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.
May 1912:00 PM PDT
-01:00 PM PDT
Scoring 329 on the GRE is not always about using more books, more courses, or a longer study plan. In this episode of GRE Success Talks, Ashutosh shares his GRE preparation strategy, study plan, and test-day experience, explaining how he kept his prep....
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products. Ends 6/1
May 1501:00 PM IST
-11:00 AM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.- May 18
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 25 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions. 
May 2008:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
What’s in it for you- Live Profile Evaluation Chat Session with Jenifer Turtschanow, CEO, ARINGO. Come with your details prepared and ARINGO will share insights! Pre-MBA Role/Industry, YOE, Exam Score, C/GPA, ECs Post-MBA Role/ Industry & School List.- Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
28 May 2009, 23:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
N
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 0
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Public health advocate: Generally over the past 30 years in the United States, it is true that medications that undergo the extensive FDA Phase III clinical safety testing are much safer than less-researched drugs. It is also true that whenever such trials are conducted, fewer people have experienced unexpected harmful side effects, thus reducing public health risks. However, eliminating the requirement that even FDA-tested medications continue to include extensive warnings about individual risk factors would almost certainly harm rather than help public health. Consumers would tend to rely on the FDA’s general certification of safety, and if no longer encouraged to read about individual risks and drug interactions, many patients would suffer serious adverse reactions.
The two bolded statements serve what purpose in the context of the public health advocate’s argument?
*
A.
The first is a general pattern that the advocate accepts as true; the second is said to be a natural consequence that must follow if the general pattern applies.
*
B.
The first is a causal relationship that the advocate believes will happen again in the case at issue; the second admits a situation in which the relationship would not hold.
*
C.
The first describes a cause and effect relationship that the advocate believes will not hold in the case at issue; the second suggests a consideration that supports that belief.
*
D.
The first is proof that the advocate uses to support a prediction; the second states that prediction.
*
E.
The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the stance that the advocate supports; the second is that stance.
Pls help
The two bolded statements serve what purpose in the context of the public health advocate’s argument?
*
A.
The first is a general pattern that the advocate accepts as true; the second is said to be a natural consequence that must follow if the general pattern applies.
*
B.
The first is a causal relationship that the advocate believes will happen again in the case at issue; the second admits a situation in which the relationship would not hold.
*
C.
The first describes a cause and effect relationship that the advocate believes will not hold in the case at issue; the second suggests a consideration that supports that belief.
*
D.
The first is proof that the advocate uses to support a prediction; the second states that prediction.
*
E.
The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the stance that the advocate supports; the second is that stance.
Pls help
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
29 May 2009, 01:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
A: It says 'the second is said to be a natural consequence that must follow if the general pattern applies.' which is not true.
D: The first is proof that the advocate uses to support a prediction; the second states that prediction.' the second is against what's mentioned in first
E:'The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the stance that the advocate supports; the second is that stance.' I think the first is not against the stance that the advocate supports.
B:'The first is a causal relationship that the advocate believes will happen again in the case at issue; the second admits a situation in which the relationship would not hold.'
It's nowhere mentioned that the advocate believes this will happen again in the case at issue .
C:'The first describes a cause and effect relationship that the advocate believes will not hold in the case at issue; the second suggests a consideration that supports that belief.' Fits the bill.
D: The first is proof that the advocate uses to support a prediction; the second states that prediction.' the second is against what's mentioned in first
E:'The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the stance that the advocate supports; the second is that stance.' I think the first is not against the stance that the advocate supports.
B:'The first is a causal relationship that the advocate believes will happen again in the case at issue; the second admits a situation in which the relationship would not hold.'
It's nowhere mentioned that the advocate believes this will happen again in the case at issue .
C:'The first describes a cause and effect relationship that the advocate believes will not hold in the case at issue; the second suggests a consideration that supports that belief.' Fits the bill.
29 May 2009, 16:57
Kudos
Bookmarks
First I identified that first part is causal relationship so I came down to B and C.
And out of B and C, C fits because B says it happens again, which does not hold true.
And out of B and C, C fits because B says it happens again, which does not hold true.
