OE

Split #1: the word “prohibit” is already a negative. Any answer with “no” would be an incorrect double-negative. Choices (A) & (C) are incorrect.

Split #2: as discussed in this post, we want a construction that means none of item #1, none of item #2, and none of item #3. For the construction, we need the word “or.” Choices (A) & (B) are incorrect.

Split #3: Concision. Choice (E) is an wordy monstrosity that should be taken out back and shot. The hypothetical “would be an illegal drug” is totally inappropriate to the context. It’s not that heroin or cocaine “would be” illegal — they are illegal!! Choice (E) is far too wordy as well as illogical, so it is incorrect.

For all these reasons, the only possible answer is (D).
_________________

Hasan Mahmud

Option D is absolutely correct.

Options B & D are both correct grammatically, but only option D is correct LOGICALLY. Let's understand WHY..

Major League Baseball policy prohibits use of anabolic steroids, human growth hormone, and no illegal drugs.

The Policy prohibits 3 items -
1) Anabolic Steroids
2) Human Growth Hormones
3) Illegal Drugs

Scenario A - If we use AND
Such use would mean that any player would be eliminated only if he uses ALL THE THREE ITEMS. It also means that a player would not be eliminated if he use either only 1 item or a combination of 2 items.
I don't think that's the practice of any league or Sports team.

Scenario B - If we use OR
Such use would mean that any player would be eliminated if he uses ANY of THE THREE ITEMS. It also means that a player would be eliminated if he use either a combination of 2 items or all 3 items.
I believe that's the practice of any league or Sports team.
Hence CORRECT
_________________

If you like the post, show appreciation by pressing Kudos button

The word "and" is the appropriate choice here, if the intended meaning is that all three things are prohibited.

I've read a justification for using "or" in situations like this, and there's a subtle logical error in it. This is not going to be relevant in GMAT SC, but I'll point it out anyway - for interest only!

The justification for using "or" goes like this:

- if we say "X, Y, or Z", we mean one or more of these things
- so if we say "*not* X, Y, or Z" we mean "not one or more of these things", so we mean "none of these things"
- when we list things after a verb like 'prohibit', 'ban', 'forbid', or 'proscribe', a verb where the meaning "not" is implied, we usually mean "none of these things" are allowed, so we should say "or", not "and"

That is logically correct if your sentence reads as follows:

1. "You are allowed to eat things that are not meat, tomatoes, or lemons"

That means meat, tomatoes and lemons are all forbidden. We need to use "or" here to convey that meaning. This sentence has a different meaning:

2. "You are allowed to eat things that are not meat, tomatoes, and lemons"

This only means you'd be allowed to deviate from a diet consisting of meat, tomatoes and lemons.

But that consideration isn't relevant when you consider a sentence like this:

3. "You are not allowed to eat meat, tomatoes and lemons."

This does not mean the same thing as sentence #1 above. We can't just move the word "not" around without changing the meaning of the sentence. When we write a sentence like #3, the word "not" is stuck to the verb. In sentence #3, the verb "not allowed" applies to all three foods in the list. It would mean something different if you used "or":

4. "You are not allowed to eat meat, tomatoes or lemons."

This means something more like "you're not allowed to eat (at least) one of these things, but I'm not telling you which". That's not normally the meaning we'd intend by a sentence like this.

So if we're listing things that are all "prohibited", we need to use "and" in that list.

And just to confirm this accords with general usage, I did do a quick google search to find credible writing which used "prohibited" or "forbidden" followed by a list, and in each example the word "and" was used when the intended meaning was "all of these things are prohibited". So independent of logic, "and" also appears to be the idiomatically correct choice.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

The reason we "or" is because it changes the sentence to mean that any of these three items will result in a MLB player being banned. However, the use of "and" implies that it would have to be conclusively proven that an MLB violate ALL three of these criteria. B is grammatically correct but this isn't the SAT this the GMAT.

D