GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 8): Because of the increasing number of

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles: Not relevant. Reject
B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles: As there will be a drop in sale, injuries will also drop. Reject
C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle: Not relevant. Reject
D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious: Not relevant. Reject
E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can: logically complete the argument. Even with safety mechanism, children will not use it & hence number of injuries will not come down. Correct

Hence E is the correct option

Correct answer : Choice E

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles. - Wrong : Does not add the point that "this will not retard the rate at which injuries happen "

B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles. - Wrong : Has nothing to do with expensiveness and sales

C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle. - Wrong :
Does not matter if its 80% or 100%

D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious. - Wrong : type of the seriousness of the injury does not matter

E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can. - Correct : this supports the arguement that children want to ride bicycles that are unaided and this inturn will lead to falling and hence not retard the rise of the number of injuries.

need to give another reason why plan would not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle
one reason given that fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism
and


A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles. this is not weakener
B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles. not weakener
C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle. not weakener
D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious. not weakener
E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can. correct option
so children if deliberately disengaged the mechanism then there wont be drop on injuries

OPTION E is correct

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Because of the increasing number of injuries caused to children who start learning bicycles and in the process frequently fall down, bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide children’s bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism that can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider.
However this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle because the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism and ___________


If parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles, it will retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle.
Incorrect


We are concerned with rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle and not concerned about their sales.
Incorrect


The statement does not complete the sentence since it does not relate to retarding the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle.
Incorrect


We are concerned with rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle and about their seriousness.
Incorrect


However this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle because the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism and children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can.
The sentence is complete and conveys the correct meaning that safety mechanism slows down learning and children want to learn fast, therefore, regulation will not work.

IMO E

Ans: E

The correct answer should continue to provide reason that fall-proof mechanism will not solve the problem of reducing number of injuries which is only mentioned in option E.

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Because of the increasing number of injuries caused to children who start learning bicycles and in the process frequently fall down, bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide children’s bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism that can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider. However this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle because the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism and ___________

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles. : Incorrect
This gives reason for having safety mechanism.

B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles. Incorrect
Cost of bicycles in irrelevant here.

C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle. Incorrect.
It doesn't even talk about the mechanism.

D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious. Incorrect
Same as C, it doesn't talk about the mechanism.

E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can. :Correct

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles.
INCORRECT. This does not give a reason that logically completes the thought conveyed in the argument.

B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles.
INCORRECT. The argument does not talk or refer anything about how expensive the bicycle is going to. This does not give a reason that logically completes the thought conveyed in the argument.

C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle.
INCORRECT. This too does not complete the thought conveyed in the argument. This is irrelevant to the point of the argument.

D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious.
INCORRECT. Again the argument does not look to complete the sentence alluding to the seriousness of injuries resulting from falling from bicycles.

E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can.
CORRECT. This conveys the correct sense and logically completes the argument. It highlights two parallel reasons as to why the regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle. One, the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism, and two, children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can.

[quote="Bunuel"]Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Because of the increasing number of injuries caused to children who start learning bicycles and in the process frequently fall down, bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide children’s bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism that can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider. However this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle because the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism and ___________

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles.
-This is incorrect. This option here is weakening the argument
B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles.
-This is out of scope because here the argument is about why the rise in number of injuries will not be stopped due to this additional fall proof mechanism
C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle.
This is incorrect. there is no relation with this argument as here we are discussing about the additional fall-proof mechanism to prevent injuries
D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious.
-This is out of scope. As here we are not concerned about the seriousness of the injury but the number of injuries
E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can.
-this is the correct option. As children would still be riding bicycles without any safety mechanism to learn the process fast

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles.

Even if parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles, we know that the rider can disengage it. Hence this is not correct.

B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles.

Not in scope of the argument

C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle.

Doesn't tell us why the plan wont work

D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious.

We are not concerned about the type of injury cause, hence this is not in scope.

E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can.

This is correct, because we know that the safety mechanism can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider, so its likely that the children will remove them.

IMO E

Fact 1: bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide children’s bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism that can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider.
Conclusion: this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle
Fact 2: because the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism and ___________

Analysis:
Author analyzes that the rise in number of injuries from falling from a bicycle will not be reduced even if fall-proof mechanism is installed and reason for this is given as slow learning.
We assume that author would continue to speak about why this slow learning would not reduce the number of injuries.

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles.
--> Incorrect: this should in fact reduce the number of injuries.

B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles.
--> Incorrect: with reduced bicycle riders the number of injuries should decrease.

C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle.
--> Incorrect: this just explains importance of why new learners need some help to prevent them from falling of a bicycle. This statement does not indicate why slow learning with fall-proof mechanism would not reduce the number of injuries.

D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious.
--> Incorrect: the argument does not specify about seriousness of injuries. Hence, this is out of scope.

E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can.
--> Correct: This explains why slow aided learning would still not reduce the number of injuries. Because with slow learning children would not learn to ride bicycle before they remove the additional safety mechanism.

ANSWER E

Premise: bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism, because injuries are increasing

Conclusion: This is NOT going to be helpful because of several reasons

We want to identify reasons that tell us drawbacks of this fall-proof mechanism

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles. We are looking for the opposite of this
B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles. Sales of bicycles is irrelevant here
C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle. Out of focus, does not affect the conclusion in any way
D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious. Out of focus, does not affect the conclusion in any way
E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can. CORRECT

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Because of the increasing number of injuries caused to children who start learning bicycles and in the process frequently fall down, bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide children’s bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism that can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider. However this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle because the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism and ___________

Despite safety mechanism, no reduction in injuries. This can only be explained by some additional information which points at severely limited usage of such mechanism by children.


A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles.

will reduce the injuries, hence goes against the flow wrt the last line of the passage

B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles.

drop in chidrens' bicycles will lead to reduced injuries..however this prmpt is irrelevant since no discussion wrt prices in the stimulus

C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle.

safety mechanism will lead to reduction in injuries

D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious.

seriousness of the injury is not discussed..Out of scope

E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can.

if children wish to learn through 'unaided' bicycles, it means they will not be using the 'safety mechanism' bicycles..hence there will not be any reduction in injuries..in line with our prethinking

(E) is the correct answer..to complete the passage

Because of the increasing number of injuries caused to children who start learning bicycles and in the process frequently fall down, bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide children’s bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism that can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider. However this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle because

(1) the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism

and ___________

Here we need another reason that explains that even after mandating an additional fall-proof mechanism the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle would not retard.

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles. Incorrect.

B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles. Incorrect.

C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle. Irrelevant.

D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious. Tangential to the argument !

E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can. Correct !!

IMO Option E

Answer: E

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?

Because of the increasing number of injuries caused to children who start learning bicycles and in the process frequently fall down, bicycle manufacturers will soon be required to provide children’s bicycles with an additional fall-proof mechanism that can be engaged or disengaged as per the wish of the rider. However this regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries from falling from a bicycle because the fall-proof mechanism slows down the learning process by providing extra stability that is not experienced while riding a standard bicycle without such a mechanism and ___________

We need to look for an option which explains the reason why rise of the number of injuries will not retard.
The portion after because is one of the reason and passage ends with 'and', so we need to find another reason which will be parallel to the portion after because.

A. parents cautiously engage the safety mechanism before the children go out riding bicycles. --> Incorrect. If parents will engage the safety mechanism then injuries will reduce.
B. bicycles with the additional safety mechanism would be expensive and hence there will be a drop in the sales of childrens’ bicycles. --> Incorrect. Cost and sales are out of scope and do not provide reasoning as required in any manner.
C. as many as 80% of the new learners have been reportedly injured at least once by falling from a bicycle. --> Incorrect. Past data or survey are irrelevant as a reason.
D. the injuries resulting from falling from bicycles are in most cases not serious. --> Incorrect. Seriousness of injuries don't matter as long as there are injuries happening.
E. children wish to learn to ride bicycles unaided by any additional safety mechanism as fast as they can. --> Correct. This gives proper reasoning to the argument. if children learn unaided by any additional safety mechanism then they will tend to fall which will give rise in injuries. Hence, regulation would most probably not retard the rise of the number of injuries.

We're trying to find a second reason in support of this conclusion:



In my own words, the conclusion we need to support is "The new rules won't reduce total injuries to people falling off bikes."

There are 2 different ways to support this type of negative-space statement ("WON'T REDUCE total injuries"):
• The answer choice could be something that will INCREASE total falling-off-bike injuries,
OR
• The answer choice could just show that the new rules are IRRELEVANT to falling-off-bike injuries.


The goal is to find either of these.

Let's look at the choices;


This extra safety measure would be likely to reduce injuries. Wrong way.


This won't have any effect on each individual rider's probability of being injured—but if the bikes become less affordable overall, then there will be fewer riders.
We're interested in the TOTAL number of injuries (NOT injuries per rider!). This would actually have the effect of reducing that total, so, nope. Wrong way.



No connection to the new rule or the new mechanisms.


Well, that's good? Hah... but the only thing we're monitoring is the total number of injuries. We're not monitoring the seriousness of the injuries.



This is it! If this is true, then kids will be taking more attempts each at riding bikes WITHOUT the new mechanism engaged. That's going to translate into a proportional increase in falling injuries.

It's E.