Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
May 0312:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
May 0301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
May 0510:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
GMAT Inequalities is a high-frequency topic in GMAT Quant, but many students struggle because the concepts behave differently from standard algebra. Understanding the right rules, patterns, and edge cases can significantly improve both speed and accuracy.
May 0612:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
GMAT 615 to 715 in Just 15 Days! Riya’s 100-pt Improvement Strategy- May 06
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
In Episode 3 of our GMAT Ninja Critical Reasoning series, we tackle Discrepancy, Paradox, and Explain an Oddity questions. You know the feeling: the passage gives you two facts that seem completely contradictory.... - May 08
08:00 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join the special YouTube live-stream for selecting the winners of GMAT Club MBA Scholarships sponsored by Juno live. Watch who gets these coveted MBA scholarships offered by GMAT Club and Juno.
16 Sep 2014, 02:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
Analyst: On average, the Urgent treatment for an elderly person for injuries resulting from a fall costs USD 10,000. A new therapeutic program can significantly reduce an elderly person's chances of falling. Though obviously desirable for many reasons, this treatment program will cost $15,000 and thus cannot be justified.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion of the argument?
A. Among elderly people who had followed the program for only a few months, the number of serious falls reported was higher than it was for people who had followed the program for its recommended minimum length of one year.
B. Falls resulting in serious injuries are less common among elderly people living in nursing homes than they are among elderly people who live alone at home.
C. A frequent result of injuries sustained in falls is long-term pain, medication for which is not counted among the average per-person costs of emergency treatment for elderly people's injuries from such falls.
D. The new therapeutic program focuses on therapies other than medication, since overmedication can cause disorientation and hence increase the likelihood that an elderly person will have a serious fall.
E. A significant portion of the cost of the new therapeutic program is represented by regular visits by health care professionals, the costs of which tend to increase more rapidly than do those of other elements of the program.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the conclusion of the argument?
A. Among elderly people who had followed the program for only a few months, the number of serious falls reported was higher than it was for people who had followed the program for its recommended minimum length of one year.
B. Falls resulting in serious injuries are less common among elderly people living in nursing homes than they are among elderly people who live alone at home.
C. A frequent result of injuries sustained in falls is long-term pain, medication for which is not counted among the average per-person costs of emergency treatment for elderly people's injuries from such falls.
D. The new therapeutic program focuses on therapies other than medication, since overmedication can cause disorientation and hence increase the likelihood that an elderly person will have a serious fall.
E. A significant portion of the cost of the new therapeutic program is represented by regular visits by health care professionals, the costs of which tend to increase more rapidly than do those of other elements of the program.
16 Sep 2014, 02:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Analyst: On average, the Urgent treatment for an elderly person for injuries resulting from a fall costs USD 10,000. A new therapeutic program can significantly reduce an elderly person's chances of falling. Though obviously desirable for many reasons, this treatment program will cost $15,000 and thus cannot be justified.
A. Among elderly people who had followed the program for only a few months, the number of serious falls reported was higher than it was for people who had followed the program for its recommended minimum length of one year.
B. Falls resulting in serious injuries are less common among elderly people living in nursing homes than they are among elderly people who live alone at home.
C. A frequent result of injuries sustained in falls is long-term pain, medication for which is not counted among the average per-person costs of emergency treatment for elderly people's injuries from such falls.
D. The new therapeutic program focuses on therapies other than medication, since overmedication can cause disorientation and hence increase the likelihood that an elderly person will have a serious fall.
E. A significant portion of the cost of the new therapeutic program is represented by regular visits by health care professionals, the costs of which tend to increase more rapidly than do those of other elements of the program.
We know for sure that 11000 < 12500; this is not something that can be questioned. So, if you want to damage this argument, you have to find something that will swing this inequality the other way. by definition, that's going to have to be one of two things:
1. Some other, hidden cost of the emergency treatment that's not inherent in the original \(11000 price tag (and that would therefore raise the real price of emergency treatment) \\
\\
... or ... \\
\\
2. Some hidden financial savings that's not inherent in the original\)12500 price tag (and that would therefore lower the real cost of the treatment program)
Choice (c) is the definite winner here, since it satisfies #1 here exactly. (in fact, the problem even spells out that the extra cost is "not included in the cost of emergency treatment".)
choice (d) doesn't help, because, if anything, it just provides an extra reason to believe something that's already stated in the passage. in particular, the passage already tells us that the new therapeutic program can significantly reduce an elderly person's chances of falling.
choice (e) provides a nice reason WHY the program might reduce those chances -- but it's already stated as a fact that those chances are reduced! thus, the specific reasons why don't help; those are already factored into the statement made in the argument.
Answer: C
Analyst: On average, the Urgent treatment for an elderly person for injuries resulting from a fall costs USD 10,000. A new therapeutic program can significantly reduce an elderly person's chances of falling. Though obviously desirable for many reasons, this treatment program will cost $15,000 and thus cannot be justified.
A. Among elderly people who had followed the program for only a few months, the number of serious falls reported was higher than it was for people who had followed the program for its recommended minimum length of one year.
B. Falls resulting in serious injuries are less common among elderly people living in nursing homes than they are among elderly people who live alone at home.
C. A frequent result of injuries sustained in falls is long-term pain, medication for which is not counted among the average per-person costs of emergency treatment for elderly people's injuries from such falls.
D. The new therapeutic program focuses on therapies other than medication, since overmedication can cause disorientation and hence increase the likelihood that an elderly person will have a serious fall.
E. A significant portion of the cost of the new therapeutic program is represented by regular visits by health care professionals, the costs of which tend to increase more rapidly than do those of other elements of the program.
We know for sure that 11000 < 12500; this is not something that can be questioned. So, if you want to damage this argument, you have to find something that will swing this inequality the other way. by definition, that's going to have to be one of two things:
1. Some other, hidden cost of the emergency treatment that's not inherent in the original \(11000 price tag (and that would therefore raise the real price of emergency treatment) \\
\\
... or ... \\
\\
2. Some hidden financial savings that's not inherent in the original\)12500 price tag (and that would therefore lower the real cost of the treatment program)
Choice (c) is the definite winner here, since it satisfies #1 here exactly. (in fact, the problem even spells out that the extra cost is "not included in the cost of emergency treatment".)
choice (d) doesn't help, because, if anything, it just provides an extra reason to believe something that's already stated in the passage. in particular, the passage already tells us that the new therapeutic program can significantly reduce an elderly person's chances of falling.
choice (e) provides a nice reason WHY the program might reduce those chances -- but it's already stated as a fact that those chances are reduced! thus, the specific reasons why don't help; those are already factored into the statement made in the argument.
Answer: C
