GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 3): When the heart is under duress, it

Question

When the heart is under duress, it releases proteins known as troponins into the bloodstream. In elite marathoners and cyclists, troponin levels become so elevated after a race that they are indistinguishable from those observed in patients who have recently suffered a heart attack. Despite the benefits of exercise, it is evident that too much running or cycling, even for one day, has a detrimental effect on health.

Which of the following would be most useful to determine to evaluate the argument?

(A) Whether non-elite runners and cyclists, after prolonged exercise, have more troponin in their bloodstream than do elite athletes.
(B) How long the body takes, on average, to restore elevated troponin levels to normal.
(C) Whether the body produces any other substances after extended periods of exercise that may be harmful.
(D) Whether the body sustains irreparable damage as a result of a long-distance run or bicycle ride.
(E) Whether other forms of prolonged cardiovascular exercise, such as swimming, also lead to elevated levels of troponin in the body.

AndrewN · Accepted Answer

Hello, everyone. I thought it would be fun to weigh in on a sports-related question, even if the sports deviate from our World Cup theme. There are only three lines in the passage, and they follow a typical development.

The first line provides factual information: the heart  releases… troponins  when  under duress     Elite marathoners and cyclists  display elevated levels of troponin after an event that are comparable to levels of troponin found in recent heart attack patients   The argument claims that  it is evident that too much running or cycling, even for one day, has a detrimental effect on health

My mind gravitates to a correlation/causation relationship, but remember, our goal is to  evaluate the argument , not weaken it. What would help us better weigh the pros and cons of the argument presented?

It can be tempting to attack the first part, since it mentions  non-elite  athletes, but then a comparison follows with elite athletes. The problem is that  more troponin  does not offer any insight into whether the levels of troponin actually observed in post-race elite endurance athletes have an overall  detrimental effect on health . If that could be established, and if the information in this answer choice could be ascertained, then the comparison would be more meaningful.

A heart attack survivor would probably tell you that it only takes a moment for your entire life to flash before your eyes. The issue is whether these  elevated troponin levels  contribute to heart attacks or to negative effects on health in general. The average duration for the body to clear out debris from the bloodstream is not a relevant concern.

If you want to make this answer choice work, you will find a way to jam that square peg into a round hole. But objectively, we are putting together  other substances  (not troponin) and another unknown,  may be harmful . This is a case in which vague language is not what we want. It would be much more useful, for instance, to know whether there  was  some confounding variable in another particular substance.

Remember the exact words of the argument:  too much running or cycling, even for one day, has a detrimental effect on health . If the body did sustain  irreparable damage  after a long run or bicycle ride, then  too much running or cycling, even for one day  looks a lot more reasonable; if, on the other hand, the body could repair the damage, the argument would look out of place. This is just what we want in our answer choice.

There are two easy targets here. The first is that  cardiovascular exercise  itself is not being implicated in the argument, just running and cycling. Sure, a stronger case could be made for the argument if these  other forms  of exercise did not produce the same effects in athletes, but that argument still might not be  evident . Then, the passage outlines a specific range of  elevated levels of troponin in the body , levels consistent with those observed in recent heart attack patients, so merely  elevated  levels would not provide sufficiently detailed information—we would want to know just how elevated those troponin levels proved to be.

Whenever there is an argument, do your best not to lose sight of just what it is saying. Once associative reasoning takes over, you can easily be sidetracked and end up picking an answer that is one or two steps removed from what the linear logic of the passage dictates.

Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

Archit3110 · Answer

Argument : 
When the heart is under duress, it releases proteins known as troponins into the bloodstream. In elite marathoners and cyclists, troponin levels become so elevated after a race that they are indistinguishable from those observed in patients who have recently suffered a heart attack

Conclusion : Despite the benefits of exercise, it is evident that too much running or cycling, even for one day, has a detrimental effect on health.

use variance test on answer option :

(A) Whether non-elite runners and cyclists, after prolonged exercise, have more troponin in their bloodstream than do elite athletes.  not relevant 
 (B) How long the body takes, on average, to restore elevated troponin levels to normal.  not relevant 
 (C) Whether the body produces any other substances after extended periods of exercise that may be harmful.  not relevant 
 (D) Whether the body sustains irreparable damage as a result of a long-distance run or bicycle ride.  
yes the body sustains irreparable damage as a result of a long-distance run or bicycle ride ; strengthens the conclusion
no the body sustains irreparable damage as a result of a long-distance run or bicycle ride ; weakens the conclusion

(E) Whether other forms of prolonged cardiovascular exercise, such as swimming, also lead to elevated levels of troponin in the body.  not relevant

OPTION D is correct

mainbhiankit · Answer

The conclusion: Too much cycling and running have a detrimental effect on health.
Premise: Tropin levels are elevated in elite marathoners and cyclists to the level observed in people who have recently suffered heart attacks.

But think about it, does having high levels of tropin indicate danger? What if doesn't really cause serious damage? In that case, the premise doesn't really justify the conclusion. And this is exactly what we need to figure out to evaluate the argument.

Option D clearly captures this idea. Hence, option D is the right answer.

Iotaa · Answer

Evaluate the conclusion first:  Despite the benefits of exercise, it is evident that too much running or cycling, even for one day, has a detrimental effect on health .

Question asks:  most useful to determine to evaluate the argument . We have to look at each option & select one which helps us to evaluate the conclusion.

(A)  Whether non-elite runners and cyclists, after prolonged exercise, have more troponin in their bloodstream than do elite athletes : May or may not be. Does it help us to evaluate the argument in any sense? No. Eliminate this option.
 
(B)  How long does the body takes, on average, to restore elevated troponin levels to normal : Can we correlate this with the negative effect of too much exercise? No. Eliminate this option.

(C)  Whether the body produces any other substances after extended periods of exercise that may be harmful : Out of context, eliminate.

(D)  Whether the body sustains irreparable damage as a result of a long-distance run or bicycle ride : Statement says  troponin levels become so elevated after a race that they are indistinguishable from those observed in patients who have recently suffered a heart attack . Do we have to find out if a high level of troponin from exercise does permanent damage to the body as a heart attack does? Yes, we have to evaluate this to verify the conculsion. It serves the purpose. Correct

(E)  Whether other forms of prolonged cardiovascular exercise, such as swimming, also lead to elevated levels of troponin in the body : Out of context, eliminate.

sanjayparihar16 · Answer

When the heart is under duress, it releases proteins known as troponins into the bloodstream. In elite marathoners and cyclists, troponin levels become so elevated after a race that they are indistinguishable from those observed in patients who have recently suffered a heart attack. Despite the benefits of exercise, it is evident that too much running or cycling, even for one day, has a detrimental effect on health.

Which of the following would be most useful to determine to evaluate the argument?

(A) Whether non-elite runners and cyclists, after prolonged exercise, have more troponin in their bloodstream than do elite athletes. —->  Information about non-elite runners and cyclists won’t be helpful as argument is about exercise only. So this doesn’t create any differentiation to gauge the validity of the argument.

(B) How long the body takes, on average, to restore elevated troponin levels to normal. —->  By knowing how much time does it take for the recovery we cannot say anything about the detrimental effect on health.

(C) Whether the body produces any other substances after extended periods of exercise that may be harmful. —->  Other substances are beyond the scope

(D) Whether the body sustains irreparable damage as a result of a long-distance run or bicycle ride. —->  This option talks about running/cycling and irreparable damages. A yes answer to this will strengthen the conclusion and a No to this will weaken the conclusion. Hence, the correct answer

(E) Whether other forms of prolonged cardiovascular exercise, such as swimming, also lead to elevated levels of troponin in the body. —->  Other physical activity is not in the scope.

Kinshook · Answer

Premise: When the heart is under duress, it releases proteins known as troponins into the bloodstream. 
Premise: In elite marathoners and cyclists, troponin levels become so elevated after a race that they are indistinguishable from those observed in patients who have recently suffered a heart attack. 
Conclusion: Despite the benefits of exercise, it is evident that too much running or cycling, even for one day, has a detrimental effect on health.

Which of the following would be most useful to determine to evaluate the argument?

Two causes may have same effect on the body. Elevated troponin levels may occurs because of heart attached or extensive exercise. But both causes may not be detrimental to health.
Incorrect

Even if heart is under duress for a short period of time, heart attach may occur. Therefore, too much cycling or running will have detrimental effect on health even if elevated troponin levels are restored within a short period of time.
Incorrect

The conclusion remains unaffected whether the body produces any other substances after extended periods of exercise that may be harmful or not.
Incorrect

If yes, then long-distance run or bicycle ride will be detrimental to health
If no, then long-distance run or bicycle ride will not be detrimental to health.
Correct

The conclusion remains unaffected Whether other forms of prolonged cardiovascular exercise, such as swimming, also lead to elevated levels of troponin in the body or not.
Incorrect

IMO D

JonShukhrat · Answer

Dear  RonTargetTestPrep

I would be grateful if you could evaluate my line of reasoning. I have problem with the OA.

The conclusion that needs to be evaluated is that too much of A has a detrimental effect on health.

Even if we answer No to the question in choice D, we will find out that too much of A has NO  irreparable  damage. However, “irreparable” effect and “detrimental” effect can be different things. Certain detrimental effects on health are reparable. Hence, a body may suffer detrimental yet still reparable effect – in which case, the conclusion may still hold. So, to me AO seems to have no relevance to the conclusion.

I thought that at least remotely relevant choice here is B.

Many thanks in advance.

RonTargetTestPrep · Answer

This problem doesn't work like official GMAT problems.

The 'correct' answer here (choice D) works by just  affirming  (a stronger form of)  the conclusion .
That's problematic for two different reasons: /1/ As mentioned above, the official test doesn't work that way, and, moreover, /2/ just affirming the conclusion DOESN'T actually say anything about  the reasoning used to argue for it .

Presumably, D is marked 'correct' because it's the only answer option that's relevant to anything in the passage. (Your statement here, about the significance of a negative answer to D, is accurate. If that answer is  affirmative , though, then that means  irreparable  damage is done. "Irreparable damage" is a stronger statement than just "detrimental effect"; a 'yes' to the stronger statement would imply a 'yes' to the weaker one.)

What matters here, ultimately, is that you understand how the official problems of this type will work. Namely, they'll help to substantiate connections  in the line of reasoning that's used to argue for  the conclusion. An official correct answer will NEVER 'strengthen' an argument by just declaring that the conclusion is true, nor will any correct answer ever 'weaken' an argument by just saying the conclusion is false.

AndrewN · Answer

Hello, Jon and Ron. Jon, you may know from some of my former competition questions that I do not write them with GMAC™ standards in mind. Rather, I like to enjoy the process of writing a question, and I take a somewhat liberal stance on the task while still driving toward a single best answer. If you look at my other questions from this competition and from past competitions, you will note that some seem rather GMAT™-like, while others do not. I thought it might be a good idea to ask  me  about the question before calling upon someone else, but that is okay. If you did not enjoy the question, I will take the blame.

Ron, we agree: "D is marked 'correct' because it's the only answer option that's relevant to anything in the passage." It may not be a perfect answer to a perfect question, but it is functional. I appreciate your pointing out how this question may differ from official questions. (Note that I am not defending any sloppiness or errors in logic.) I think my own stance on what to study for GMAT™ preparation is pretty clear, at least on the Verbal end. Competition questions are like carnival games, at least how I approach them (both as a contributor and a participant.) If your new job entails improving the Verbal arm of Target Test Prep, I wish you good luck in that endeavor.

Jon, good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 3): When the heart is under duress, it

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 3): When the heart is under duress, it

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards