Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 20:51 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 20:51

Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92915
Own Kudos [?]: 619047 [1]
Given Kudos: 81595
Send PM
Senior Moderator - Masters Forum
Joined: 19 Jan 2020
Posts: 3137
Own Kudos [?]: 2769 [0]
Given Kudos: 1510
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Internet and New Media)
Send PM
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2017
Posts: 301
Own Kudos [?]: 269 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Location: India
GMAT 1: 580 Q42 V27
Send PM
Senior Moderator - Masters Forum
Joined: 19 Jan 2020
Posts: 3137
Own Kudos [?]: 2769 [0]
Given Kudos: 1510
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Internet and New Media)
Send PM
Re: Since the 1960s, most drinking water provided by public water systems [#permalink]
I still think answer is C as the passage is saying that the fluorine is mixed in toothpastes fulfilling the need of fluorine in water.
Moreover saving cost is the issue here. As if the cost of fluorine is substantial the value saved by not adding fluorine won't be of significant amount.

Posted from my mobile device
Intern
Intern
Joined: 05 Jun 2016
Posts: 6
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 40
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Technology
GMAT 1: 610 Q45 V28
GPA: 3.6
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Send PM
Re: Since the 1960s, most drinking water provided by public water systems [#permalink]
The conclusion states that -
Quote:
Therefore, public water systems could now save the money formerly spent on water fluoridation without impacting the rate of occurrence of dental cavities in the communities they serve.

The author is relating the amount of money saved by not flourinating water to the rate of occurrences of dental cavities. If we can find an option which specifies that the amount of money saved is NOT reducing the occurrences of dental cavities, we can weaken the argument.

Option D does that -
Quote:
D. Fluoride toothpaste has been widely available since 1980, and recent studies have found higher levels of dental cavities in communities with unfluoridated water than in communities with fluoridated water.

By not flourinating the water, public water systems are saving money, but the occurrences of dental cavities are still are not reducing.

Option C talks about just the cost of flouride, and nothing about the rate of occurrences of dental cavities.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Feb 2019
Posts: 9
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 48
Send PM
Re: Since the 1960s, most drinking water provided by public water systems [#permalink]
A. The savings realized by public water systems would not be passed on to their customers but would be used for maintenance of and improvements to the system. - Out of Scope

B. The cost of adding fluoride to toothpaste is much less than the cost of adding fluoride to the water produced by public water systems. - Strengthening as toothpaste is shown as cost effective

C. Fluoride is a commodity traded throughout the world, and the availability and price of fluoride can vary substantially due to economic and political events. -Trading doesn't weaken the argument

D. Fluoride toothpaste has been widely available since 1980, and recent studies have found higher levels of dental cavities in communities with unfluoridated water than in communities with fluoridated water. - Directly attacks the conclusion. Correct

E. Fluoride is colorless, odorless, and tasteless when added to water, but flavorings are added to fluoride toothpaste to deliver a taste that most people describe as pleasant. Out of Scope
IESE School Moderator
Joined: 11 Feb 2019
Posts: 271
Own Kudos [?]: 171 [0]
Given Kudos: 53
Send PM
Re: Since the 1960s, most drinking water provided by public water systems [#permalink]
I think D could be the correct answer.

My analysis:
A: Irrelevant
B: this will strengthen the statement that more money will be saved by using alternate source to supplements the need for fluoride
C: Fluoride is currently added in water and now due to the availability of fluoride in toothpaste, public water systems can save money. We are not concern about the availability
D: It adds additional information about survey which supports that if fluoride is present in water, # of dental cavities patients are less
E: Passage does not talk about characteristics of fluoride
Manager
Manager
Joined: 25 Feb 2020
Posts: 53
Own Kudos [?]: 18 [0]
Given Kudos: 83
Send PM
Since the 1960s, most drinking water provided by public water systems [#permalink]
Since the 1960s, most drinking water provided by public water systems has had fluoride added, because research has demonstrated that adding fluoride to drinking water significantly reduces the occurrence of dental cavities in the populations served by those systems. However, manufacturers now add fluoride to toothpaste in amounts sufficient to provide the same level of protection against dental cavities as that provided by fluoridated water. Therefore, public water systems could now save the moneyformerly spent on water fluoridation without impacting the rate of occurrence of dental cavities in the communities they serve.

PRE -THINKING



Quote:
ASSUMPTION:-SAVING THE MONEY MEANS NOT GOING TO SPEND ON ADDING FLUORIDE IN WATER MEANS WHOLLY STOPPING THE PROCESS OF ADDITION.ADDITION OF FLUORIDE IN TOOTHPASTE WILL HAVE SAME BENEFIT ON TEETH AS ADDITION OF FLUORIDE IN WATER,THATSWHY IT STOPPED SPENDING.
WE HAVE TO DESTROY THE ASSUMPTION IN ORDER TO WEAKEN THE ARGUEMENT WHICH CAN BE DONE IF WE PROVE THAT ADDITION OF FLUORIDE IN TOOTHPASTE DOESNT HAVE SAME RESULT/BENEFIT AS THAT OF ADDITION OF FLUORIDE IN WATER,WHICH MEANS THAT IF WE STOP SPENDING THE MONEY THE HEALTH OF TEETH WILL DETEORIATE WHICH US REFLECTED IN OPTION D.


Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument?


A. The savings realized by public water systems would not be passed on to their customers but would be used for maintenance of and improvements to the system.

irrelevant,savings passing to customers doesnt weaken



B. The cost of adding fluoride to toothpaste is much less than the cost of adding fluoride to the water produced by public water systems.

comparison of cost is irrelevant,doesnt weaken



C. Fluoride is a commodity traded throughout the world, and the availability and price of fluoride can vary substantially due to economic and political events.

we have to weaken the assumption stated above.



D. Fluoride toothpaste has been widely available since 1980, and recent studies have found higher levels of dental cavities in communities with unfluoridated water than in communities with fluoridated water.

correct



E. Fluoride is colorless, odorless, and tasteless when added to water, but flavorings are added to fluoride toothpaste to deliver a taste that most people describe as pleasant.

irrelevant



Posted from my mobile device
GMAT Club Bot
Since the 1960s, most drinking water provided by public water systems [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne