GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 18 Oct 2019, 07:51

Close

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
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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence tha

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 58453
The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence tha  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Aug 2018, 21:33
1
8
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  35% (medium)

Question Stats:

68% (01:28) correct 32% (01:57) wrong based on 285 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence that breathing other people’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.


CR38561.01

_________________
SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 23 Sep 2015
Posts: 1716
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
Re: The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence tha  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Aug 2018, 22:10
3
This is more like identify the flaw in given reasoning. So biggest flaw is that if some smoking does not incidences the incidence of heart disease or lung cancer in healthy nonsmokers then it should be allowed. I think they have raised the bar too much. While if nonsmokers start coughing then also smoking should not be allowed. more precisely any kind of impact should not be there on non smokers. Only B is on these lines.

(B) It neglects the damaging effects of smoke-filled air on nonsmokers who are not healthy.
_________________
Thanks!
Do give some kudos.

Simple strategy:
“Once you’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”

Want to improve your Score:
GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 1| GMAT Ninja YouTube! Series 2 | How to Improve GMAT Quant from Q49 to a Perfect Q51 | Time management

My Notes:
Reading comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Absolute Phrases | Subjunctive Mood
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Posts: 291
Re: The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence tha  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2019, 11:54
1
1
Bunuel wrote:
The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence that breathing other people’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.


CR38561.01


Official Explanation

Argument Evaluation

Among the answer choices given, which one describes the most significant flaw in the reasoning, given the information provided?

Note that not all nonsmokers are healthy in every respect. This raises the possibility that tobacco-smoke exposure of some nonsmokers—those who already have some medical condition—could either worsen existing illnesses or cause new ones such as lung cancer or heart disease.

The risks in such exposure could be significantly greater for those unhealthy nonsmokers than for the healthy nonsmokers.

A. This choice is outside the scope of the argument. The argument addresses the issue of illnesses that could be caused by exposure to other people's smoke in the workplace. In this context, cancer-causing factors other than smoking are irrelevant.

B. Correct. The information provided does not mention health risks to unhealthy nonsmokers that exposure to other people's tobacco smoke in the workplace might cause.

C. This choice is outside the scope of the argument. The argument addresses the issue of illnesses that could be caused by exposure to other people's smoke in the workplace. It does not address general risk factors that contribute to anybody's risk of getting heart disease.

D. The argument does not consider whether nonsmokers might become concerned about their health risks in workplaces where they breathe smoke. The argument is about health risks, not about workers' attitudes to health risks.

E. The argument suggests that healthy nonsmokers are not unduly affected by cigarette smoke in the workplace. While possibly true, this claim is not a valid criticism of the argument as stated. The argument has no explicit comparison of the health levels of smokers and nonsmokers.

The correct answer is B.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 10 Sep 2013
Posts: 307
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
Re: The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence tha  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Sep 2019, 10:44
THe premise only talks about healthy non-smokers and then generalises the argument. It completely ignores the effect on unhealthy non-smokers and B elegently exemplifies it.
GMAT Club Bot
Re: The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence tha   [#permalink] 24 Sep 2019, 10:44
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The lobbyists argued that because there is no statistical evidence tha

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne