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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.
Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
Updated on: 24 Jan 2018, 04:47
3
6
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
5% (low)
Question Stats:
86% (01:02) correct 14% (01:18) wrong based on 688 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with SV40, a virus that in monkeys causes various cancers. Some researchers now claim that this contamination caused some cases of a certain cancer in humans, mesothelioma. This claim is not undercut by the fact that a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer, since __________.
(A) most cases of mesothelioma are caused by exposure to asbestos
(B) in some countries, there was no contamination of the vaccine
(C) SV40 is widely used in laboratories to produce cancers in animals
(D) mesotheliomas take several decades to develop
(E) mesothelioma was somewhat less common in 1960 than it is now
Re: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
28 Mar 2013, 23:59
1
'D' for me.
Researchers are now at present making claim of the effect of something that happened in past .... so effect of contamination happened 1960 took time......
Survey was made in 1960,so this survey does not undercut the argument ("some researchers now claim that this contamination caused some cases of a certain cancer in humans, mesothelioma") because mesotheliomas take several decades to develop _________________
Re: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
30 Mar 2013, 00:39
I was locked between C and D. But eliminated C , as it presents the repackaged premise...Moreover we need to link that "why fewer people were found with the disease, but researcher claimed that there are people who suffer from cancer coz of the chemical" D bridges the gap
Re: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
28 Apr 2017, 00:30
Some researchers now claim that this contamination caused some cases of a certain cancer in humans, mesothelioma but in carfule survey done in 1960 there were no sign of cancer . Probably it will take decade to develop
Re: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
12 May 2017, 06:39
Hi Experts, Can you help me to distinguish if this is an assumption question or strengthen question? Furthermore, what does phrase - is not undercut - suggest? I am presenting my analysis: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with SV40, a virus that in monkeys causes various cancers.
This is a fact.
Some researchers now claim that this contamination caused some cases of a certain cancer in humans, mesothelioma.
This sentence is claim by researchers so it can be a belief of people other than author hence it is not main conclusion.
This claim is not undercut by the fact that a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer, since ..
I took this whole sentence as fact and then I realized that only - This claim is not undercut by the fact - is the main conclusion. How can I avoid such traps? Further reading the argument also confused me since am i suppose to prove the fact that people in 1960 did not develop cancer in spite of getting contaminated vaccines. Since I wasn't able to understand argument in first place, I could not figure out correct OA.
_________________
It's the journey that brings us happiness not the destination.
Re: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
13 May 2017, 13:38
Top Contributor
Quote:
Hi Experts, Can you help me to distinguish if this is an assumption question or strengthen question? Furthermore, what does phrase - is not undercut - suggest? I am presenting my analysis: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with SV40, a virus that in monkeys causes various cancers.
This is a fact.
Some researchers now claim that this contamination caused some cases of a certain cancer in humans, mesothelioma.
This sentence is claim by researchers so it can be a belief of people other than author hence it is not main conclusion.
This claim is not undercut by the fact that a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer, since ..
I took this whole sentence as fact and then I realized that only - This claim is not undercut by the fact - is the main conclusion. How can I avoid such traps? Further reading the argument also confused me since am i suppose to prove the fact that people in 1960 did not develop cancer in spite of getting contaminated vaccines. Since I wasn't able to understand argument in first place, I could not figure out correct OA.
The claim of the researchers is that contamination of the polio vaccine used around 1960 caused some cases of mesothelioma in humans. "The fact that a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer" could potentially weaken (ie "undercut") this claim. Why? Because this evidence seems to show that the contaminated vaccine did NOT cause the cases of mesothelioma, as stated in the researchers' claim.
Identifying the conclusion is, indeed, a crucial step in tackling questions like this: "{the researchers'} claim is not undercut by the fact that a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer." Since that is the conclusion, the correct choice must answer the following question: why doesn't the survey evidence weaken the researchers' claim, even though the survey evidence seems to weaken the researchers' claim? If "mesotheliomas take several decades to develop", then patients surveyed soon after receiving the contaminated vaccine would not yet show signs of having the cancer, even if they do in fact have the cancer. In that case, the survey evidence does not undermine the researchers' claim, so (D) is correct.
_________________
Need an expert reply? Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.
Re: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
23 May 2017, 02:23
1
adkikani wrote:
Hi Experts, Can you help me to distinguish if this is an assumption question or strengthen question? Furthermore, what does phrase - is not undercut - suggest? I am presenting my analysis: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with SV40, a virus that in monkeys causes various cancers.
This is a fact.
Some researchers now claim that this contamination caused some cases of a certain cancer in humans, mesothelioma.
This sentence is claim by researchers so it can be a belief of people other than author hence it is not main conclusion.
This claim is not undercut by the fact that a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer, since ..
I took this whole sentence as fact and then I realized that only - This claim is not undercut by the fact - is the main conclusion. How can I avoid such traps? Further reading the argument also confused me since am i suppose to prove the fact that people in 1960 did not develop cancer in spite of getting contaminated vaccines. Since I wasn't able to understand argument in first place, I could not figure out correct OA.
Responding to a pm:
"not undercut" means "not weakened".
Premises: Some polio vaccines in 1960s were contaminated by SV40. Researchers claim that SV40 can cause mesothelioma.
Question stem: This claim is not undercut by the fact that a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer, since___________.
Normally, if one would say "a very careful survey made in the 1960s of people who had received the contaminated vaccine found no elevated incidence of any cancer", this would weaken the claim of the researchers. The researchers say that SV40 could cause mesothelioma but since no elevated incidence was found, we would doubt the claim of the researchers. But we need to find the reason this claim is not put in doubt by "no elevated incidence found".
Look at option (D): mesotheliomas take several decades to develop
The contaminated vaccine is given in 1960s. The survey was conducted in 1960s itself. If mesothelioma takes several decades to develop, we will not see an elevated incidence in the 60s decade itself. We will see an elevated incidence in later decades. Hence this option nicely completes the sentence.
All other options are irrelevant.
_________________
Karishma Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Re: Some batches of polio vaccine used around 1960 were contaminated with
[#permalink]
Show Tags
06 Oct 2018, 02:57
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!
Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).
Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________
close
86% (01:02) correct 
