GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 17 Aug 2018, 12:35

### 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

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

# People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 29 May 2016
Posts: 3
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Dec 2016, 20:52
I chose E

I originally chose A but disregarded because I felt the assumption that switching to another occupation involving people was a stretch. A different occupation could involve a plethora of jobs that allows one to be by themself.
Senior Manager
Status: Come! Fall in Love with Learning!
Joined: 05 Jan 2017
Posts: 433
Location: India
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Mar 2017, 03:50
A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.( RIGHT ANSWER : A zoo employee who switches to other occupation becomes a member of the general population who has spent large amount of time with animals but he still retains his animal induced allergy thereby increasing the %age of the people with the allergy in the general population)
B. A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets at home( Wrong Answer : This option is irrelevant to the argument at hand.)
C. The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.( Wrong Answer : But the argument is concerned with the %age of the people of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact.)
D. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos.( Wrong Answer : This option is irrelevant to the argument )
E. Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care.( Wrong Answer : This option is irrelevant to the argument.)
_________________

GMAT Mentors

Senior Manager
Status: Active
Affiliations: NA
Joined: 24 Oct 2012
Posts: 295
GMAT 1: 590 Q50 V21
GMAT 2: 600 Q48 V25
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V37
GPA: 3.5
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2017, 03:20
Vidhi1 wrote:
Isn't C stating the fact mentioned in the argument? The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small. That means the percentage of general population who has severe allergies is greater than the zoo population. Which supports the claim made by the author.
Can you please elaborate why A is right?

Premise : People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies.

Conclusion of Experts : Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.

A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
This option confirms that general people infected with allergy is more than zoo employee .

C. The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.
Opposite of what mentioned in passage , please refer higlighted text in experts conclusion
_________________

#If you like my post , please encourage me by giving Kudos

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Posts: 473
Location: India
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2017, 11:33
People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.
Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts’ conclusion?

A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
B. A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets at home
C. The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.
D. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos.
E. Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care.

The expert concluded that the percentage of people contracting animal induced allergies is greateer than that observed in the survey because the employees who develop serious allergies tend to swith profession and thus the people with allergies left to fill the questioner remain lesser than actual.Option A is Correct. ,pet animals and protective gear and sample space is out of scope here.
Intern
Joined: 13 May 2017
Posts: 1
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 May 2017, 10:39
Hello,
I would like to ask about option C: "The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small."

Can't this imply that the percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals is higher than that of a zoo employee could be high?
Manager
Joined: 18 Mar 2015
Posts: 105
Location: India
Schools: ISB '19
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V26
GPA: 3.59
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 May 2017, 05:18
even after reading other's reasoning for E, still not convinced how option E is wrong? Please explain
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 1903
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2017, 14:57
1
r19 wrote:
even after reading other's reasoning for E, still not convinced how option E is wrong? Please explain

Quote:
E. Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care.

The experts' conclusion is "that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more". Choice (E) certainly tells us that zoo employees are exposed to the animals in their care and thus susceptible to developing allergies, but it does not give us any reason to conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is substantially more than 30%. Choice (E) simply gives us one reason why zoo employees might develop animal-induced allergies.

Quote:
A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.

Choice (A), on the other hand, implies that the percentage of zoo employees with animal-induced allergies would be higher if those employees who developed serious animal-induced allergies were likely to continue working as zoo employees rather than switching occupations, supporting the experts' conclusion.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for \$29.99 | Time management on verbal

VP
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1219
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2017, 09:05
IMO A
A gives us the reason why the population of the infected people is greater than 30%.
E is out of scope
B does not affect argument at all.
C is also out of scope
D is also does not help
_________________

Please give kudos if you found my answers useful

Intern
Joined: 27 Dec 2015
Posts: 29
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jul 2017, 07:05
How E is weakening the argument..??

I choose E because, it is given in E, Zoo employees don't wear the protective gear.Similarly, general public also don't use protective gear while handling the animals in their care.So the luxury of using protective gear with zoo employees is clearly omiited.
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 634
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jul 2017, 08:47
Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!
_________________

Intern
Joined: 16 May 2017
Posts: 2
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2017, 00:04
why we are not considering zoo experts inside the general population ?
Director
Joined: 12 Nov 2016
Posts: 771
Location: United States
Schools: Yale '18
GMAT 1: 650 Q43 V37
GRE 1: Q157 V158
GPA: 2.66
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2017, 13:05
mymba99 wrote:
People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts’ conclusion?

A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
B. A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets at home weakens conclusion
C. The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.
D. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos. weakens conclusion
E. Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care.
weakens conclusion

A is basically saying that because a zoo employee switches occupations when they become infected the general population of people who are not zoo workers would but infected would naturally become larger - the general population is increasing because infected zoo workers are leaving and the zoo worker population is shrinking
Manager
Joined: 19 Jun 2017
Posts: 50
GMAT 1: 660 Q39 V40
GMAT 2: 700 Q45 V41
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Dec 2017, 23:57
Imo, this is not a very good question primarily because of the answer choices.

A wins because all the others are either irrelevant, or blatantly weaken the conclusion.

The conclusion states that the % of people with animal induced allergies is substantially more.

A states that zoo keepers who have developed allergies often switch professions. This means that in addition to the 30% of the general population suffering from allergies, we need to add the number of zookeepers too, which obviously increases that percentage. But by how much?

It depends on the sample size. But when considering a general population, its typical to run into the thousands if not hundreds of thousands. Adding a few sick zookeepers into the mix is going to increase the % from 30, sure, but significantly so? Doesn't seem right.

But at the end, through PoE, A is the best of the worst.
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2018
Posts: 253
Location: United States (ID)
GPA: 3.33
WE: Accounting (Accounting)
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2018, 15:12
experts, pls help. How A can help to strengthen the argument?
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Dec 2015
Posts: 277
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
WE: Investment Banking (Venture Capital)
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2018, 12:44
Pretty straightforward...

People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts’ conclusion?

** You know what I'm thinking is odd here? If 30% of people working at zoos get animal-induced allergies, how on earth is the general population much more affected? Who can spend more time with animals than people whose job it is to literally be in their presence all day??

A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
>> Bingo. If former employees are now part of the general population, no wonder the % is much higher than 30. You get the 30 from the former employees as well as others that weren't employees, just really into their pets lol

B. A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets at home
>> OPPOSITE. we want to prove that there's a higher % in the general population than zoo employees.

C. The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.
>> OPPOSITE. we want to prove that there's a higher % in the general population than zoo employees.

D. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos.
>> OPPOSITE. we want to prove that there's a higher % in the general population than zoo employees.

E. Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care.
>> OUT OF FOCUS. Doesn't address general population at all.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 286
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Feb 2018, 11:23
LakerFan24 wrote:
Pretty straightforward...

People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often develop animal-induced allergies, some of them quite serious. In a survey of current employees in major zoos, about 30 percent had animal-induced allergies. Based on this sample, experts conclude that among members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals, the percentage with animal-induced allergies is not 30 percent but substantially more.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest grounds for the experts’ conclusion?

** You know what I'm thinking is odd here? If 30% of people working at zoos get animal-induced allergies, how on earth is the general population much more affected? Who can spend more time with animals than people whose job it is to literally be in their presence all day??

A. A zoo employee who develops a serious animal-induced allergy is very likely to switch to some other occupation.
>> Bingo. If former employees are now part of the general population, no wonder the % is much higher than 30. You get the 30 from the former employees as well as others that weren't employees, just really into their pets lol

B. A zoo employee is more likely than a person in the general population to keep one or more animal pets at home
>> OPPOSITE. we want to prove that there's a higher % in the general population than zoo employees.

C. The percentage of the general population whose level of exposure to animals matches that of a zoo employee is quite small.
>> OPPOSITE. we want to prove that there's a higher % in the general population than zoo employees.

D. Exposure to domestic pets is, on the whole, less likely to cause animal induced allergy than exposure to many of the animals kept in zoos.
>> OPPOSITE. we want to prove that there's a higher % in the general population than zoo employees.

E. Zoo employees seldom wear protective gear when they handle animals in their care.
>> OUT OF FOCUS. Doesn't address general population at all.

Thanks LakerFan24 for the explanation!

Indeed, if the percentage of zoo employees with allergies is 30% AFTER the employees with serious allergies quit and find other jobs, then that percentage would be even higher if those with serious allergies had not quit.

This data suggests that, in general, MORE than 30% of those in close contact with animals would have animal-induced allergies.

_________________
Intern
Joined: 10 Oct 2017
Posts: 8
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Feb 2018, 17:01
I have gone through the comments for explanations. I have a doubt. the general population with allergies will exceed 30% if the existing percentage is 30%. but we do not have any information about it in the question. so how do we pick A?
Please let me know if i'm missing something.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 286
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Feb 2018, 20:26
sindhugh wrote:
I have gone through the comments for explanations. I have a doubt. the general population with allergies will exceed 30% if the existing percentage is 30%. but we do not have any information about it in the question. so how do we pick A?
Please let me know if i'm missing something.

True, we do not have information about the general population. The author is using survey data from one group (zoo workers) to draw a conclusion about members of the general population who have spent a similarly large amount of time in close contact with animals. Notice that the author is not talking about the ENTIRE general population. Rather, the author is only concerned with those who have spent as much time with animals as have zoo workers.

So if 30% of zoo workers have the allergies, then we might expect 30% of ALL people in close contact with animals to have the allergies. But notice that the passage does not say that 30% of zoo workers DEVELOPED allergies. Instead, the passage, says that 30% of those surveyed HAD the allergies.

Choice (A) tells us that those workers who develop serious allergies will quit their jobs at the zoo, so those people would not be included in the survey. If those people had not quit, then the percentage might have been substantially higher than 30%. In other words, maybe 40% of zoo workers DEVELOP the allergies. But since those with serious allergies end up quitting, the percentage of those surveyed with the allergies is only 30%.

This suggests that the 30% figure is an underestimate. If nobody had quit, the figure would have been higher. Projecting this data to ALL people in close-contact with animals, we would expect MORE than 30% to develop the allergies.

I hope that helps!
_________________
Intern
Joined: 25 Dec 2017
Posts: 1
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Jun 2018, 21:28
Since most zoo employees who get allergies are likely to leave the job, and new employees would be hired instead, their leaving actually lowers the percentage of the allergic people in the zoo (the actual rate in zoo would be much higher than 30% if they don't leave). As a result, the general rate should be higher than the rate in zoo.
Re: People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often &nbs [#permalink] 10 Jun 2018, 21:28

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 59 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# People who have spent a lot of time in contact with animals often

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

# Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.