Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 1912:30 PM EST
-01:30 PM EST
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more
Nov 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 2001:30 PM EST
-02:30 PM IST
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2407:00 PM PST
-08:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Updated on: 30 Sep 2023, 10:25
Originally posted by Sajjad1994 on 26 Jul 2021, 21:00.
Last edited by BottomJee on 30 Sep 2023, 10:25, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by BottomJee on 30 Sep 2023, 10:25, edited 2 times in total.
Moved to new forum
Kudos
Bookmarks
Pharmacist: Certirizine in both compounded and non-compounded forms has unknown long-term side effects.
Patient: The pharmacist can assess known risks depending on patient profiles, but cannot do so with unknown risks.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
75%
(hard)
Question Stats:
56% (02:45) correct
44%
(02:42)
wrong
based on 760
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Pharmacist: Certirizine, available either as a compounded or non-compounded medication, has been shown to be effective as an allergy medicine in a wide population of patients as a compounded medication. Because compounded forms of certrizine have unknown long-term side effects, I advise patients to go back to their doctors before I fill a compound prescription such as this to see if there are any non-compounded alternatives. I do this to minimize health risks to the patient.
Patient: That is contradictory to your usual behavior, given my long history in coming to this pharmacy. I've had several compounded prescriptions filled here before and you've never asked me to go back to my doctor. There must be another reason for your reluctance to fill this prescription.
Identify the statement that would most weaken the pharmacist's argument and the statement that would most weaken the patient's argument.
Patient: That is contradictory to your usual behavior, given my long history in coming to this pharmacy. I've had several compounded prescriptions filled here before and you've never asked me to go back to my doctor. There must be another reason for your reluctance to fill this prescription.
Identify the statement that would most weaken the pharmacist's argument and the statement that would most weaken the patient's argument.
| Pharmacist | Patient | |
| Allergies, if left untreated, can lead to serious medical problems. | ||
| Certirizine in both compounded and non-compounded forms has unknown long-term side effects. | ||
| The pharmacist does not believe that the studies conducted on certirizine are well substantiated. | ||
| The side effects of most allergy medicines take at least two years to appear. | ||
| The pharmacist can assess known risks depending on patient profiles, but cannot do so with unknown risks. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Pharmacist: Certirizine in both compounded and non-compounded forms has unknown long-term side effects.
Patient: The pharmacist can assess known risks depending on patient profiles, but cannot do so with unknown risks.
26 Aug 2021, 09:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Explanation
Weaken the pharmacist's argument
Since this is a weaken question, you'll want to identify the conclusion and the premise of this argument, and then weaken the link between them.
Conclusion: The pharmacist argues that he asks patients to revisit their doctors before prescribing compounded Certirizine to those patients in order to determine whether there may be any non-compounded alternatives.
Premises: The pharmacist does this because of unknown side effects associated with the compounded drug, as well as his desire to minimize health risks to the patient.
The assumption here is that the non-compounded alternatives have no such risk to patient health.
Answer choice (A) about allergies possibly leading to serious medical problems if left untreated does nothing to weaken this argument. While it may be the case that the delay in patient's receiving treatment could lead to problems, this answer choice doesn't weaken the connection between what the pharmacist does and his stated reasons for doing so. That connection is what you're actually trying to weaken in a weaken argument, not the conclusion itself, as this answer choice does.
Answer choice (B) about the drug's having unknown side effects in both compounded and non-compounded forms does weaken the argument. Since the pharmacist bases his recommendation about compounded Certirizine on the fact that there are unknown side effects, it would make no sense for the doctor not to make a similar recommendation for non-compunded Certirizine if in fact that form of the drug also has unknown side effects. This answer choice therefore weakens the pharmacist's argument and is the correct answer.
Answer choice (C) about the pharmacist's belief that the drug studies being not well-substantiated, does nothing to weaken this argument. Whether the studies are well-substantiated or not is outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (D) about the side effects of most medicines, is also outside the scope of the argument. You're not concerned with most medicines, only this one. And you have no information to determine whether this medicine is or isn't part of the "most" medicines with side effects not necessarily appearing for two years.
Answer choice (E) strengthens, not weakens the pharmacist's argument. The fact that the pharmacist can assess known risks, but not unknown risks, makes him more likely to refer patients to other doctors when prescribing this drug, which has unknown risks.
The correct answer is (B).
Weaken the patient's argument
Since this is a weaken question, you'll want to identify the conclusion and the premise of this argument, and then weaken the link between them.
Conclusion: The patient argues that there must be some other reason than unknown side effects that the pharmacist is asking him to see his own doctor before receiving a prescription for compounded Certirizine.
Premises: The patient makes this conclusion based on the fact that he has received prescriptions for compounded medicines previously and has never had to revisit his doctor before.
The assumption here is that this medicine is analogous to those other medicines. So to weaken this analogy, you're looking for the answer choice that indicates that this medicine is NOT similar to previous medicines.
Answer choice (A) about allergies possibly leading to serious medical problems if left untreated does nothing to weaken this argument, as it does not address the illogical connection between previous medicines and this one.
Answer choice (B) about the drug's having unknown side effects in both compounded and non-compounded forms does not weaken the argument, as it does not address the illogical connection between previous medicines and this one.
Answer choice (C) about the pharmacist's belief that the drug studies being not well-substantiated, does nothing to weaken this argument. Whether the studies are well-substantiated or not is outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (D) about the side effects of most medicines, is also outside the scope of the argument. You're not concerned with most medicines, only this one. And it does not address the illogical connection between previous medicines and this one..
Answer choice (E) weakens the patient's argument by describing a possible dissimilarity between this drug and other drugs. Perhaps all previous prescriptions of this patient were filled with drugs with known side effects. In this case, the patient's assertion that there is "some other reason" is weakened.
The correct answer is (E).
Weaken the pharmacist's argument
Since this is a weaken question, you'll want to identify the conclusion and the premise of this argument, and then weaken the link between them.
Conclusion: The pharmacist argues that he asks patients to revisit their doctors before prescribing compounded Certirizine to those patients in order to determine whether there may be any non-compounded alternatives.
Premises: The pharmacist does this because of unknown side effects associated with the compounded drug, as well as his desire to minimize health risks to the patient.
The assumption here is that the non-compounded alternatives have no such risk to patient health.
Answer choice (A) about allergies possibly leading to serious medical problems if left untreated does nothing to weaken this argument. While it may be the case that the delay in patient's receiving treatment could lead to problems, this answer choice doesn't weaken the connection between what the pharmacist does and his stated reasons for doing so. That connection is what you're actually trying to weaken in a weaken argument, not the conclusion itself, as this answer choice does.
Answer choice (B) about the drug's having unknown side effects in both compounded and non-compounded forms does weaken the argument. Since the pharmacist bases his recommendation about compounded Certirizine on the fact that there are unknown side effects, it would make no sense for the doctor not to make a similar recommendation for non-compunded Certirizine if in fact that form of the drug also has unknown side effects. This answer choice therefore weakens the pharmacist's argument and is the correct answer.
Answer choice (C) about the pharmacist's belief that the drug studies being not well-substantiated, does nothing to weaken this argument. Whether the studies are well-substantiated or not is outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (D) about the side effects of most medicines, is also outside the scope of the argument. You're not concerned with most medicines, only this one. And you have no information to determine whether this medicine is or isn't part of the "most" medicines with side effects not necessarily appearing for two years.
Answer choice (E) strengthens, not weakens the pharmacist's argument. The fact that the pharmacist can assess known risks, but not unknown risks, makes him more likely to refer patients to other doctors when prescribing this drug, which has unknown risks.
The correct answer is (B).
Weaken the patient's argument
Since this is a weaken question, you'll want to identify the conclusion and the premise of this argument, and then weaken the link between them.
Conclusion: The patient argues that there must be some other reason than unknown side effects that the pharmacist is asking him to see his own doctor before receiving a prescription for compounded Certirizine.
Premises: The patient makes this conclusion based on the fact that he has received prescriptions for compounded medicines previously and has never had to revisit his doctor before.
The assumption here is that this medicine is analogous to those other medicines. So to weaken this analogy, you're looking for the answer choice that indicates that this medicine is NOT similar to previous medicines.
Answer choice (A) about allergies possibly leading to serious medical problems if left untreated does nothing to weaken this argument, as it does not address the illogical connection between previous medicines and this one.
Answer choice (B) about the drug's having unknown side effects in both compounded and non-compounded forms does not weaken the argument, as it does not address the illogical connection between previous medicines and this one.
Answer choice (C) about the pharmacist's belief that the drug studies being not well-substantiated, does nothing to weaken this argument. Whether the studies are well-substantiated or not is outside the scope of the argument.
Answer choice (D) about the side effects of most medicines, is also outside the scope of the argument. You're not concerned with most medicines, only this one. And it does not address the illogical connection between previous medicines and this one..
Answer choice (E) weakens the patient's argument by describing a possible dissimilarity between this drug and other drugs. Perhaps all previous prescriptions of this patient were filled with drugs with known side effects. In this case, the patient's assertion that there is "some other reason" is weakened.
The correct answer is (E).
