Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 23:00 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 23:00
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2 
805+ Level|   Assumption|      
User avatar
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 06 Apr 2019, 23:44
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma
Hi.
Actually I rejected B because B talked about deficiency of iron leading to incidence of anemia where as the discussion is about the cure i.e if the iron injections could reverse the already existing anemic condition.

I went through the thread but I did not find any post stating this as the very reason for rejecting B. Can you confirm if this thought process is correct.
Thanks a lot!

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
ab965
User avatar
Joined: 26 Dec 2018
Last visit: 04 Jul 2022
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
28
Given Kudos: 26
Posts: 13
Kudos: 28
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 07 Apr 2019, 04:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasKarishma
D is not completely logical/is ambiguous as children who refuse to get injections does not imply that their parents will also accept their refusal and won't take them to get injected (as children are not adults and parents/guardian are responsible for their child's health). If it mentioned parents or guardian instead, then D is definitely the correct choice.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,266
Own Kudos:
76,983
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,266
Kudos: 76,983
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 07 Apr 2019, 23:38
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mudit27021988
VeritasKarishma
Hi.
Actually I rejected B because B talked about deficiency of iron leading to incidence of anemia where as the discussion is about the cure i.e if the iron injections could reverse the already existing anemic condition.

I went through the thread but I did not find any post stating this as the very reason for rejecting B. Can you confirm if this thought process is correct.
Thanks a lot!

Posted from my mobile device
Show more

Actually in (B), "influencing the incidence" doesn't necessarily mean "cause". It means iron has a role to play in the incidence of anaemia. What role is that exactly, the option doesn't say. But the argument does say "...the boost in iron that anaemic children need to reverse their condition..."
So the argument tells us that "a low iron level in the body is the major factor influencing the incidence of anaemia in children".
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,266
Own Kudos:
76,983
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,266
Kudos: 76,983
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 07 Apr 2019, 23:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ab965
VeritasKarishma
D is not completely logical/is ambiguous as children who refuse to get injections does not imply that their parents will also accept their refusal and won't take them to get injected (as children are not adults and parents/guardian are responsible for their child's health). If it mentioned parents or guardian instead, then D is definitely the correct choice.

Posted from my mobile device
Show more

In (D), "children will find out and submit" means "parents/family will find out and submit". Because the children are the beneficiaries, hence the option uses "children".

The argument says "The R&D Dep has expressed confidence that ... children will be cured ..."

Just because there is a cure doesn't mean people will be cured. They need to find out about it and submit to it. e.g. what if parents don't want their kids to get shots because of the risks associated with needles etc? So the R&D dip has assumed that their cure will be acceptable.
User avatar
andrew08
User avatar
Joined: 05 Apr 2019
Last visit: 08 Apr 2019
Posts: 4
Own Kudos:
5
Posts: 4
Kudos: 5
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 08 Apr 2019, 00:01
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
asaratchandra
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceutical organisations have been experimenting with new injections that provide the boost in iron that anemic children need to reverse their condition. These companies have expressed confidence that children who are suffeing from anemia will be cured relatively simply through the use of such biochemical supplements.

In concluding that the biochemical remedy being developed will have its desired effect, the pharmacuetical companies assume that :


(A) major pharmaceutical companies have the responsibility to cure childhood anemia

(B) a low iron level in the body is the major factor influencing the incidence of anemia in children

(C) a diet rich in iron cannot improve the conditions of children suffering from anemia to the point that biochemical supplements would become necessary

(D) children aflicted with anemia will find out about and submit to injections that can reverse their conditions

(E) the use of biochemical supplements is the safest way to cure anemia in children
Show more
I answered correctly! But I have one question? - Negating option C would mean that an iron enriched diet can improve to the point that biochemical supplements would become unnecessary suggesting there is a 'simpler' way i.e. the diet to cure anemia and this will undermine the conclusion. Why not C then?
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,266
Own Kudos:
76,983
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,266
Kudos: 76,983
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 08 Apr 2019, 05:37
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
andrew08
asaratchandra
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceutical organisations have been experimenting with new injections that provide the boost in iron that anemic children need to reverse their condition. These companies have expressed confidence that children who are suffeing from anemia will be cured relatively simply through the use of such biochemical supplements.

In concluding that the biochemical remedy being developed will have its desired effect, the pharmacuetical companies assume that :


(A) major pharmaceutical companies have the responsibility to cure childhood anemia

(B) a low iron level in the body is the major factor influencing the incidence of anemia in children

(C) a diet rich in iron cannot improve the conditions of children suffering from anemia to the point that biochemical supplements would become necessary

(D) children aflicted with anemia will find out about and submit to injections that can reverse their conditions

(E) the use of biochemical supplements is the safest way to cure anemia in children
I answered correctly! But I have one question? - Negating option C would mean that an iron enriched diet can improve to the point that biochemical supplements would become unnecessary suggesting there is a 'simpler' way i.e. the diet to cure anemia and this will undermine the conclusion. Why not C then?
Show more


Option (C) states, "would become unnecessary" not "would become necessary"

Look at the quote in various posts. I am not sure why the first post gives it as "necessary". It makes no sense.
User avatar
JuniqueLid
User avatar
Joined: 04 Feb 2025
Last visit: 29 Oct 2025
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
18
Given Kudos: 687
Products:
Forum Quiz
Posts: 53
Kudos: 18
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 21 Mar 2025, 20:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The most comprehensive and resonable reasoning on this post so far.
IanStewart
hemanthp
Recently, the research and development departments at major pharmaceutical companies have been experimenting with new injections that provide the boost in iron that anemic children need to reverse their condition. These companies have expressed confidence that children who are suffering from anemia will be cured relatively simply through the use of such biochemical supplements.

In concluding that the biochemical remedy being developed will have its desired effect, the pharmaceutical companies assume that

major pharmaceutical companies have the primary responsibility to cure childhood anemia
a low iron level in the body is the major factor influencing the incidence of anemia in children
a diet rich in iron cannot improve the conditions of children suffering from anemia to the point that biochemical supplements would become unnecessary
children afflicted with anemia will find out about and submit to injections that can reverse their conditions
the use of biochemical supplements is the safest way to cure anemia in children

I have serious issues with the wording here, since it's open to two completely legitimate interpretations; the phrase "children who are suffering from anemia will be cured" could mean two different things. It could mean "*all* children with anemia will be cured" (this is the interpretation that they intend), or it could mean "this supplement is a successful cure for anemia". I find the second interpretation far more reasonable than the first. To give a parallel example, if a veterinarian says "this injection will cure rabies in dogs", he or she surely doesn't mean "because of this injection, rabies will, in the future, be completely eradicated in dogs". Instead he or she means "if a dog takes this injection, the dog's rabies will be cured".

Now, if you take "children who are suffering from anemia will be cured" to mean "this supplement is an effective cure for those who take it", then D is not a relevant assumption at all; a supplement can be an effective cure for a disease even if no one actually uses it. Only B would be a good answer in that case. I disagree with the posts above which dismiss B as an assumption; it is an assumption in the argument. The stem tells us that iron boosts are *necessary* to reverse anemia. The stem does not tell us that iron boosts are *sufficient* to reverse anemia. The iron supplements will only reverse anemia if nothing in addition to iron is needed to reverse anemia. To give a different example, if I say "I need a tent to go camping. I have a tent, so I can go camping", then I'm assuming that a tent is *all* I need to go camping - that is, I'm assuming that the tent alone is sufficient for camping, and that I don't need, say, food as well. Since B suggests that iron supplements are the only thing required to reverse anemia, it does provide a missing assumption in the argument.

Now, if instead you interpret "children who are suffering from anemia will be cured" to mean that anemia will be eliminated because of the supplement, then D is certainly a good answer, but I think that's a bizarre way to interpret the question stem here.

Given how I interpret the question, I think B is a better answer than D here, though someone who interprets the question differently can certainly justify answer D. I find the whole question problematic, so I wouldn't suggest devoting much time to it.
Show more
User avatar
ajay0520
User avatar
Joined: 21 Oct 2023
Last visit: 08 Nov 2025
Posts: 58
Own Kudos:
45
Given Kudos: 26
Posts: 58
Kudos: 45
Recently, the research and development departments of major pharmaceut 24 Mar 2025, 05:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
i was stuck with option B and D SO I Thought of negating both of them:

(B) a low iron level in the body is NOT the major factor influencing the incidence of anemia in children.
this means the injection that boost iron in anemic children May not work.

(D) children affected with anemia will not find out about and submit to injections that can reverse their conditions.
so what if children not found out about this? their parents could still find out and get them injected? isn't it?

i still am not satisfied with option d
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts