Teratomas are unusual forms of cancer because they are composed of tis

Difference b/w 'as' and 'like'. Please tell a way so that i could avoid this mistake

(A) because they are composed of tissues such as tooth and bone
Eleminated this for the sole reason that tissues at the end felt more appropriate

(B) because they are composed of tissues like tooth and bone that are
like doesn't feel appropriate such as felt much better in the comparison

(C) because they are composed of tissues, like tooth and bone, tissues
These are joining depended clauses with comma which distorts the meaning

(D) in that their composition, tissues such as tooth and bone, is
Similar reasoning as C and 'is' isn't the appropriate word

(E) in that they are composed of tissues such as tooth and bone, tissues
This presents the right meaning and tense

Therefore IMO E

Can someone help me understand how to tell based on the meaning of the sentence when to use "like" vs "such as". I know "like" is used in scenarios when you are comparing two different things, and "such as" is used when you are listing examples. However, in this sentence, it seems more logical to me that the "tooth and bone" are being compared to the tissues of the teratomas, meaning that the tissues of the teratomas are similar to tooth and bone. It also seems less logical that tooth and bone are examples of tissues found in the composition of a form of cancer. Since cancer doesn't have teeth or bones.

Any help would be great! Thanks

I am a bit confused. Please help.

Isn't option E repetitive:
Teratomas are unusual forms of cancer in that they are composed of tissues such as tooth and bone, tissues not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears.

Why do you need the additional 'tissues' again?

I chose option D: the T's are unusual because of their composition . . . .

Hi GMATNinja IanStewart - Given we are not biology majors here, how is one supposed to know -- what is the reason for the "unusualness" exactly ?

I actually chose A because I thought the reason for the "unusualness" was something different.

Another Reason for "unusualness" - The ORGAN (containing the tumor), the organ itself does NOT HAVE teeth / the organ itself (containing the tumor) does not have bones. Given the organ itself DOES NOT HAVE teeth / the organ itself DOES NOT HAVE bones, how can Teratomas (which is seen within the organ) have tissues of teeth / have tissues of bones.

For example - lung cancer is a very comman type of cancer

I thought -- lungs DO NOT have bones in them (bones, seen in pic below) / lungs DONT HAVE teeth in them (teeth seen in pic below).

So, how can Teratomas (with tissues of bones and tissue of teeth) be showing up in the lungs when the lungs itself DO NOT HAVE BONES / the lung itself DOES NOT HAVE teeth

How are you so sure -- this is not the intended "unusualness" the author is talking about ? if that was the intended "unusualness" - A i think is indeed the winner

thank you

Thank you IanStewart – I can now see why A has ambiguity in the simpler sentence.

Tried re-creating option E in the simpler sentence to see how the ambiguity is resolved


In E – isn’t there ambiguity as well. is it

(i) Animals in general are not found in the local area
OR
(ii) Animals are found in the local area but snakes specifically are not found in the local area

In E - the modifier "such as snakes" seems to be missing after the comma, leading to this ambiguity in option E

Hi GMATNinja - i thought (D) made perfect logical sense.

My understanding of the situation -- Teratomas are a tumor - A tumor is a mass or lump of tissue that resembles a swelling.

So, Teratomas can be thought of as a swelling.

These swellings(aka tumors) are seen on an organ (lets say the lungs..)

So what is so unsual about this ?

The composition of the swelling specifically IS DIFFERENT from the composition of the organ (lungs)

GMATNinja - Isnt that what (D) drives at ?

(D) is saying -- composition of the 'swelling' IS NOT FOUND in the host location

That implies -- composition of the 'swelling' vs composition of the host location IS CLEARLY different

Hello jabhatta2,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, Option D conveys an incorrect meaning because it implies that the composition of the teratoma - the specific combination of tissues that make up the teratoma - rather than the tissues themselves is not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Hi ExpertsGlobal5 - not sure i agree.

What is unusual is -- the COMPOSITION (specific combination of tissues) of the teratoma IS DIFFERENT than the COMPOSITION (Specific combination of tissues) of the lungs.

How can tissues themselves NOT BE FOUND in lungs ?

GMATNinja - could you please help clarify -- that would be great as well ..

Hello jabhatta2,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your doubt, this is the intended meaning of the sentence - what makes teratomas unusual is that they are made up of those types of tissues that do not normally appear in the organs in which the teratoma has formed; in other words, the teratoma grows in Organ A, but is made up of tissue from Organ B.

Option D seems to indicate that the specific combination of tissues that the teratoma is made of is not normally found in the organ the teratoma grows in, but the intended meaning is that none of the tissues the teratoma is made of are normally found in the organ the teratoma grows in.

So, if a teratoma made of muscle and skin tissue forms in the brain, it is not that the particular combination of muscle and skin tissue is not normally found in the brain; rather, muscle and skin tissue are not normally found in the brain in any combination or alone.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

I'm not 100% sure that I'm interpreting your question correctly, but "composition" in (D), is a descriptive term meaning "the makeup" or "arrangement." It's illogical to say that the makeup of a kind of tissue isn't found in a certain location, the same way it would be illogical to say that another descriptive term, such as "red" isn't found in a location.

It makes far more sense to write that the tissue itself is (or isn't) found in the organ, as (E) does.

I hope that clears things up!

Could anyone help to advise about choice E. The completed sentence will be " Teratomas are unusual forms of cancer in that they are composed of tissues such as tooth and bone, tissues not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears. ".

In the part of the modifier states " tissues not normally found ", is it correct? because there is no verb to be in the middle between "tissues" and "not".

GMATNinja egmat AndrewN
KarishmaB

Can you please explain why option (B) is wrong. As per me "that" here might be ambiguous and might refer only to bone and not tooth and bone. But someone can stretch and say that it can refer to "tooth and bone" since we are using "are" correctly. Please let me know your comments. I was confused between (B) and (E). Choose the wrong answer.

"Like" can be a reason but I don't really focus on it to eliminate answer choices.

Thanks

AnthonyRitz GMATGuruNY ReedArnoldMPREP

Hi experts - how would you pick (E) over (A) ?

i have gone through the messages but i am not able to understand what is wrong with (A)

Curious on your thoughts.

Hey jabhatta2,

Happy to help you with this.


There is a verb-ed modifier ambiguity in choice A. Allow me to explain:

Sentence Structure:

Teratomas are unusual forms of cancer because they are composed of tissues such as tooth and bone not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears.

• Teratomas are unusual forms of cancer
  
  • because they are composed of tissues
    
    • such as tooth and bone
      
      • not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears.

Vs

• Teratomas are unusual forms of cancer
  
  • because they are composed of tissues
    
    • such as tooth and bone
    • not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears.

Observation:
It is unclear from the original sentence whether "not normally found..." modifies "bone", "tooth", "tooth and bone", or "tissues". Owing to proximity, "bone" or "tooth and bone" seem more likely. But that disagrees with common sense. Why?

Because, there is no such thing as "tooth and bone not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears".

Meaning Analysis:

1. Teratomas are unusual forms of cancer.
2. They are unusual because they contain tissues such as tooth and bone.
3. Usual forms of cancer do not contain tissues such as tooth and bone.
4. And, teratomas are found in organs in which it is not normal to find such hard tissues (of tooth and bone).

Conclusion:
So, we need a structure that makes it clear that such cancerous hard tissues are found in organs in which it is not normal to find such hard tissues. This is why the phrase "Tissues of (tooth and bone not normally found in the organ in which the tumor appears)" paints the wrong picture. There is no such thing as 'tooth and bone found in cancerous organs'. But there are teratomas, which are a certain kind of "tissue" found in cancerous organs.


This is why choice E is better than A. Choice E eliminates this ambiguity by using a noun + noun modifier to describe "tissues" categorically.


Hope this helps.

Happy learning!

Thanks GMATNinja for the great explanation as always. I have learnt something new.