain their accustomed nicotine level.

CB

Definitely E.
My own answer was something else cause the heart attack other than tar, nicotine, and co. However, this is not the answer. But same amount of puffs = same amount of all substances = same risk of heart attack.
Senior Manager
Joined: 27 Jul 2006
Posts: 297
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

07 Oct 2007, 12:07
This is a big confusing, because the statement says that it is tested on a "machine" which seems to indicate that puffs and intake would be standardized. Therefore an answer should indicate that the quantity of nicotine and tar in a cigarette is irrelevant, the consistent exposure to such elements is enough.

Therefore I pick B, which indicates that the type of smoke inhaled by smokers in irrelevant, the only relevence is that they are all smokers.

If the statement was about a test on humans and the behavior of their smoking, then I would choose E.

Cannot figure out what is ment by Machine
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 276
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 207 [0], given: 2

Show Tags

07 Oct 2007, 12:32
I also not clear the use of "Machine" in the passage. But only E seems correct here.
_________________

Trying hard to achieve something unachievable now....

Manager
Joined: 01 Oct 2007
Posts: 139
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

07 Oct 2007, 20:23
I agree with defenestrate.

The machine made me confusing too. But if you study all the 5 options, E looks more better than rest of the options. So I would have marked E if get this question in GMAT.
07 Oct 2007, 20:23
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 low embarassing verbal score 6 27 Feb 2016, 06:46
Doctors generally agree that such factors as cigarette smoking, eating 3 22 Mar 2015, 02:51
3 Continuous low score. Need guidance to improve low score 1 17 Nov 2013, 12:34
low-priced newspapers and magazines 6 05 Sep 2008, 10:15
low pay job 2 15 Sep 2007, 01:32
Display posts from previous: Sort by