Many individuals take antihistamine medications to alleviate the sympt

Question

Many individuals take antihistamine medications to alleviate the symptoms of allergies. Although all antihistamines are essentially similar, there is sufficient variation among the available formulas to make some more effective than others for any particular individual. Therefore, by trying different antihistamine formulations, any allergy sufferer can eventually find one that is effective.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion drawn in the argument above?

(A) Antihistamines are the only types of medications proven effective in treating allergy symptoms.

(B) At least one antihistamine will relieve any individual’s allergy symptoms.

(C) The effectiveness of an antihistamine is partially determined by the drug’s specific formulation.

(D) The specific formulation used most often by allergy sufferers is not the one that would be most effective for the greatest number of allergy sufferers.

(E) Most allergy sufferers experience allergy symptoms that are typical of many different types of allergies.

PyjamaScientist · Answer

The conclusion- "by trying different antihistamine formulations, any allergy sufferer can eventually find one that is effective" rests on a presupposition that atleast "one effective" antihistamine exists for every person suffering from allergy. If that were not the case, then the conclusion would fall. Because then trying various anti-histamines won't necessarily lead one to the one that is effective for that individual.

(B) brings in that information and removes any doubts. " At least one antihistamine will relieve any individual’s allergy symptoms. "
With this information our belief into the conclusion gets strenghtened. As trying many could very well lead to the one that is effective.

Notice, though it's an "strenghten" type question, the correct answer can very well be an "assumption".

Note: Every assumption is a strengthener. But, not every strengthener is an assumption.

Posted from my mobile device

durant25 · Answer

Why can't it be C? Isn't B already given in the question?

AllisonBell · Answer

Good question! Choice (B) does look very similar to the argument’s conclusion:  by trying different antihistamine formulations, any allergy sufferer can eventually find one that is effective.

But  since it’s the argument’s conclusion, it has to be treated as a subjective claim, not a statement of fact . The task is to consider:   how do we know that’s true?

The premises just tell us that variations make some antihistamines more effective than others for different individuals. Then the argument leaps to the conclusion that any individual can find one that works for them. But there’s a gap in the logic.  How do we know that there’s a variation that works for every single person?

Choice (B) fills in that gap by confirming that there is, indeed, at least one variation in existence that could work for any given person.

Choice (C) does confirm that there’s a relationship between the formula and its effectiveness. But what if all the formulas are varying degrees of limited effectiveness? Or there are only five formulas out there, and they don’t address all individual allergy situations? This answer doesn’t go as far as (B) to confirm that the conclusion is true.

For more CR questions and explanations, check out ManhattanPrep’s   Free GMAT QBank and Starter Kit  .

Best,

guddo · Answer

Many individuals take antihistamine medications to alleviate the symptoms of allergies. Although all antihistamines are essentially similar, there is sufficient variation among the available formulas to make some more effective than others for any particular individual. Therefore, by trying different antihistamine formulations, any allergy sufferer can eventually find one that is effective.
 
 Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion drawn in the argument above?

The argument says different antihistamine formulas work differently for different people. Then it concludes that any allergy sufferer can eventually find an effective one.  The key gap  is whether  every allergy sufferer has at least one antihistamine that will work .

(A) Antihistamines are the only types of medications proven effective in treating allergy symptoms.

This does not strengthen the conclusion much. The issue is not whether other medications work; the issue is whether some antihistamine will work for each allergy sufferer.

(B) At least one antihistamine will relieve any individual’s allergy symptoms.

This is correct. If at least one antihistamine will work for any individual, then trying different formulations can eventually lead each allergy sufferer to an effective one.

(C) The effectiveness of an antihistamine is partially determined by the drug’s specific formulation.

This supports the general idea that formulation matters, but it does not show that every allergy sufferer can find an effective formulation.

(D) The specific formulation used most often by allergy sufferers is not the one that would be most effective for the greatest number of allergy sufferers.

This is not enough. It suggests many people may be using a less-than-best formula, but it does not show that every allergy sufferer can find an effective one.

(E) Most allergy sufferers experience allergy symptoms that are typical of many different types of allergies.

This is irrelevant. The argument is about whether trying different antihistamine formulations can lead each person to an effective medication.

Answer: (B)

egmat · Answer

Hi durant25,

Good instinct to challenge B, because on a quick read it  does  sound like something the passage already told us. But look closely at the exact words, and you'll see B adds the one piece the argument never actually supplied.

Why B isn't a restatement

The premise says there's "sufficient variation among the available formulas to make  some more effective than others  for any particular individual." That's a  comparative  claim - some work better than others. It never says any of them actually  works  (relieves symptoms). "More effective than the rest" is still consistent with  all of them being useless  for a given person.

The conclusion, though, is that every sufferer  can eventually find one that is effective . That only holds if an effective one exists for each person in the first place. That's the gap - and B fills it exactly: "At least one antihistamine will relieve  any  individual's allergy symptoms." This is new information, not a repeat.

Why C falls short

C says effectiveness "is  partially determined by  the drug's specific formulation." That's essentially the premise reworded - it explains  why  formulas differ, but it still never guarantees that a working formula exists for a given sufferer. So it leaves the same gap open and does nothing for the conclusion.

Turn one word to feel it

- If the premise had said "variation is enough to make  at least one effective  for any individual" - the argument would already be airtight, and B would be redundant.
- But it only says some are " more effective than others " - a ranking, not a guarantee - so B is doing real work.

That's the whole trap: "more effective than others"  ≠  "effective." B closes that distance; C just restates the ranking.

Answer: B

Many individuals take antihistamine medications to alleviate the sympt

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Many individuals take antihistamine medications to alleviate the sympt

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards