Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 25 May 2017, 04:52

### 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

# The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2004
Posts: 328
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 01:05
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

100% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence that breathing other peopleâ€™s tobacco smoke increases the incidence of heart disease or lung cancer in healthy nonsmokers, legislation banning smoking in workplaces cannot be justified on health grounds.

Of the following, which is the best criticism of the argument reported above?

(A) It ignores causes of lung cancer other than smoking.
(B) It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.
(C) It fails to mention the roles played by diet, exercise, and heredity in the development of heart disease.
(D) It does not consider the possibility that nonsmokers who breathe smoke-filled air at work may become more concerned about their health.
(E) It does not acknowledge that nonsmokers, even those who breathe smoke-filled air at work, are in general healthier than smokers.
Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Jul 2006
Posts: 326
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 01:58
VP
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1122
Location: India
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 44 [0], given: 1

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 02:00
Is it C ?
_________________

Trying hard to conquer Quant.

Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 718
Followers: 4

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

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 03:36
D for me on this one
_________________

IE IMBA 2010

Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2006
Posts: 56
Location: Moscow, Russia
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 03:59
I'll go for B:

A - irrelevant, the argument discusses the smoking effects and ban.
B - right. The statistics the tabacco lobby cites only refers to healthy nonsmokers. Very few people are healthy.
C - irrelevant, addresses only the heart disease but not lung cancer, and if it were relevant it would provide support for the lobbyists, notr criticicize them: "yeah guys what don't you eat healthy and exercise more instead of prohibiting peiple from smoking"
D - so what if they become concerned ? anyway they may or may not- that's a weak argument
E - it doesn't matter if they are healthier in general because the ground for the ban are specific diseases and it's the evidence against those diseases that the lobbyists cite
_________________

________________________________
"Amicus Plato, sed magic amica veritas"

Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jun 2006
Posts: 441
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 69 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 04:50
(B) looks fine.
_________________

http://mba2010dreams.blogspot.com

Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5221
Followers: 26

Kudos [?]: 403 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 05:54
Yurik79 wrote:
D for me on this one

I agree with Yurik here. These people may not take notice in their health until they suffer the consequences of second hand smoke.
Director
Joined: 17 Jul 2006
Posts: 707
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 06:52
Caught Between B and D.

D is the better choice than B.

All other options are out of scope.
VP
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1261
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 07:04
(B) It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.

The lobbyists cite "affect on healthy ..." ignoring unhealthy nonsmokers who may be affected too.
Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 526
Location: US
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 07:13
straight one B...

argument only takes care of healthy non-smokers. that's the issue.
Director
Joined: 06 May 2006
Posts: 791
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 2

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 07:22
Definitely b/w B and D.

Should be a straight B - I don't think a legislation can be raised just because people start becoming concerned; there must be some solid health ground.
_________________

Uh uh. I know what you're thinking. "Is the answer A, B, C, D or E?" Well to tell you the truth in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself. But you've gotta ask yourself one question: "Do I feel lucky?" Well, do ya, punk?

Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 236
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 80 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 17:08
B. What's d OA?
CEO
Joined: 20 Nov 2005
Posts: 2898
Schools: Completed at SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - Class of 2008
Followers: 25

Kudos [?]: 289 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Aug 2006, 23:37
Between B and D, I go with D.
_________________

SAID BUSINESS SCHOOL, OXFORD - MBA CLASS OF 2008

23 Aug 2006, 23:37
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
The pharmaceutical industry argues that because new drugs 9 03 Aug 2011, 21:41
The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical 6 12 Sep 2008, 06:08
The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical 4 13 Aug 2008, 06:15
The Pharmaceutical industry argues that because new drugs 6 01 Sep 2007, 02:14
The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical 1 02 Jul 2007, 02:43
Display posts from previous: Sort by