|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
06 Sep 2021, 08:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
71% (01:38) correct
29%
(01:55)
wrong
based on 476
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The city performed its annual testing of lead levels in the drinking water and discovered that about 14 percent of the samples taken exceeded federal standards for allowable lead levels. Regardless of these findings, the lead levels, even in the ones that exceeded federal standards, were still too low to pose any immediate health threat. So, it’s perfectly safe for the city’s residents to drink all the tap water they want.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The city’s residents often disregard federal guidelines when it comes to public health issues because the standards are overly stringent.
(B) The most dangerous contaminant in drinking water is lead.
(C) Statistical sampling is not the most accurate basis for determining health threats even though the federal government and the city must depend on them.
(D) Lead levels even slightly above federal standards do not have long-term effects on people’s health.
(E) People feel safer when they heed warnings from the federal government even if they are not entirely accurate.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The city’s residents often disregard federal guidelines when it comes to public health issues because the standards are overly stringent.
(B) The most dangerous contaminant in drinking water is lead.
(C) Statistical sampling is not the most accurate basis for determining health threats even though the federal government and the city must depend on them.
(D) Lead levels even slightly above federal standards do not have long-term effects on people’s health.
(E) People feel safer when they heed warnings from the federal government even if they are not entirely accurate.
09 Sep 2021, 04:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
(A) The city’s residents often disregard federal guidelines when it comes to public health issues because the standards are overly stringent.
WRONG. Doesn't matter what the residents normally do, the argument talk about why the water is safe to drink
(B) The most dangerous contaminant in drinking water is lead.
(C) Statistical sampling is not the most accurate basis for determining health threats even though the federal government and the city must depend on them.
WRONG. Statistics don't have to be most accurate since lead levels are anyway higher than the allowed levels
(D) Lead levels even slightly above federal standards do not have long-term effects on people’s health.
Tempting choice but WRONG according to me. The argument talks about short term effects. This talks about long term
(E) People feel safer when they heed warnings from the federal government even if they are not entirely accurate.
WRONG. Not relevant to the argument
Premise:
14% of samples have lead levels above allowed standards
Lead is still low in levels to cause any immediate threat
Conclusion: City residents can drink this water all they want
My final choices were down to B and D. Since this is an assumption question, we are looking for a choice without which the argument falls apart. My answer is B since if there was something more dangerous than lead in the water, then the conclusion that people can drink as much as they want would not hold true (even in the short term).
VeritasKarishma nightblade354 please correct me if i'm wrong
WRONG. Doesn't matter what the residents normally do, the argument talk about why the water is safe to drink
(B) The most dangerous contaminant in drinking water is lead.
(C) Statistical sampling is not the most accurate basis for determining health threats even though the federal government and the city must depend on them.
WRONG. Statistics don't have to be most accurate since lead levels are anyway higher than the allowed levels
(D) Lead levels even slightly above federal standards do not have long-term effects on people’s health.
Tempting choice but WRONG according to me. The argument talks about short term effects. This talks about long term
(E) People feel safer when they heed warnings from the federal government even if they are not entirely accurate.
WRONG. Not relevant to the argument
Premise:
14% of samples have lead levels above allowed standards
Lead is still low in levels to cause any immediate threat
Conclusion: City residents can drink this water all they want
My final choices were down to B and D. Since this is an assumption question, we are looking for a choice without which the argument falls apart. My answer is B since if there was something more dangerous than lead in the water, then the conclusion that people can drink as much as they want would not hold true (even in the short term).
VeritasKarishma nightblade354 please correct me if i'm wrong
09 Sep 2021, 21:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
roVanG
Option (B) is not correct.
(B) The most dangerous contaminant in drinking water is lead.
We do not need to assume that lead is the most dangerous contaminant. Perhaps arsenic is far more dangerous but our water has no arsenic or it has such a low concentration that it is harmless, we don't know.
If we negate the option, we get:
Lead is not the most dangerous contaminant in drinking water.
Does that impact our argument? No.
Yes, our conclusion is: the water is safe to drink.
There is an assumption that it has no other contaminant in a harmful concentration. But do we need to assume that lead is the most dangerous? No.
Now review the argument and options again.
