A specific skin rash has been linked to exposure to certain

I think that option A and d are both correct and hence either cannot be considered as the correct answer.Now option B,C and E are left. Option E can be eliminated since its out of scope. The argument is concerned about the banning of the product as a whole....
Out of B and C Option B is right since the argument recommends on the basis of just one reason mentioned.....and does not considers other reasons to eliminate the options..

Hence Answer is b

Consider Kudos If my post helps!!!!!

Archit

can please explain why d is not the answer and how did you you come to your answer

Thanks and regards,
Sidd

Can you explain how did you eliminate A ...If you cannot eliminate D than i think you also cannot eliminate A as well.
Pls provide you reasoning and than i will help you..

Archit

Hi Sidd,

D. It makes a generalization based on one segment of the population.

Yes the author is making generalization based on one segment of population, but it still does not explain the flaw. It is something that the author is doing.

Suppose we correct this point and change in the stimulus so that it includes the segment of population discussed: "the only way in which females aged 24-30 can avoid rashes is to stay away from Bronzer and other tanning beds". Would this make the argument no longer flawed? No; therefore (D) is incorrect.

Hope that helps,

Vercules

Please read carefully the rules for posting in verbal section

rules-for-posting-in-verbal-gmat-forum-134642.html

Thanks

Snookie goes into her favorite tanning salon with all her gal pals. She then hops in a greased out and over used tanning bed only to emerge hours later with a rash that will prevent even the most desperate of guidos from hollering at her. Naturally she is worried and proceeds to blame the equipment (bronzer) for her first world problems. When she tells her pal J-Wow about her dilema, J-Wow promptly tells her the only thing she can do is to take the "tan" out of Gym Tan Laundry.

However, immediately after J-Wow has imparted her knowledge of tanning on Snookie, Mike walks into the room and tells everyone to chill out because just because she got a rash from entering the womb of the Bronzer, does not mean the Bronzer is the only cause of Snookie's rash.

Snookie, now relieved that she won't have to part with her bronzing sessions, sits down in her favorite chair. As she sits down in her chair she feels a slimy sensation on her arm and almost immediately her rash comes back. Mike starts screaming at her from the top of his lungs "Don't sit there! A bunch of grenades just vomited all over that chair last night!" Snookie screams at him "what?? I fell asleep on this chair right before I went to the tanning salon!!" to which Mike responds "well maybe that's why you got a rash"

/end scene

I pick (B)

i think its A because the rash has been contracted by majority of the women using it in a specific age group and thus it deems allergic to them
however the conclusion states them to refrain from using the bronzer as well as other products....this means the author is saying not to use the tanning beds based on the data concluded from using the bronzer

i think its A because the rash has been contracted by majority of the women using it in a specific age group and thus it deems allergic to them
however the conclusion states them to refrain from using the bronzer as well as other products....this means the author is saying not to use the tanning beds based on the data concluded from using the bronzer

Hi Vercules

Really liked your way of eliminating options.
But in this case there seems to be multiple flaws in the argument and I find both A and B to be flaws that the argument has.Now,addressing one flaw ,in this case A does not make the argument correct.Neither does addressing B correct the argument completely.
Could u please suggest a way of working past this hurdle?

Many Thanks!
DebWenger

Vercules you are correct even if we address A or D, the argument remains flawed. But even if we address B, and remove the "Only way" part, the argument still remains flawed. The conclusion would be

A way avoid the rash is to refrain from using "The Bronzer" and other tanning beds altogether.

Now it is flawed for the reasons mentioned in A and D. And now I can say B is not the flaw in the reasoning.



How is my argument for eliminating B any different from your argument for eliminating A and D? Personally I think there are multiple flaws in the argument and A,B, and D cover them.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.