Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

 It is currently 20 Jul 2019, 17:18

### 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

# The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 03 Jan 2015
Posts: 72

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2016, 14:24
1
7
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

63% (02:10) correct 37% (02:16) wrong based on 326 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets has improved bicycle safety dramatically. Over the past 12 months, the number of serious bicycling injuries has been reduced by nearly 70 percent. Unfortunately, helmet usage has not reduced the number of all types of bike injuries. While serious head trauma has decreased by nearly 85 percent, broken bones now represent 20 percent of all reported bicycling injuries. This is a significant increase from last year’s 14 percent.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument does which of the following?

A. It fails to include information about any types of bicycle injuries other than head trauma and broken bones.

B. It implies that the same conclusion can result from two different sets of causes.

C. It fails to take into account any possible increase in the number of people riding bicycles over the past 12 months.

D. It presumes that an increase in the percentage of injuries involving broken bones precludes a decrease in the actual number of such injuries.

E. It ignores the fact that a 70 percent overall decrease in injuries would not allow for an 85 percent decrease in one specific type of injury.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 05 Sep 2010
Posts: 647
Re: The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jan 2016, 22:25
D it is: It presumes that an increase in the percentage of injuries involving broken bones precludes a decrease in the actual number of such injuries.---->A TYPICAL confusion of PERCENTAGES and ACTUAL NUMBERS
Board of Directors
Status: QA & VA Forum Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Posts: 4512
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
Re: The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jan 2016, 11:32
saiesta wrote:
The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets has improved bicycle safety dramatically. Over the past 12 months, the number of serious bicycling injuries has been reduced by nearly 70 percent. Unfortunately, helmet usage has not reduced the number of all types of bike injuries. While serious head trauma has decreased by nearly 85 percent, broken bones now represent 20 percent of all reported bicycling injuries. This is a significant increase from last year’s 14 percent.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument does which of the following?

A. It fails to include information about any types of bicycle injuries other than head trauma and broken bones. - Out of scope
B. It implies that the same conclusion can result from two different sets of causes . - Out of scope
C. It fails to take into account any possible increase in the number of people riding bicycles over the past 12 months. - Out of scope
D. It presumes that an increase in the percentage of injuries involving broken bones precludes a decrease in the actual number of such injuries.
The stimulus starts with -
Quote:
The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets has improved bicycle safety dramatically.
and
The concluding lines of the stimulus states -
Quote:
serious head trauma has decreased by nearly 85 percent, broken bones now represent 20 percent of all reported bicycling injuries. This is a significant increase from last year’s 14 percent.

There is an increase in % broken bone injuries from 14% to 20% this year, yet there is a dramatic improvement in bicycle safety.

E. It ignores the fact that a 70 percent overall decrease in injuries would not allow for an 85 percent decrease in one specific type of injury. - Out of scope
_________________
Thanks and Regards

Abhishek....

PLEASE FOLLOW THE RULES FOR POSTING IN QA AND VA FORUM AND USE SEARCH FUNCTION BEFORE POSTING NEW QUESTIONS

How to use Search Function in GMAT Club | Rules for Posting in QA forum | Writing Mathematical Formulas |Rules for Posting in VA forum | Request Expert's Reply ( VA Forum Only )
Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2014
Posts: 99
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q48 V27
GPA: 1.9
WE: Engineering (Energy and Utilities)
Re: The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jan 2016, 04:59
Abhishek009 wrote:
saiesta wrote:
The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets has improved bicycle safety dramatically. Over the past 12 months, the number of serious bicycling injuries has been reduced by nearly 70 percent. Unfortunately, helmet usage has not reduced the number of all types of bike injuries. While serious head trauma has decreased by nearly 85 percent, broken bones now represent 20 percent of all reported bicycling injuries. This is a significant increase from last year’s 14 percent.

The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument does which of the following?

A. It fails to include information about any types of bicycle injuries other than head trauma and broken bones. - Out of scope
B. It implies that the same conclusion can result from two different sets of causes . - Out of scope
C. It fails to take into account any possible increase in the number of people riding bicycles over the past 12 months. - Out of scope
D. It presumes that an increase in the percentage of injuries involving broken bones precludes a decrease in the actual number of such injuries.
The stimulus starts with -
Quote:
The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets has improved bicycle safety dramatically.
and
The concluding lines of the stimulus states -
Quote:
serious head trauma has decreased by nearly 85 percent, broken bones now represent 20 percent of all reported bicycling injuries. This is a significant increase from last year’s 14 percent.

There is an increase in % broken bone injuries from 14% to 20% this year, yet there is a dramatic improvement in bicycle safety.

E. It ignores the fact that a 70 percent overall decrease in injuries would not allow for an 85 percent decrease in one specific type of injury. - Out of scope

Not clear to me at all. please tell me why option C is incorrect?
Jamboree GMAT Instructor
Status: GMAT Expert
Affiliations: Jamboree Education Pvt Ltd
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Posts: 273
Location: India
Re: The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Jan 2016, 00:29
"C" has a statistical flaw. Neither does percentage translate to number nor does number translate to percentage.
_________________
Aryama Dutta Saikia
Jamboree Education Pvt. Ltd.
Intern
Joined: 31 Aug 2018
Posts: 1
Re: The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2018, 03:50
Can you please explain why D is right and other options are wrong
Re: The public service advertising campaign promoting the use of helmets   [#permalink] 31 Aug 2018, 03:50
Display posts from previous: Sort by