It is currently 13 Dec 2017, 10:29

# Decision(s) Day!:

CHAT Rooms | Ross R1 | Kellogg R1 | Darden R1 | Tepper R1

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Status: Bell the GMAT!!!
Affiliations: Aidha
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 175

Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 43

Location: Singapore
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q46 V37
GMAT 2: 620 Q49 V27
GMAT 3: 700 Q49 V36
WE: Other (Other)

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2011, 20:40
IMO A

I love this question type

We can guess the answer even before reading the options. The argument concludes that contact lenses cause dry eyes. How can we weaken this conclusion. This argument can be weakened in two ways:

1. If something else (not contact lenses) cause dry eyes
2. If dry eyes cause lead to wearing contact lenses.

Now lets see which option satisfies any of our two conditions:

Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the reasons their customers pur- chased eye drops to soothe eye dryness. Dry eyes were more frequently experienced by customers who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses. The pharmacists concluded that wearing con- tact lenses, by itself, can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.
Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines the pharmacists’ conclusion?
(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes. - Bingo! This option agrees with our statement 1. CORRECT
(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses. - INCORRECT. This option actually strengthens the conclusion.
(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses. - INCORRECT. This option kills the conclusion. We just have to weaken it.
(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes.- INCORRECT. Same reasoning as C
(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches.- INCORRECT. Out of scope

_________________

If my post did a dance in your mind, send me the steps through kudos :)

Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 43

Manager
Status: Target MBA
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 196

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 12

Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2011, 23:21
GMATmission wrote:
IMO A

I love this question type

We can guess the answer even before reading the options. The argument concludes that contact lenses cause dry eyes. How can we weaken this conclusion. This argument can be weakened in two ways:

1. If something else (not contact lenses) cause dry eyes
2. If dry eyes cause lead to wearing contact lenses.

Now lets see which option satisfies any of our two conditions:

Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the reasons their customers pur- chased eye drops to soothe eye dryness. Dry eyes were more frequently experienced by customers who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses. The pharmacists concluded that wearing con- tact lenses, by itself, can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.
Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines the pharmacists’ conclusion?
(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes. - Bingo! This option agrees with our statement 1. CORRECT
(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses. - INCORRECT. This option actually strengthens the conclusion.
(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses. - INCORRECT. This option kills the conclusion. We just have to weaken it.
(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes.- INCORRECT. Same reasoning as C
(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches.- INCORRECT. Out of scope

Why can't an option that <color>kills</color> the conclusion also weaken the conclusion.
AFAIK, any option that decreases the likelihood of conclusion to occur weakens the conclusion.
I may be wrong, but I doubt that it's a GMAT question.
_________________

Thanks and Regards,
GM.

Kudos [?]: 21 [0], given: 12

Manager
Status: Bell the GMAT!!!
Affiliations: Aidha
Joined: 16 Aug 2011
Posts: 175

Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 43

Location: Singapore
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 680 Q46 V37
GMAT 2: 620 Q49 V27
GMAT 3: 700 Q49 V36
WE: Other (Other)

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 00:13
gautammalik wrote:
GMATmission wrote:
IMO A

I love this question type

We can guess the answer even before reading the options. The argument concludes that contact lenses cause dry eyes. How can we weaken this conclusion. This argument can be weakened in two ways:

1. If something else (not contact lenses) cause dry eyes
2. If dry eyes cause lead to wearing contact lenses.

Now lets see which option satisfies any of our two conditions:

Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the reasons their customers pur- chased eye drops to soothe eye dryness. Dry eyes were more frequently experienced by customers who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses. The pharmacists concluded that wearing con- tact lenses, by itself, can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.
Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines the pharmacists’ conclusion?
(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes. - Bingo! This option agrees with our statement 1. CORRECT
(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses. - INCORRECT. This option actually strengthens the conclusion.
(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses. - INCORRECT. This option kills the conclusion. We just have to weaken it.
(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes.- INCORRECT. Same reasoning as C
(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches.- INCORRECT. Out of scope

Why can't an option that <color>kills</color> the conclusion also weaken the conclusion.
AFAIK, any option that decreases the likelihood of conclusion to occur weakens the conclusion.
I may be wrong, but I doubt that it's a GMAT question.

Hi Gautam,

The objective is not to nullify the argument. The objective - as clearly stated in the question - is to weaken the argument. If there were no option which weakens the argument, I MAY go for the one that kills the argument...but I will think a lot about it.
_________________

If my post did a dance in your mind, send me the steps through kudos :)

Kudos [?]: 85 [0], given: 43

Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 196

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 21

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 00:41
siddhans wrote:

Hi Aj85,

Choice A states: An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.

Isnt this choice out of scope since our target audience is people who wear contact lenses only and this choice also talks about people who do not wear contact lenses. Choice B talks only about people who wear contact lenses and says that physical exertion causes dry eyes and not wearing contact lenses. I agree many = not all but i believe this choice seems more to be a weakener than choice A since choice B talks about the people who wear contact lenses as stated in the passage and not about all people .

Thanks!!!

It doesn't matters if this choice also addresses people who do not war lenses as long as it talks about possibility of a cause other than contact lenses which causes dry eyes. The statement identifies the possibility of a unknown cause which may be real underlying cause of both weak eyesight (people wearing lenses) and dry eyes.

Regarding B, B actually has 2 flaws which I mentioned in my previous statement. First the sentence itself is ambiguous and add to that the misleading word many.

'MANY' is a very misleading word, we generally think word 'many' represents a very large proportion of a group , but that is false.

Suppose in your college there are 100 students and 80 of them know how to speak in Japanese , you will say many people in my college can speak in Japanese. So here 'many' represents 80 % of the group. Now I can say in my town 200 people can speak in Japanese . 200 is definitely a number with which we can use 'many'. So I can say many people in my town can speak in japanese . But my town has 20 million people. so here 'many' represents just 200/20 million = 0.001 %. people of the group. That is why many is the one of the most misleading term . It simply doesn't clarifies an issue.

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 21

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Posts: 336

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 00:46
Aj85 wrote:
siddhans wrote:

Hi Aj85,

Choice A states: An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.

Isnt this choice out of scope since our target audience is people who wear contact lenses only and this choice also talks about people who do not wear contact lenses. Choice B talks only about people who wear contact lenses and says that physical exertion causes dry eyes and not wearing contact lenses. I agree many = not all but i believe this choice seems more to be a weakener than choice A since choice B talks about the people who wear contact lenses as stated in the passage and not about all people .

Thanks!!!

It doesn't matters if this choice also addresses people who do not war lenses as long as it talks about possibility of a cause other than contact lenses which causes dry eyes. The statement identifies the possibility of a unknown cause which may be real underlying cause of both weak eyesight (people wearing lenses) and dry eyes.

Regarding B, B actually has 2 flaws which I mentioned in my previous statement. First the sentence itself is ambiguous and add to that the misleading word many.

'MANY' is a very misleading word, we generally think word 'many' represents a very large proportion of a group , but that is false.

Suppose in your college there are 100 students and 80 of them know how to speak in Japanese , you will say many people in my college can speak in Japanese. So here 'many' represents 80 % of the group. Now I can say in my town 200 people can speak in Japanese . 200 is definitely a number with which we can use 'many'. So I can say many people in my town can speak in japanese . But my town has 20 million people. so here 'many' represents just 200/20 million = 0.001 %. people of the group. That is why many is the one of the most misleading term . It simply doesn't clarifies an issue.

Not sure but I have seen so many instances where if the answer choice doesn't have the exact population/subject that was talked about in the subject it gets rejected as out of scope.

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 196

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 21

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 01:02
siddhans wrote:

Not sure but I have seen so many instances where if the answer choice doesn't have the exact population/subject that was talked about in the subject it gets rejected as out of scope.

I think you are not connecting the subjects properly. The statement 1 only changes a few words but implies contact lenses.

An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.

The weak eyesight above subtly conveys the situation of wearing lenses. The statement will be more direct if author wrote. 'An inherited condition can cause both problem requiring wearing contact lenses and dry eyes. But to make question difficult author plays with the wording. Hope you also got the problem with b.

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 21

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Posts: 336

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 01:08
Aj85 wrote:
siddhans wrote:

Not sure but I have seen so many instances where if the answer choice doesn't have the exact population/subject that was talked about in the subject it gets rejected as out of scope.

I think you are not connecting the subjects properly. The statement 1 only changes a few words but implies contact lenses.

An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.

The weak eyesight above subtly conveys the situation of wearing lenses. The statement will be more direct if author wrote. 'An inherited condition can cause both problem requiring wearing contact lenses and dry eyes. But to make question difficult author plays with the wording. Hope you also got the problem with b.

May be if the statement read : An inherited condition in people can cause dry eyes... but since this statement doesnt say anything we can be sure that the subjects are people who wear contact lenses and not general population or no one else... Not sure just a random thought that came to my mind. Not sure if i am correct here or no... Somehow I am not fully satisfied...

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 196

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 21

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 01:15
siddhans wrote:
Aj85 wrote:
siddhans wrote:

Not sure but I have seen so many instances where if the answer choice doesn't have the exact population/subject that was talked about in the subject it gets rejected as out of scope.

I think you are not connecting the subjects properly. The statement 1 only changes a few words but implies contact lenses.

An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.

The weak eyesight above subtly conveys the situation of wearing lenses. The statement will be more direct if author wrote. 'An inherited condition can cause both problem requiring wearing contact lenses and dry eyes. But to make question difficult author plays with the wording. Hope you also got the problem with b.

May be if the statement read : An inherited condition in people can cause dry eyes... but since this statement doesnt say anything we can be sure that the subjects are people who wear contact lenses and not general population or no one else... Not sure just a random thought that came to my mind. Not sure if i am correct here or no... Somehow I am not fully satisfied...

This statement identifies the possibility of 3rd agent causing the problem of both dry eyes and wearing lenses (weak eyesight) . For example

Ice cream sales increase in the summer. Violent crime also increases in the summer.
Therefore, ice cream causes violent crime.
-Assumes that correlation means causation. However, there is a third variable here -
the increased temperature in the summertime, which causes both ice cream sales
and violent crime to increase.

This is one of the repeated flaw patterns which question employs., Another right answer would have been a reason which suggested that dry eyes causes wearing contract lens or poor eyesight and not the other way. also you will always encounter subtler language the best way is to practise more.

Kudos [?]: 134 [0], given: 21

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Posts: 336

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 01:20
No , I understand the logic of 3rd agent causing something and I dont deny that fact. The only thing here i am confused about is that if answer choice refers to the people who just wear contact lenses or everyone in this world(even who do not wear contacts) ... This is the part where my confusion lies thats all

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

Manager
Joined: 14 Mar 2011
Posts: 196

Kudos [?]: 134 [2], given: 21

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 01:28
2
KUDOS
siddhans wrote:
No , I understand the logic of 3rd agent causing something and I dont deny that fact. The only thing here i am confused about is that if answer choice refers to the people who just wear contact lenses or everyone in this world(even who do not wear contacts) ... This is the part where my confusion lies thats all

what is important is that 'does explanation given in statement 1 includes the cases of people who wear the contact lenses or not'. the answer is yes we can attribute this 3rd unknown agent to be the cause of both dry eyes and weak eyesight (wearing lenses).

Now does this 3rd agent also works on people who do not wear eye lenses is not important for us (does this statement refer to other people too). it could also be a underlying agent which causes both wearing GLASSES and having dry eyes. So it can refer to even people who dont wear lenses (like to people who wear glasses) but the main issue of resolving the problems of contact lenses not causing dry eyes has been solved by this statement. Hope this helps.

Kudos [?]: 134 [2], given: 21

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jan 2011
Posts: 336

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 01:31
Aj85 wrote:
siddhans wrote:
No , I understand the logic of 3rd agent causing something and I dont deny that fact. The only thing here i am confused about is that if answer choice refers to the people who just wear contact lenses or everyone in this world(even who do not wear contacts) ... This is the part where my confusion lies thats all

what is important is that 'does explanation given in statement 1 includes the cases of people who wear the contact lenses or not'. the answer is yes we can attribute this 3rd unknown agent to be the cause of both dry eyes and weak eyesight (wearing lenses).

Now does this 3rd agent also works on people who do not wear eye lenses is not important for us (does this statement refer to other people too). it could also be a underlying agent which causes both wearing GLASSES and having dry eyes. So it can refer to even people who dont wear lenses (like to people who wear glasses) but the main issue of resolving the problems of contact lenses not causing dry eyes has been solved by this statement. Hope this helps.

Wow good explanation!!! Kudos to you

Kudos [?]: 248 [0], given: 87

Manager
Status: Retaking next month
Affiliations: None
Joined: 05 Mar 2011
Posts: 211

Kudos [?]: 184 [0], given: 42

Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V27
GPA: 3.01
WE: Sales (Manufacturing)

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2011, 01:52
Aj85 wrote:
This argument employs a common fallacy. That is if two things are happening together one causes other. It assumes that correlation means causation. Choice A correctly identifies the faulty reasoning and identifies the possibility of another condition which may be real cause behind both the problems of poor eyesight and dry eyes.

Rest other choices do not undermine the conclusion. that is they do not directly suggest in any way that contact lenses are not the cause of dry eyes"

Choice B has 2 problems, first it says Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses. But many is not equivalent to 'all' . for proving causation many people is not the appropriate word to use. Even if we remove many then this statement can be interpreted in two ways, physical exertion causes dry eyes and not contact lenses. this does undermines the conclusion. But another interpretation may be wearing contact lenses cause physical exertion which in turn causes dry eyes. This interpretation will support the argument. In any case, the first reason - the usage of uncertain word 'many' itself eliminates this choice.

Choice C - this does not deals with issue itself.

Choice D - again -Most people ? may be most dont have, but still contact lenses can cause dry eyes in some.

Choice E. this does not deals with issue itself

Awesome Explanation Aj. Kudos to you

Kudos [?]: 184 [0], given: 42

Intern
Joined: 24 Feb 2010
Posts: 11

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2012, 06:13

Contact lenses are used for 2 reasons:
1. Weak eye-sight
2. Stylish looks.

Aren't we assuming that the people who are using contact lenses are in fact using them ONLY because of weak eye-sight?

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 01 Aug 2011
Posts: 81

Kudos [?]: 292 [0], given: 29

Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Finance
GPA: 3.4
Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2012, 07:25
can someone give correct reasoning for incorrect answers

Kudos [?]: 292 [0], given: 29

Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 233

Kudos [?]: 163 [0], given: 16

Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jun 2012, 07:59
vote for A

(weaken)
Conclusion: Contact lenses "by itself" causes dry eyes

Premise: Dry eyes more frequently --> who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses.

(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.
--> provide additional premise that states there are causes to dry eyes and not only the contact lenses. Weakens the conclusion.

(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses.
--> This strengthens the conclucion by stating that "dry eyes are caused by wearing contact lenses".what about the perople who dont wear contact lenses but still have dry eyes

(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses.
--> But the premise in argument states otherwise (Premises should always be considered true, this information cannot be false)

(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes.
--> But the premise in argument states otherwise (Premises should always be considered true, this information cannot be false)

(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches.
--> Out of scope argument has nothing to do with headaches

Kudos [?]: 163 [0], given: 16

Senior Manager
Status: Student
Joined: 26 Aug 2013
Posts: 250

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 401

Location: France
Concentration: Finance, General Management
Schools: EMLYON FT'16
GMAT 1: 650 Q47 V32
GPA: 3.44
Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Feb 2014, 09:32
huskers wrote:
Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the reasons their customers purchased eye drops to soothe eye dryness. Dry eyes were more frequently experienced by customers who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses. The pharmacists concluded that wearing contact lenses, by itself, can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines the pharmacists' conclusion?

(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.
(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses.
(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses.
(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes.
(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches.

Hi,

this is how I did it:

You are looking for a cause and an effect. This is basic stuff. What will undermine the conclusion: well that some other cause produces the exact same effect.

Now state the conclusion in simple terms: "Wearing contact lenses cause dry eyes"

(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes. correct
(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses. Not correct Irrelevant
(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses. Not correct (trap)
(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes. Not correct (trap)
(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches Irrelevant Not correct

Only A undermines.

Now verify if it make sense:

"Wearing contact lenses cause dry eyes" ==> BUT An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes ==> Therefore, Contact lenses might cause dry eyes as well as an inherited condition can.

hih
_________________

Think outside the box

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 401

Senior Manager
Joined: 03 May 2013
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 154 [0], given: 70

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Human Resources
Schools: XLRI GM"18
GPA: 4
WE: Human Resources (Human Resources)
Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Feb 2015, 07:56
Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the reasons their customers purchased eye drops to soothe eye dryness. Dry eyes were more frequently experienced by customers who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses. The pharmacists concluded that wearing contact lenses, by itself, can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines the pharmacists' conclusion?

what is the conclusion--- wearing contact lenses, by itself, can cause dry eyes.

(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes. does this undermine "wearing contact lenses, by itself, can cause dry eyes"--- NO. An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes. BUT WEARING CONTACT LENSES, BY THOSE WHO DO NOT HAVE INHERITED CONDITION, CAN STILL CAUSE DRY EYES......
(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses. DOES " wearing contact lenses, by itself, cause dry eyes"... MAY NOT BE SO...IT IS ACTUALLY PHYSICAL EXERTION NOT "wearing contact lenses, by itself" THAT CAUSES dry eyes...... hence a BETTER ANSWER.....

Kudos [?]: 154 [0], given: 70

Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2016
Posts: 60

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 4

Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2016, 14:52
Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the reasons their customers purchased eye drops to soothe eye dryness. Dry eyes were more frequently experienced by customers who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses. The pharmacists concluded that wearing contact lenses, by itself, can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines the pharmacists' conclusion?

(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.
Could be weak eyesight means they wear glass or ignore or having laser operated. No where weakens the conclusion
wearing contact lenses can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.

(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses.
(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses.
(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes. ==> ANSWER
(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches

Argument says dry eyes is experienced by people who wore contact lenses.
Lets say the entire dry eyes set is A and contact lenses set is B and normal glasses set is C and no eye sight is D
Set A and B overlaps and Set A and C and Set A and D could overlap
But chance that large unoverlapped set of B could exists

Means lets say
Dry eyes = 10
Contact lenses = 40
NOrmal glasses = 25
No eye sight = 35

Dry eyes coincides with contact lenses is 9 and is equvivalent to 1% of contact lenses.
so many people with contact lenses are not having dry eyes which is weakening the conclusion that contact lenses causes dry eyes and is clearly mentioned in D

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 4

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3227

Kudos [?]: 3634 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2016, 09:04
ravikrishna1979 wrote:
Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the reasons their customers purchased eye drops to soothe eye dryness. Dry eyes were more frequently experienced by customers who wore contact lenses than by customers who did not wear contact lenses. The pharmacists concluded that wearing contact lenses, by itself, can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously undermines the pharmacists' conclusion?

(A) An inherited condition can cause both weak eyesight and dry eyes.
Could be weak eyesight means they wear glass or ignore or having laser operated. No where weakens the conclusion
wearing contact lenses can cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.

(B) Physical exertion causes dry eyes in many people who wear contact lenses.
(C) Most people who have dry eyes do not wear contact lenses.
(D) Most people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eyes. ==> ANSWER
(E) Both weak vision and dry eyes cause headaches

Argument says dry eyes is experienced by people who wore contact lenses.
Lets say the entire dry eyes set is A and contact lenses set is B and normal glasses set is C and no eye sight is D
Set A and B overlaps and Set A and C and Set A and D could overlap
But chance that large unoverlapped set of B could exists

Means lets say
Dry eyes = 10
Contact lenses = 40
NOrmal glasses = 25
No eye sight = 35

Dry eyes coincides with contact lenses is 9 and is equvivalent to 1% of contact lenses.
so many people with contact lenses are not having dry eyes which is weakening the conclusion that contact lenses causes dry eyes and is clearly mentioned in D

A is alright. This is a typical GMAT-like option:
Conclusion: X causes Y.
Weakening statement: Z causes X and Y. (Thus X does not cause Y - just that they happen together because something else causes both of them).

It is very difficult to pose a solid reason to eliminate D - it is trap, yes - but why is it a trap?
Take a look at the conclusion carefully: Wearing contact lenses CAN cause contact wearers to have dry eyes.

The conclusion does not say Wearing contact lenses WILL cause contact wearers to have dry eyes. So even if most of the people who wear contact lenses do not have dry eye, that does not weaken the argument, because the argument does not claim that whoever wears or most of them who wear contact lenses WILL have dry eyes. It just implies that there is a chance that if someone wears contact lenses, he/ she will have dry eyes caused by wearing the lenses.

A is indeed the right answer.

Kudos [?]: 3634 [0], given: 22

Manager
Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Posts: 84

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 99

Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q50 V30
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Nov 2016, 18:09
I am still confused why B is wrong. Isn't it saying that physical exertion rather than contact lenses itself causes dryness.

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 99

Re: Pharmacists recently conducted a study with respect to the   [#permalink] 29 Nov 2016, 18:09

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 41 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by