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

 It is currently 24 Sep 2018, 08:34

### 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

# QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 5001
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 11:31
12
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

68% (01:33) correct 32% (01:54) wrong based on 784 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Verbal Question of The Day: Day 74: Critical Reasoning

Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS

A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study the effectiveness of hair loss prevention treatments on two different groups of men, all of whom were 25 years old when the trial began. Before the trial began, none of the men had shown signs of hair loss, which is widely believed to be caused primarily by genetic factors. The treatment given to Group A was a pill taken daily for the duration of the trial, and the treatment given to Group B was a topical scalp cream used once daily for the duration of the trial. By the end of the five-year trial, 50% of the members of Group A had experienced some hair loss while only 25% of the members of Group B had experienced some hair loss. Despite these results, the treatment used on Group A was considered significantly more effective in preventing hair loss than the treatment used on Group B.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the apparent discrepancy?

(A) The members of Group B who experienced some hair loss had, on average, a slightly higher degree of hair loss than the members of Group A who experienced some hair loss.

(B) Most members of Group B found using the topical cream to be difficult and inconvenient, while most members of Group A found taking a pill once per day to be easy and convenient.

(C) The treatment used on Group B is significantly more expensive than the treatment used on Group A, and, as a result, a relatively small percentage of the target market would be able to afford the treatment used on Group B.

(D) Group A consisted of men with a family history of hair loss, while Group B consisted of men with no such family history.

(E) Nearly all members of Group B experienced significant side effects such as scalp irritation, unwanted growth of facial hair, and swelling in the hands and feet, while side effects of the treatment used on Group A were rare and minor.

Every question of the day will be followed by an expert reply by GMATNinja in 12-15 hours. Stay tuned! Post your answers and explanations to earn kudos.

_________________
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2023
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 11:37
4
1
The first step is to identify the discrepancy, using the author's own words as much as possible: "Despite these results (that, by the end of the five-year trial, 50% of the members of Group A had experienced some hair loss while only 25% of the members of Group B had experienced some hair loss), the treatment used on Group A was considered significantly more effective in preventing hair loss than the treatment used on Group B."

What else do we know...

• All of the men were 25 years old when the trial began.
• Before the trial began, none of the men had shown signs of hair loss.
• Hair loss is widely believed to be caused primarily by genetic factors.
• The treatment given to Group A was a pill taken daily for the duration of the trial.
• The treatment given to Group B was a topical scalp cream used once daily for the duration of the trial.

Based on the information in the passage, there are no major differences between the two groups of men. The form of their treatments was different, but that doesn't tell us anything about the effectiveness of the treatments. So if a larger percentage of Group A experienced some hair loss, why was the treatment used on Group A considered significantly more effective?

We need a statement that helps explain this apparent discrepancy:

Quote:
(A) The members of Group B who experienced some hair loss had, on average, a slightly higher degree of hair loss than the members of Group A who experienced some hair loss.

Choice A is tempting because it certainly makes the treatment used on Group B seem slightly less effective than we would conclude based solely on the information in the passage. But is this strong enough to explain why the treatment used on Group was considered significantly more effective, even though the percentage of Group A that experienced hair loss was double that of Group B? This doesn't seem like a strong enough answer, but I wouldn't cross it off just yet.

Quote:
(B) Most members of Group B found using the topical cream to be difficult and inconvenient, while most members of Group A found taking a pill once per day to be easy and convenient.

The treatment used by members of Group A might be significantly more convenient and easier to use than the treatment used by members of Group B, but these characteristics have nothing to do with the effectiveness of the two treatments. We need something that explains why the treatment used on Group A was considered more significantly more effective, not more convenient. Eliminate (B).

Quote:
(C) The treatment used on Group B is significantly more expensive than the treatment used on Group A, and, as a result, a relatively small percentage of the target market would be able to afford the treatment used on Group B.

As with the last choice, choice (C) addresses a characteristic--cost--that has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the two treatments. We need a statement that addresses effectiveness, not affordability. Eliminate (C).

Quote:
(D) Group A consisted of men with a family history of hair loss, while Group B consisted of men with no such family history.

We are told that "hair loss is widely believed to be caused primarily by genetic factors." Thus, if Group A consists of men with a family history of hair loss, most of those men, without treatment, may have been likely to experience hair loss. Similarly, most of the men in Group B may have been likely to avoid hair loss, even without treatment. In fact, if statement (D) is true, it is possible that the treatment used on Group B had no effect at all. Perhaps, due to genetic factors, only 25% of Group B's members would have experienced hair loss even without treatment.

Remember, we are looking for an answer that most helps to explain the apparent discrepancy. The statement in choice (D) certainly explains why the treatment used on Group B is less effective than it seems based on the facts given in the passage. This statement also explains why the treatment used on Group A was more effective than it seems based on the facts given in the passage. Thus, even though we can't know for sure what percentage of men from each group would have experienced hair loss without treatment, choice (D) helps explain the discrepancy more than choice (A).

Quote:
(E) Nearly all members of Group B experienced significant side effects such as scalp irritation, unwanted growth of facial hair, and swelling in the hands and feet, while side effects of the treatment used on Group A were rare and minor.

The amount and degree of the side effects have no impact on the effectiveness of the treatments. One treatment could be considered significantly more effective, even if its side effects are much worse. Thus, choice (E) does not help explain the discrepancy and can be eliminated.

Choice (D) is the only explanation that would explain why the treatment used on Group A might be considered significantly more effective. So choice (D) is the best answer.
_________________

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

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

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

##### General Discussion
Manager
Joined: 20 Jan 2016
Posts: 203
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 12:11
I am between A and D but I will go with option D
Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jul 2016
Posts: 398
Location: Singapore
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 12:19
Quote:
A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study the effectiveness of hair loss prevention treatments on two different groups of men, all of whom were 25 years old when the trial began. Before the trial began, none of the men had shown signs of hair loss, which is widely believed to be caused primarily by genetic factors. The treatment given to Group A was a pill taken daily for the duration of the trial, and the treatment given to Group B was a topical scalp cream used once daily for the duration of the trial. By the end of the five-year trial, 50% of the members of Group A had experienced some hair loss while only 25% of the members of Group B had experienced some hair loss. Despite these results, the treatment used on Group A was considered significantly more effective in preventing hair loss than the treatment used on Group B.

Group A and Group B - Both with men 25 years old with NO SIGN of HAIR LOSS, which is believed to be caused by genetic factors.
Group A given pills and Group B given a cream. After 5 years, Group A - 50% men experienced hair loss and Group B - 25% hair loss
BUT, treatment on GROUP A considered more effective. Huh? Why?

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the apparent discrepancy?

Quote:
(A) The members of Group B who experienced some hair loss had, on average, a slightly higher degree of hair loss than the members of Group A who experienced some hair loss.

This seems like a convincing option but it doesn't explain why the treatment on Group A was considered more effective. Degree of hair loss was higher in group B, but still more people in Group A had hair loss. If I want to be safe, I can keep this option till something better comes along.

Quote:
(B) Most members of Group B found using the topical cream to be difficult and inconvenient, while most members of Group A found taking a pill once per day to be easy and convenient.

The ease of use of a product doesn't define if it the treatment is more successful. I hate getting injections, but if required, you have to get one. This is OUT!

Quote:
(C) The treatment used on Group B is significantly more expensive than the treatment used on Group A, and, as a result, a relatively small percentage of the target market would be able to afford the treatment used on Group B.

We are only concerned with the test results, and not it's ability to capture the market. Secondly, if more people lost hair in Group A, it doesn't matter if its cheap, as it won't sell as much anyway. What will be the marketing strategy? We don't help as much, but we are cheaper. Try this crappy pill! This is OUT!

Quote:
(D) Group A consisted of men with a family history of hair loss, while Group B consisted of men with no such family history.

This looks good. Definitely better than A. If men in Group A had a family history of hair loss, and hair loss is believed to be hereditary then this showcases that the pill did help reduce the effects of hair loss, especially since men in group B had no history of hair loss. The cream in this instance doesn't seem to be very effective.

Quote:
(E) Nearly all members of Group B experienced significant side effects such as scalp irritation, unwanted growth of facial hair, and swelling in the hands and feet, while side effects of the treatment used on Group A were rare and minor.

Side-effects were not discussed in this argument, and although this does provide a good argument, it not better than D.

D is the answer for me.
_________________

Put in the work, and that dream score is yours!

Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2016
Posts: 24
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 12:50
Go for D

It mentions "genetic factors" in the stimuli.

Wait for the OA.
Intern
Joined: 27 May 2017
Posts: 11
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 16:22
I go for E, since D has been already stated as a fact in the premise

Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum
Intern
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 46
Location: India
GPA: 3.7
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 19:33
vacillated between D & E.

Finally choose E.

Awaiting OA
Intern
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 7
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Aug 2017, 23:23
Correct one is choice D, as the question is only concerned with effectiveness in preventing hairfall and not the side-effects caused by the treatments. Moreover there is no link between side-effects and hairfall.
Manager
Joined: 12 Sep 2016
Posts: 72
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.15
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2017, 00:32
D should be the right answer.
Pretty straight forward.
Director
Joined: 08 Jun 2015
Posts: 502
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q48 V38
GPA: 3.33
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2017, 06:51
I would go for D. My take:

To resolve the paradox, we need to find one reason why treatment given to pool A was more effective than the one given to pool B. What if though A had higher % , members of A were more likely to be bald in the first place ? This will resolve the paradox. Analysis of the option shows that only D fits the bill.
_________________

" The few , the fearless "

SVP
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 1789
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V33
GPA: 3.64
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Nov 2017, 23:34
boiled down to A and D.
"slightly" is a common pattern in gmat -> A is eliminated.
Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2013
Posts: 171
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Tuck
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V30
GPA: 3.6
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jun 2018, 10:22
i think E is better than D. in D it says group A people had hair loss problem so percentage was 50%, while in group B, people did not have any hair loss issue, still percentage was 25%. this option does not resolve the issue. everything is happening on expected lines.
Manager
Joined: 16 May 2016
Posts: 145
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Healthcare
GPA: 3
WE: Analyst (Computer Software)
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jun 2018, 10:53
D- The passage itself states the fact as Hairloss-genetic; we need to use this element only while solving the discrepancy and D helps us to do that

Sent from my XT1562 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
_________________

Not Giving UP! Kudos if you like the question

GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2023
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jul 2018, 11:50
brs1cob wrote:
i think E is better than D. in D it says group A people had hair loss problem so percentage was 50%, while in group B, people did not have any hair loss issue, still percentage was 25%. this option does not resolve the issue. everything is happening on expected lines.

Choice (E) does not explain why one treatment would be considered "significantly more effective in preventing hair loss" than the other. For example, treatment X cures the common cold but causes horrible rashes and diarrhea. Treatment Y has no side effects but only slightly lessens the symptoms of the common cold. Even though X's side effects are worse, it would definitely be considered more effective in treating the symptoms of the common cold. The side effects are not relevant to this point.

As for (D), sure, this does not PROVE that A was more effective. But we aren't trying to prove anything. We simply need a statement that, if true, most helps to explain the apparent discrepancy. The discrepancy is that A was considered significantly more effective in preventing hair loss than B, even though members of Group B had a lower rate of hair loss.

(D) tells us why the two percentages cannot be directly compared. There is another variable to consider (family history). While it is true that we cannot know the extent to which that new variable affects the percentages, this could certainly explain the apparent discrepancy.

_________________

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

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

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

Intern
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Posts: 18
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Sep 2018, 18:58
Was confused between A & D. The genetic thing tipped it towards D.
Re: QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study &nbs [#permalink] 03 Sep 2018, 18:58
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# QOTD: A five-year clinical trial was conducted to study

## 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®.