NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 23 Apr 2024, 10:08 It is currently 23 Apr 2024, 10:08
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

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

Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
 1   2   
Tags:
Difficulty: 805+ Levelx   Assumptionx            
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
abhi758
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 140
Own Kudos [?]: 2408 [388]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   Updated on: 10 Jun 2021, 06:59
29
Kudos
359
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

36% (02:15) correct 64% (02:33) wrong based on 5845 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?


(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.

(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.

(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.

(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
A

Originally posted by abhi758 on 14 Aug 2009, 13:18.
Last edited by Bunuel on 10 Jun 2021, 06:59, edited 5 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
B
Anu26
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 May 2014
Posts: 14
Own Kudos [?]: 107 [84]
Given Kudos: 204
Location: India
Schools: IE Sept18 Intake (A)
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.8
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   17 May 2015, 08:47
68
Kudos
16
Bookmarks
Meaning of the question :

Let there be 100 people(all prospective blood donors) -> so 5 people will be caught in the new test.

2/3 * (people carrying nanb) = missed

therefore 1/3 * (people carrying nanb) = those that were caught = 5

therefore, people carrying nanb = 5*3 = 15

missed people = 10 (15-5) -> this is 10% of the prospective donor and the conclusion that they will still supply contaminated blood


Conclusion : 10% of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood


Now if donors carrying nanb carry other infections for which tests are routinely performed -> then the number of people carrying

nanb (with other infection) will be caught and will be less in number.

Thus, 2/3 * (people carrying nanb) -> will be less -> those missed will be less -> then we cannot claim that 10% of the donors will

still supply contaminated blood.
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14816
Own Kudos [?]: 64879 [19]
Given Kudos: 426
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   05 Oct 2020, 02:29
10
Kudos
9
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
abhi758 wrote:
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.

(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.

(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.

(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors

 

Screening for NANB will start.
5% of prospective donors will be disqualified. (So if 100 people come to donate, only 95 will be allowed after NANB screening because 5 will have NANB).
But only 1/3rd will be caught and 2/3rd will still be missed. So these 5 make up only 1/3rd of total who carry NANB. So another 10 will be there carrying NANB but they will be missed.

Conclusion: About 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

10 out of 95 allowed donors will have NANB so that's 'about 10%'. Looks right. Now the gap is will all these 95 supply blood i.e. will all of them be allowed to supply blood? For our conclusion, we are assuming that all these 95 will supply blood. That NANB test was the only hurdle they needed to cross to become actual donors.



(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

Correct. We are assuming that no other test will disqualify many NANB carriers. What if NANB carriers usually carry other infections too which are tested for too? Then of these 10, perhaps another 8 would be disqualified because of other associated infections. So negating this breaks our conclusion.

(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.

Irrelevant.

(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.

The argument takes the 1/3rd number to be accurate.

(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.

No such comparison in the argument.

(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors

We are talking about the donor numbers only, not the units donated and frequency of donation by each donor.

Answer (A)­
General Discussion
User avatar
boeinz
Manager
Manager
Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 228
Own Kudos [?]: 1264 [6]
Given Kudos: 32
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   16 Aug 2009, 20:28
6
Kudos
Tough one.

My explanation:

If NANB carries other infections which can be tested true positive (or reliable as stated in Option A), then the chance of detecting NANB will be higher. However, Option A states that this is not the case. Hence the 2/3 of NANB will still be missed and this figure (2/3) has to be taken as accurate. Thus its a necessary assumption.
User avatar
ykaiim
Director
Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 520
Own Kudos [?]: 5419 [9]
Given Kudos: 40
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   07 May 2010, 02:45
7
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Hi,

I solved this question with a different approach. I hope you will find it useful:

The premises are all seemed peculiar to me. But, I used %age and Number to solve this.

Conclusion is on ACTUAL 10% donors, which is nowhere mentioned in the argument. So, we need to look for following as per CR Bible:
1. Options which have ACTUAL keyword.
2. Options involveing %age instead of numbers, as we are given %ages only. So, choice with numbers will be Incorrect.
3. There seems to logical gaps in the argument and the author mentioned strong words to indicate that his reasoning is air-tight, which points to a DEFENDER assumption case. So, look for negative answer choices, which involve some defending language.

abhi758 wrote:
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point. [The conclusion is not based on this assumption. It fails to meet above three conditions and not even the negation technique proves this as an ssumption. Incorrect]
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate. [It fails to meet the (2) point above. color=#FF0000]Incorrect[/color]]
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large. [It fails to meet the (2) point above and also comparing with the population as a whole, which is irrelevent. Incorrect]
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors. [This is irrelevant to the conclusion. Try the negation test. The conclusion will still be intact. Incorrect]

Kindly explain your answers..
User avatar
B
subhashghosh
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 909
Own Kudos [?]: 1172 [4]
Given Kudos: 43
Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   20 Mar 2011, 04:32
1
Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Answer - A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed

So they'll escape the screening here, and the other screenings also, hence the number of infected donors who did not get filtered out does not change.

Say there are 15% donors affected, so 2/3 * 15 escape, hence 10% remain, they don't get caught in any other test so the %age is constant.
User avatar
sowragu
Manager
Manager
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Posts: 105
Own Kudos [?]: 119 [2]
Given Kudos: 148
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   17 Nov 2014, 20:18
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
abhi758 wrote:
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors

Kindly explain your answers..


Derived 'A' through POE.

Understanding of the passage.
P1 - Screening is happening.
P2 - Able to restrict only 5% out of 15%
C1 - Still 10% of ppl r giving the contaminated blood.

Assumption made - Some issue is there bcos of transfering this contaminated blood, Hence screening is happening in all the blood donors.

B - Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point. The information provided is not creating any link between the premise and conclusion. Also, if its not going to have any effect or creating any disease then why the screening is happening.
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate. - The statement has been already stated in the main Argument. Only 1/3rd was being identified.
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large. - Complete Out of scope. Blood Donor Vs Total Population
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors Again its a statement or an information which no way supports the argument. Its a mere inforation. What ever frequecny they are giving it doesnt support the Conclusion made

So Finally A. A is ok with the pre assumption made during reading the argument. We are only checking for NANB, what if any other contamination is there? Through POE and pre assumption i reached A.

A is better choice among the 5.
avatar
HardWorkBeatsAll
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2015
Posts: 90
Own Kudos [?]: 318 [16]
Given Kudos: 341
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Duke '19 (II)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 4
WE:Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   02 Sep 2015, 04:17
13
Kudos
3
Bookmarks
I initially replied (E) incorrectly. Here's the explanation of why it is (A) -

abhi758 wrote:
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

Note - 5% corr. to 1/3, so 10% corr to the remaining 2/3 who have NANB and are missed in screening.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
If this were not the case, some donors with NANB who also have other infections would be disqualified by the screening for the other infection. So, the 10% figure would change. On the other hand, if a negligible % of NANB folks carry other infections, the 10% figure wouldn't change much.

(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.
Whether NANB carriers develop the disease is irrelevant to their donation of blood.
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.
This is somewhat tough. Assume it is not an underestimate. If it is an accurate estimate, the given numbers are true and this assumption is not needed. If it is an overestimate, more than 1/3rd of donors would be disqualified. So, LESS than 10% would pass through. In the first case, the assumption is not necessary. In the second case, it actively contradicts the argument.
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.
Irrelevant. We have statistics for NANB already. Why bother about the rest of the population?
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors
This is the toughest. Here, one could argue that if NANB carriers donate blood, say, 10x more frequently as compared to uninfected patients, they would cause 10x more blood contamination. HOWEVER, this would apply if the argument argued for about 10% of BLOOD CONTAMINATION. Instead, the argument argues for the percentage of DONORS THEMSELVES. Even if one NANB donor donates 10x times, he will still be counted as a single donor.
Kindly explain your answers..


Great question. Thanks for posting.
User avatar
S
pkm9995
Manager
Manager
Joined: 07 Jun 2015
Posts: 72
Own Kudos [?]: 50 [1]
Given Kudos: 9
WE:Design (Aerospace and Defense)
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   25 Oct 2015, 02:25
1
Kudos
Quote:
(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.


It is already explained in the passage that 2/3rd of the NANB donors will not be detected.That means the current tests available for the NANB infection is not flawless. So the only chance is that,for NANB to be detected, they should have some other infectious disease(for which a flawless test is available) which occur along with NANB so that detection of the other disease will lead to elimination of NANB donor.This is what the logic given in option A.
User avatar
L
gmatexam439
Moderator
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Posts: 1090
Own Kudos [?]: 1969 [2]
Given Kudos: 200
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
Schools: McDonough '21 (A$) Jones '21 (A$) Kelley '23 (A)
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   04 Jan 2018, 10:24
1
Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

A. Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed. -Correct. If these people have other diseases that are easily identifiable then they will be barred from blood donation.

B. Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point. -Whether they develop the diseases is out of scope because having NANB virus will make them ineligible for blood donation, if caught in the test.

C. The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate. -Let it be an underestimation for we know 10% infected people will donate blood.

D. The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large. -Out of scope

E. The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors -Still it doesn't clear whether 10% will donate or not.
User avatar
S
Leo8
Manager
Manager
Joined: 23 May 2017
Posts: 192
Own Kudos [?]: 359 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Concentration: Finance, Accounting
WE:Programming (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   04 Jan 2018, 13:02
"Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors,
they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis."

Isn't the correct answer choice attacking the given premise. we are given that 2/3rd will be missed. How can we attack the given fact in the argument.


A. Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

if this is true, our premise doesn't stand.


I was actually hoping to see the link between donors and actual donors.
User avatar
B
DAVEexamPAL
examPAL Representative
Joined: 01 Mar 2017
Posts: 108
Own Kudos [?]: 113 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   04 Jan 2018, 14:43
1
Kudos
Leo8 wrote:
"Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors,
they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis."

Isn't the correct answer choice attacking the given premise. we are given that 2/3rd will be missed. How can we attack the given fact in the argument.


A. Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

if this is true, our premise doesn't stand.


I was actually hoping to see the link between donors and actual donors.


Leo8 it doesn't contradict our premise. We are asked which answer strengthens the premise that 2/3 of NANB donors will not be disqualified. One thing that is necessary for this is that those 2/3 won't be disqualified for any other reason - which is exactly what A tells us.
Is this clear, or still confusing? Why do you think the premise doesn't stand?
User avatar
B
DAVEexamPAL
examPAL Representative
Joined: 01 Mar 2017
Posts: 108
Own Kudos [?]: 113 [1]
Given Kudos: 3
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   04 Jan 2018, 15:01
1
Kudos
souvik101990 wrote:
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?

A. Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

B. Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.

C. The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.

D. The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.

E. The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors



Logically, we are given an assumption (the test will miss 2/3 of NANB donors) and a conclusion (2/3 of NANB donors, or 10% of all donors, will not be disqualified). But notice this assumes those infected won't be disqualified for any OTHER reason than NANB either - which is what A suggests.

By process of elimination:
A - Yes! this means if they aren't detected for NANb, they won't be detected for anything else.
B - irrelevant
C - this contradicts the argument, it doesn't underline it
D - not relevant: the stats we were given are about the potential donors, not the population at large
E - we don't know anything about the average frequency of donors, so this is just a distraction.
User avatar
G
manasveek
Intern
Intern
Joined: 18 Jun 2017
Posts: 41
Own Kudos [?]: 176 [1]
Given Kudos: 78
Send PM
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   14 Apr 2018, 08:31
1
Kudos
the way i understood this argument is,
Considering sample size of 60 people who are donating blood.
among whom 5% disqualified because they have NAMB in their blood i.e. 3 are disqualified.
Further argument says, screening misses 2/3rd means it has caught 1/3rd of NAMB cases (1/3*x=3)
i.e. Total NAMB cases are 9 and 6 are missed cases.

6 are the people who have passed the screening despite having NAMB.
So conclusion correctly says 10% of 60(Total) i.e 6 will supply contaminated blood.


We want to break this conclusion by negating options.
option A on negation says- Donors carrying NANB hepatitis carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
Means out of 6 who managed to get through new screening will fail some other screening like of other blood test criteria and that number 10% (say 6) will be reduced.
And few people despite having NAMB and having passed NAMB screening will go ahead with donation.
As this reasoning breaks conclusion. It must be the right choice.
User avatar
L
warrior1991
Director
Director
Joined: 03 Mar 2017
Posts: 586
Own Kudos [?]: 418 [1]
Given Kudos: 596
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Technology
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   19 Nov 2018, 22:22
1
Kudos
Quote:
Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.


Quote:
Let us first understand the question stimuli.

1. Donors are screened to not let them give contaminated blood.
2. Disqualification of 5% prospective donors.
Let the number be 100.
Number of prospective donors disqualified=5% of 100=5.

2/3 missed this means that 1/3 caught
and that 1/3 *x(those donors) =5(caught earlier)
meaning
x=15.
This x is the number of infected NANB donors.

Missed donors=2/3*15 =10

This value 10 is equal to 10% of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

We are asked that what has been assumed.

Quote:
The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?


Quote:
(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

This is very interesting choice.
Read carefully. Negate this choice.

Quote:
The donors carrying hepatitis do carry other infections and those infections can be caught because screening test is present and is routinely performed.

Quote:
If they are caught, let's say 2 are caught, the number 10 will now become 8 and the percentage therefore will be 8%. The conclusion will fall apart (10% of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood ).


Hence A is correct.

This is a really good question.
avatar
S
teaserbae
Manager
Manager
Joined: 24 Mar 2018
Posts: 198
Own Kudos [?]: 41 [0]
Given Kudos: 288
Location: India
Schools: Carlson Foster '24 Haas '24 Kelley '24 Kellogg '24
GMAT 1: 680 Q50 V31
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   09 Apr 2019, 21:29
AjiteshArun
I choose B.
I interpreted B as if the NANB hepatitis develop of its own then there might be increase in the number of donors having NANB hepatitis there by weakening the conclusion that only 10% will be left.
User avatar
L
AjiteshArun
GMAT Club Legend
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 5179
Own Kudos [?]: 4652 [1]
Given Kudos: 626
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   09 Apr 2019, 22:58
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
teaserbae wrote:
AjiteshArun
I choose B.
I interpreted B as if the NANB hepatitis develop of its own then there might be increase in the number of donors having NANB hepatitis there by weakening the conclusion that only 10% will be left.
The conclusion is:

Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

Option A: Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

The argument says that because the NANB screening misses 2 out of every 3 people with NANB-contaminated blood, 10% of the donors will continue to supply NANB-contaminated blood. This conclusion does not take into account the possibility that there could be other (reliable) screening processes for other problems.

If we apply negation, we see that if people with NANB-contaminated blood do have other problems that reliable screening methods can detect, then the conclusion that 10% of donors will donate NANB-contaminated blood is weakened, as these people will get "screened out" by these other tests.

Option B: Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.

This option basically says that for the conclusion to be true, donors with NANB-contaminated blood should never get the disease at any point in their lives.

I think the most important thing to remember here is that this is an assumption question, and not a general strengthen question. In assumption questions, we need to pick an option that, given the logic of the argument, the argument needs in order to get to its conclusion. This argument does not need donors with NANB-contaminated blood to be free or not free of the actual disease at any point. Just the fact that these donors have NANB-contaminated blood is enough.

You might be looking at the possibility that NANB hepatitis is infectious. However, whether it is infectious or not is already "factored in". That is, option B does not involve a change in the nature of the disease from non-infectious to infectious.
User avatar
L
dcummins
VP
VP
Joined: 14 Feb 2017
Posts: 1115
Own Kudos [?]: 2162 [1]
Given Kudos: 368
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Schools: INSEAD Sept'21 Intake (WA$) Melbourne (A$) AGSM (A$) Kellogg '23 (WL) Said '22 (A$) CBS '23 (D) Booth '23 (D) Anderson '23 (WL) Cambridge '22 (WL) LBS '23 (D) Stern '24 (WA)
GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23
GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33
GMAT 4: 650 Q44 V36
GMAT 5: 600 Q38 V35
GMAT 6: 710 Q47 V41
WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   01 Jul 2019, 21:49
1
Kudos
The argument is that ~10% of actual donors will supply contaminated blood.
This is supported by the fact that even though up to 5% of all prospective donors are eliminated from donating, still 2/3rds of donors carrying NANB are missed.
Yes, we can waste time doing math but that doesn't change much really:
Show Spoiler
1/3*X donating population is detected = 5 therefore x (donation population = 15%).


The question AND GAP between the evidence and conclusion is WHY is there still an additional 5% of people going undetected and slipping through to the actual donator pool?
(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

A must be true. Our expectation, for the conclusion to be true, is that 5% of people will slip through the tests performed. A thus denies the possibility that this WONT be the case by stating that donors WONT get picked up by other more reliably screening tests for other infections they may be carrying.


A defends the argument. It denies the possibility that the argument WONT hold.

(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.

B is incorrect because even if the donors DO develop the disease themselves it's irrelevant to the pre-screening detection and thus argument at hand.

(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.

Even if the estimate is an underestimate, say the estimate is 7.5%. This doesn't change the fact some donors will slip through, so we need to understand the gap between the methods of detection and WHY they are slipping through.

(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.

Again this doesn't change anything. The argument tries to fool the reader with numbers, so D attempts to make a ploy at saying the incidence is lower. This does not change the premise that 5% of potential donors are detected and that 10% still manage to slip through.

(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors

Frequency of donation is irrelevant to the % of infected donors slipping through.
User avatar
B
gagan0303
Manager
Manager
Joined: 13 Sep 2020
Posts: 112
Own Kudos [?]: 13 [0]
Given Kudos: 413
Location: India
Schools: Said '23 Judge '23
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   10 Jun 2021, 03:32
GMATNinja please help on this one.
User avatar
L
mSKR
VP
VP
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Posts: 1378
Own Kudos [?]: 846 [0]
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Send PM
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink] New post   11 Jun 2021, 19:58
gagan0303 wrote:
GMATNinja please help on this one.



My 2 cents:


Argument: Donors(100) --- > Reject 5% who had NANB ; 95% : 10% have still NANB ----- > still 10% supply NANB contaminated blood

Add below information in above equation
In argument: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors
OPTION A : further donors will no more be rejected
i.e.: Donors -- > TESTING/QUALIFICATION -- > Actual DONATE

==> Donors(100) --- > Reject 5% who had NANB ; 95% : 10% have still NANB ----- > OPTION A --- > still 10% supply NANB contaminated blood


Why not B? Because even develop, we can’t identify it

Why not C? So it means actual disqualification will be more? But conclusion is based on percentages .

Why not D? But how can actual donors be more than population at large? Even many , how does it matter? We have percentage calculations given .

Why not E? Because we are talking of donors not frequency of per donor.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis [#permalink]
11 Jun 2021, 19:58
 1   2   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6917 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
mysterymanrog
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions