It is currently 17 Nov 2017, 19:43

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 330

Kudos [?]: 1051 [2], given: 136

Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 06:48
2
KUDOS
8
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

62% (01:30) correct 38% (01:37) wrong based on 428 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of pancreatic cancer. They have found that people who consume at least 2 carbonated drinks containing sugar per day have a 90% higher rate of pancreatic cancer than those who drink the same number of diet drinks per day. Therefore, if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above.

a) Many diet drinks contain artificial sweeteners called cyclamates, which have been known to cause intestinal and bladder cancer in lab studies
b) Statistically, people who consume several sugared drinks a day are also the least likely to maintain a regular exercise regimen. It has been shown that regular exercise is a factor in reducing the pancreatic cancer.
c) People who generally avoid sugared beverages also tend to avoid sugar in other parts of diet.
d) Diet drinks have actually been linked to a higher risk of weight gain
e) The study showed that the increase in rate of pancreatic cancer remained the same whether the person drank 2 or 5 sugared drinks.

My doubts-

I know this is a classic cause - effect reasoning, however where I got confused is what we need to Weaken.
i.e whether we need to weaken is
sugar causes a specific type of pancreatic cancer -----equation A
or
Therefore, if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer --- equation B

Correct answer choice is blatant enough. Need to understand that answer choice B is weakening equation A or B

Also, I need reasoning for choice C as why that is wrong.

Thanks

Edit: Corrected Option B.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Last edited by imhimanshu on 07 May 2012, 09:41, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 1051 [2], given: 136

Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 209

Kudos [?]: 1658 [0], given: 18

GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 08:38
Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of pancreatic cancer. They have found that people who consume at least 2 carbonated drinks containing sugar per day have a 90% higher rate of pancreatic cancer than those who drink the same number of diet drinks per day. Therefore, if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above.

Remember, in weaken questions, you have to weaken the conclusion which in this case states that by substituting diet drinks for regular soda pop, our chances of getting pancreatic cancer would considerably reduce.

Therefore we have to search for an answer choice that gives us reason to believe that regular soda pop is not a cause for pancreatic cancer.

a) Many diet drinks contain artificial sweeteners called cyclamates, which have been known to cause intestinal and bladder cancer in lab studies Ok.. so diet drinks cause other types of cancer. But this doesn't tell us anything about the effect of diet drinks relating to PANCREATIC CANCER which is what the conclusion of the argument clearly refers to. Therefore this does not weaken the conclusion in any way.
b) Statistically, people who consume several suggested (is this the same word used in the original question?)drinks a day are also the least likely to maintain a regular exercise regimen. It has been shown that regular exercise is a factor in reducing the pancreatic cancer.This provides us with with another reason as to why people who drink regular soda pop might be getting pancreatic cancer - Lack of exercise. Therefore since this alludes to the fact that lack of exercise and not soda pop is the reason they might be getting pancreatic cancer, this definitely weakens the conclusion.
c) People who generally avoid sugared beverages also tend to avoid sugar in other parts of diet. This makes no mention of whether these people get pancreatic cancer or not and therefore does not strengthen or weaken the conclusion
d) Diet drinks have actually been linked to a higher risk of weight gain We don't know the relation of weight gain to pancreatic cancer. Hence we cannot say whether this weakens the conclusion or not.
e) The study showed that the increase in rate of pancreatic cancer remained the same whether the person drank 2 or 5 sugared drinks. This, if anything, strengthens the argument by stating that irrespective of whether a person consumes 2 or 5 sugared drinks, there is definitely an increased risk of pancreatic cancer as a result of consuming sugared drinks.
_________________

Click below to check out some great tips and tricks to help you deal with problems on Remainders!
http://gmatclub.com/forum/compilation-of-tips-and-tricks-to-deal-with-remainders-86714.html#p651942

1) Translating the English to Math : http://gmatclub.com/forum/word-problems-made-easy-87346.html

Kudos [?]: 1658 [0], given: 18

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7736

Kudos [?]: 17766 [2], given: 235

Location: Pune, India
Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 09:08
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
imhimanshu wrote:
My doubts-

I know this is a classic cause - effect reasoning, however where I got confused is what we need to Weaken.
i.e whether we need to weaken is
sugar causes a specific type of pancreatic cancer -----equation A
or
Therefore, if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer --- equation B

Correct answer choice is blatant enough. Need to understand that answer choice B is weakening equation A or B

Also, I need reasoning for choice C as why that is wrong.

Thanks

One of the most important things in CR - you have to strengthen/weaken the conclusion of the stimulus. Just the conclusion.

So first thing to look for is the conclusion. It is pretty straight forward here, isn't it?
It starts with 'Therefore' and fits the description of conclusion perfectly. It is the conclusion of the stimulus then.

Focus on the conclusion: if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer

What is it trying to tell you? It is saying that if you reduce your sugar intake, your chances of getting pancreatic cancer reduces.

I think the only confusion is between (B) and (C).
(B) is correct because it gives you an alternative cause of pancreatic cancer - no regular exercise. Since people who consume sugar drinks are also the ones who exercise little, the ones who consume diet drinks could be more active and hence, there could be an alternative explanation. Hence the conclusion that reduction in sugar will reduce your chances of getting pancreatic cancer is weakened.

(C) is a sneaky but incorrect option. It kind of strengthens the link between sugar and cancer, doesn't it? People who drink regular pop also consume more sugar in other things. So probably, people who consume diet drinks take less sugar in other things too and hence, their risk of cancer is lower. Don't forget the intent of the conclusion - it is establishing a relation between sugar and cancer, not between soda pop and cancer. The whole stimulus is based on the amount of sugar.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17766 [2], given: 235

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Sep 2009
Posts: 353

Kudos [?]: 601 [0], given: 2

Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 10:01
Hai Karishma

can you tell me that in option B "suggested drinks" means diet soda or regular soda. i thought like suggested drink means diet soda. How can i differentiate. please explain

Kudos [?]: 601 [0], given: 2

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 330

Kudos [?]: 1051 [0], given: 136

Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 10:03

As you pointed out that we need to focus on Conclusion in Weaken /Strengthen question, however, I need to confirm one doubt. Can we state the conclusion in our own words as you did below(colored part). i.e. Are we allowed to state the logical intent of the conclusion, just as you found out in your reply?

While going through the explanation of this question from book, same conclusion is being derived i.e the one you found out logically and then options were analyzed in order to weaken it. That is where I got confused.

Thanks

VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:

One of the most important things in CR - you have to strengthen/weaken the conclusion of the stimulus. Just the conclusion.

So first thing to look for is the conclusion. It is pretty straight forward here, isn't it?
It starts with 'Therefore' and fits the description of conclusion perfectly. It is the conclusion of the stimulus then.

Focus on the conclusion: if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer

What is it trying to tell you? It is saying that if you reduce your sugar intake, your chances of getting pancreatic cancer reduces.

I think the only confusion is between (B) and (C).
(B) is correct because it gives you an alternative cause of pancreatic cancer - no regular exercise. Since people who consume sugar drinks are also the ones who exercise little, the ones who consume diet drinks could be more active and hence, there could be an alternative explanation. Hence the conclusion that reduction in sugar will reduce your chances of getting pancreatic cancer is weakened.

(C) is a sneaky but incorrect option. It kind of strengthens the link between sugar and cancer, doesn't it? People who drink regular pop also consume more sugar in other things. So probably, people who consume diet drinks take less sugar in other things too and hence, their risk of cancer is lower. Don't forget the intent of the conclusion - it is establishing a relation between sugar and cancer, not between soda pop and cancer. The whole stimulus is based on the amount of sugar.

_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Kudos [?]: 1051 [0], given: 136

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 330

Kudos [?]: 1051 [0], given: 136

Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 10:04
Hi TomB,
I have edited my post. Sorry for the confusion.

Thanks
H
TomB wrote:
Hai Karishma

can you tell me that in option B "suggested drinks" means diet soda or regular soda. i thought like suggested drink means diet soda. How can i differentiate. please explain

_________________

+1 Kudos me, Help me unlocking GMAT Club Tests

Kudos [?]: 1051 [0], given: 136

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7736

Kudos [?]: 17766 [0], given: 235

Location: Pune, India
Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 10:19
imhimanshu wrote:

As you pointed out that we need to focus on Conclusion in Weaken /Strengthen question, however, I need to confirm one doubt. Can we state the conclusion in our own words as you did below(colored part). i.e. Are we allowed to state the logical intent of the conclusion, just as you found out in your reply?

While going through the explanation of this question from book, same conclusion is being derived i.e the one you found out logically and then options were analyzed in order to weaken it. That is where I got confused.

Thanks

Yes, you certainly have to focus on the intent of the conclusion. If one replaces sugar soda pop with diet soda pop but starts drinking fruit juices with added sugar, it doesn't help, does it?

That is how Verbal is different from Quant (though CR is closest to Quant). You take Quant on face value (if the variable given is 'a', it is 'a'. The author's intent cannot be 'b'.). In Verbal, you need to deduce the author's intent sometimes.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17766 [0], given: 235

Manager
Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Posts: 128

Kudos [?]: 478 [0], given: 33

Location: India
Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2012, 19:42
sriharimurthy wrote:

b) Statistically, people who consume several suggested (is this the same word used in the original question?)drinks a day are also the least likely to maintain a regular exercise regimen. It has been shown that regular exercise is a factor in reducing the pancreatic cancer.This provides us with with another reason as to why people who drink regular soda pop might be getting pancreatic cancer - Lack of exercise. Therefore since this alludes to the fact that lack of exercise and not soda pop is the reason they might be getting pancreatic cancer, this definitely weakens the conclusion.

It has been shown that regular exercise is a factor in reducing the pancreatic cancer.

Does this mean that lack of regular exercise ---> increases the chances of cancer ???
_________________

Encourage me by pressing the KUDOS if you find my post to be helpful.

Help me win "The One Thing You Wish You Knew - GMAT Club Contest"
http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-one-thing-you-wish-you-knew-gmat-club-contest-140358.html#p1130989

Kudos [?]: 478 [0], given: 33

Intern
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Re: CR- Sugar and Pancreatic Cancer [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jun 2012, 23:31
Not simply a part of the pancreas, stomach or gallbladder are removed via the surgery treatment implemented in Whipple treatment for pancreatic cancer. Tumor concerning the pancreas may be tremendously helped with it. Usually, deficiency of information that's equally precise and simple to learn can easily weigh on already distressed individuals. This content can help patients, their own families as well as relatives to understand the Whipple procedure, survival rate, side effects and possible prospects.

Kudos [?]: [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Sep 2009
Posts: 263

Kudos [?]: 78 [0], given: 6

Re: Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jun 2012, 04:02
Straight B.

One way to weaken the "To reduce pancreatic cancer, stop drinking sugared drinks" argument is to identify alternative causes of the disease. If exercise has been found to be a major reducer of the likelihood of the diseases, this revelation diminishes the need to cut down consumption of the sugared drinks.

Cheers,
Der alte Fritz.
_________________

+1 Kudos me - I'm half Irish, half Prussian.

Kudos [?]: 78 [0], given: 6

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10145

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Re: Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jun 2014, 11:31
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.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 04 Nov 2014
Posts: 42

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 25

Location: United States (DE)
Concentration: Technology, Finance
GMAT 1: 670 Q49 V32
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.4
Re: Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2016, 10:04
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
imhimanshu wrote:
My doubts-

I know this is a classic cause - effect reasoning, however where I got confused is what we need to Weaken.
i.e whether we need to weaken is
sugar causes a specific type of pancreatic cancer -----equation A
or
Therefore, if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer --- equation B

Correct answer choice is blatant enough. Need to understand that answer choice B is weakening equation A or B

Also, I need reasoning for choice C as why that is wrong.

Thanks

One of the most important things in CR - you have to strengthen/weaken the conclusion of the stimulus. Just the conclusion.

So first thing to look for is the conclusion. It is pretty straight forward here, isn't it?
It starts with 'Therefore' and fits the description of conclusion perfectly. It is the conclusion of the stimulus then.

Focus on the conclusion: if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer

What is it trying to tell you? It is saying that if you reduce your sugar intake, your chances of getting pancreatic cancer reduces.

I think the only confusion is between (B) and (C).
(B) is correct because it gives you an alternative cause of pancreatic cancer - no regular exercise. Since people who consume sugar drinks are also the ones who exercise little, the ones who consume diet drinks could be more active and hence, there could be an alternative explanation. Hence the conclusion that reduction in sugar will reduce your chances of getting pancreatic cancer is weakened.

(C) is a sneaky but incorrect option. It kind of strengthens the link between sugar and cancer, doesn't it? People who drink regular pop also consume more sugar in other things. So probably, people who consume diet drinks take less sugar in other things too and hence, their risk of cancer is lower. Don't forget the intent of the conclusion - it is establishing a relation between sugar and cancer, not between soda pop and cancer. The whole stimulus is based on the amount of sugar.

Hi Karishma,

If the stimulus is based on amount of sugar, then the fact that people drinking diet sodas would reduce/be mindful of their sugar intake in other aspects of their diet directly panders to our forethinking, correct? Option C would then mean that substituting drinks would not resolve the issue, conscious effort to reduce sugar intake would. (am i overthinking here?)

Add to it the fact that option C was my prethinking choice. So, although I took more than a minute deciding between B and C, I (obviously) went with my prethinking.
I still cant get my head around why B is the winner over C here.

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 25

Intern
Joined: 03 Apr 2016
Posts: 10

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Re: Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2016, 12:46
Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of pancreatic cancer. They have found that people who consume at least 2 carbonated drinks containing sugar per day have a 90% higher rate of pancreatic cancer than those who drink the same number of diet drinks per day. Therefore, if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above.

P: Sugar causes panc. cancer
P: 2+ sodas = 90% higher rate of panc. cancer vs. same amt of diet soda
C: Sub reg soda for diet = lower chances of panc. cancer

Need to attack the argument

a) Many diet drinks contain artificial sweeteners called cyclamates, which have been known to cause intestinal and bladder cancer in lab studies
b) Statistically, people who consume several sugared drinks a day are also the least likely to maintain a regular exercise regimen. It has been shown that regular exercise is a factor in reducing the pancreatic cancer.
Hmm....Possibly since this implies that exercise reduces panc. cancer and people who drink soda tend not to exercise much.
c) People who generally avoid sugared beverages also tend to avoid sugar in other parts of diet.
WRONG: This actually strengthens argument since if someone avoids soda, they avoid sugar sources
d) Diet drinks have actually been linked to a higher risk of weight gain
WRONG: Don't care about risk of weight gain, I care about subbing reg soda for diet = lower chances of panc. cancer
e) The study showed that the increase in rate of pancreatic cancer remained the same whether the person drank 2 or 5 sugared drinks.
WRONG: Doesn't weaken argument as the claim is at least 2+ sodas a day

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 15 Nov 2015
Posts: 47

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

Re: Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2016, 15:27
P : more sugar --> more chance of cancer
C : less sugar-- > less chance of cancer

Assumption: sugar causes cancer!

Maybe sugar doesn't cause cancer, something else does.

B. gives that alternative explanation.
C.

Kudos [?]: 8 [0], given: 1

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7736

Kudos [?]: 17766 [0], given: 235

Location: Pune, India
Re: Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2016, 23:53
perfervid89 wrote:
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
imhimanshu wrote:
My doubts-

I know this is a classic cause - effect reasoning, however where I got confused is what we need to Weaken.
i.e whether we need to weaken is
sugar causes a specific type of pancreatic cancer -----equation A
or
Therefore, if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer --- equation B

Correct answer choice is blatant enough. Need to understand that answer choice B is weakening equation A or B

Also, I need reasoning for choice C as why that is wrong.

Thanks

One of the most important things in CR - you have to strengthen/weaken the conclusion of the stimulus. Just the conclusion.

So first thing to look for is the conclusion. It is pretty straight forward here, isn't it?
It starts with 'Therefore' and fits the description of conclusion perfectly. It is the conclusion of the stimulus then.

Focus on the conclusion: if we were to substitute diet drinks for regular soda pop, it would considerably reduce our chances of getting pancreatic cancer

What is it trying to tell you? It is saying that if you reduce your sugar intake, your chances of getting pancreatic cancer reduces.

I think the only confusion is between (B) and (C).
(B) is correct because it gives you an alternative cause of pancreatic cancer - no regular exercise. Since people who consume sugar drinks are also the ones who exercise little, the ones who consume diet drinks could be more active and hence, there could be an alternative explanation. Hence the conclusion that reduction in sugar will reduce your chances of getting pancreatic cancer is weakened.

(C) is a sneaky but incorrect option. It kind of strengthens the link between sugar and cancer, doesn't it? People who drink regular pop also consume more sugar in other things. So probably, people who consume diet drinks take less sugar in other things too and hence, their risk of cancer is lower. Don't forget the intent of the conclusion - it is establishing a relation between sugar and cancer, not between soda pop and cancer. The whole stimulus is based on the amount of sugar.

Hi Karishma,

If the stimulus is based on amount of sugar, then the fact that people drinking diet sodas would reduce/be mindful of their sugar intake in other aspects of their diet directly panders to our forethinking, correct? Option C would then mean that substituting drinks would not resolve the issue, conscious effort to reduce sugar intake would. (am i overthinking here?)

Add to it the fact that option C was my prethinking choice. So, although I took more than a minute deciding between B and C, I (obviously) went with my prethinking.
I still cant get my head around why B is the winner over C here.

Option (C) strengthens the connect between sugar and cancer. People who drink diet pop, avoid sugar at other places too. These people see lower incidence of cancer.
It, in a way, strengthens our conclusion. If you drop regular soda and drink diet one, you will be reducing your sugar intake and that will reduce the chances of cancer. It might reduce the chances by 30% (instead of 80-90% as seen by the scientists) but it is probable that it will reduce the chances.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Kudos [?]: 17766 [0], given: 235

Re: Some scientists believe that sugar causes a specific type of   [#permalink] 20 Apr 2016, 23:53
Display posts from previous: Sort by