Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo

Question

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking anti-psychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years. That is greater than the increase in the number of adults taking anti-psychotic medicines during the same period.

Lucy: But the use of anti-psychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on anti-psychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children.

Lucy's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion? 
 
A) The current level of anti-psychotic drug use among children is extremely high

B) The fact that number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high

C) If only 6.6 of every 1000 children are taking an anti psychotic medicine, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage that Antoine cites

D) It is unlikely that the increase in the use of anti-psychotic medicines by children will continue at the same rate

E) If the number of children taking anti-psychotoc drugs is given as a certain number, the actual rate of such drug use is even higher

P.S The question stem is similar to another on MGMAT, but differs subtly; kindly do not delete. Also, please note that OA is unavailable.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Antoine is alarmed that the number of children on antipsychotic medication has increased by 73 percent. Lucy begins her reply with “but,” indicating that she is about to counter either Antoine’s facts or his alarm; she accepts his facts but addresses his alarm. If the number of children taking antipsychotic medication is still within the normal range, the rate at which the total number has increased is not cause for alarm. Lucy shows that even though the total number of children on such medications has increased, children still take antipsychotic drugs at an even lower rate than do adults, and the current adult rate is considered normal.

(A) Lucy’s argument is that the rate of adults taking antipsychotic drugs is normal, and the rate of children taking such drugs is even lower. Thus, the argument does not lead to the conclusion that the current level of antipsychotic drug use in children is abnormally high.

(B) CORRECT.  This statement properly identifies the conclusion to which Lucy’s argument is leading.

(C) Lucy does not dispute Antoine’s statistics, and her argument is designed to make a conclusion about their interpretation, not about their accuracy. Also, it is mathematically possible for the increase in the use of such medicines to be 73 percent, as Antoine cites. An increase from 3.8 to 6.6 out of every 1,000 represents an approximately 73 percent increase.

(D) There is no information about what might happen in the future, so no conclusion can be made about whether the use of antipsychotic medicines by children will increase or decrease, or at what rate that might happen.

(E) No information in Lucy’s argument supports the conclusion that the rate of antipsychotic drug use in children is higher than that reported.

VeritasPrepBrandon · Answer

This is an inference question, because we are given a series of premises and then asked to draw a conclusion.

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking anti-psychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years. That is greater than the increase in the number of adults taking anti-psychotic medicines during the same period.

Lucy: But the use of anti-psychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on anti-psychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children.

Lucy's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

A) The current level of anti-psychotic drug use among children is extremely high
 Lucy if anything is implying the opposite, by indicating that the current level of children utilizing the drugs is far less than the normal adult level

B) The fact that number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high
 This nails it and is thus correct. Lucy is pointing out in response to Antoine's concern about the increase in drug use by children that just because it has increased by a high percentage does not mean that the absolute number is currently high. Be careful with absolute number vs. percent data. If you start with a small number and then increase it by a large percentage, you may still have a relatively small number.

C) If only 6.6 of every 1000 children are taking an anti psychotic medicine, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage that Antoine cites
 Lucy never says anything to hint that she disagrees with Antoine's evidence

D)It is unlikely that the increase in the use of anti-psychotic medicines by children will continue at the same rate
 No mention of the future is given or implied

E) If the number of children taking anti-psychotoc drugs is given as a certain number, the actual rate of such drug use is even higher
 Lucy never states or implies that the statistics are inaccurate

I hope this helps!

arnabs · Answer

between B and C;

B) The fact that number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high
This hits the assumption thus stating it as the conclusion. Hence, correct

C) If only 6.6 of every 1000 children are taking an anti psychotic medicine, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage that Antoine cites.
on calculating mathematically, it can be found that the no. of children who were taking these drugs 4(x+0.73x=6.6; x=3.8) years back was around 4 and in these 4 years the number changed from 4 to 6.6, which does suggest that the increase in the use of such medicines CAN be the percentage antoine cites.(assuming that the change was calculated per 1000 child patients.) hence, incorrect.

chetan2u · Answer

Hi,
i feel the statement of Antoine itself is not very clear..
He compares increase in percentage of one group to increase in pure number , even if he meant otherwise..Although one may argue that "that" stands for the number `but i dont think it is clear..
Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger,  the number taking anti-psychotic medicines soared 73 percent  in the last four years.  That  is greater than  the increase in the number of adults  taking anti-psychotic medicines during the same period.

hello  VeritasPrepBrandon ..
how can we compare two different groups and infer usage of a younger group from an accepted normal rate in adults....
It may be that even 6.6 could be a high number for this group looking at the age bracket because Lucy very clearly speaks of 11 as normal for adults and keeps 19 yrs and below out of it..

Skywalker18 · Answer

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking antipsychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years. That is greater than the increase in the number of adults taking antipsychotic medicines during the same period.
Lucy: But the use of antipsychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on antipsychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children. Lucy’s argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

A.The current level of antipsychotic drug use in children is abnormally high.
B.The fact that the number of children taking antipsychotic medicines increased 73 percent over the last four years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high.
C.If only 6.6 out of every 1,000 children are taking an antipsychotic medication, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage Antoine cites.
D. It is unlikely that the increase in the use of antipsychotic medicines by children will continue at the same rate.
E. If the number of children taking antipsychotic drugs is given as a certain number, the actual rate of such drug use is even higher.

Kurtosis · Answer

Antoine --> AP drug consumption by children below 19 years increased by 73% in last 4 years.

Lucy --> Normal consumption is 110/10000. Last year consumption = 66/10000 .

Question:  Lucy’s argument  is structured to lead to which of the following as a  conclusion ?

A.The current level of antipsychotic drug use in children is abnormally high. - Incorrect. Opposite.

B.The fact that the number of children taking antipsychotic medicines increased 73 percent over the last four years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high. - Correct. Even if the consumption rate increased by 100%, it's still closer to the normal consumption rate and not abnormally high. So 73% increase over 66/10000 is closer to 110/10000.

C.If only 6.6 out of every 1,000 children are taking an antipsychotic medication, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage Antoine cites. - Incorrect. Opposes the stated facts.

D. It is unlikely that the increase in the use of antipsychotic medicines by children will continue at the same rate. - Incorrect. Out of scope.

E. If the number of children taking antipsychotic drugs is given as a certain number, the actual rate of such drug use is even higher. - Incorrect. Out of scope. Cannot be inferred.

Answer: B

TaN1213 · Answer

I agree with  this  fault in reasoning. The OA needs an assumption for it to be correct and the assumption is that if 11 is normal then 6 can also be a normal level for the children's group. 
IMO this is an incorrect question. Thanks.

shashankism · Answer

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking anti-psychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years. That is greater than the increase in the number of adults taking anti-psychotic medicines during the same period.

Lucy: But the use of anti-psychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on anti-psychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children.

Lucy's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion? 
 
 A) The current level of anti-psychotic drug use among children is extremely high 
Lucy is pointing out the opposite of this..

B) The fact that number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high 
Though the number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs has increased by a huge percentage over the last 4 years, even then the current number is not as high as adults.. This is exactly what is pointed by Lucy.

C) If only 6.6 of every 1000 children are taking an anti psychotic medicine, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage that Antoine cites 
No such conclusion is drawn by Lucy.. She just said that the number last year was 6.6 per 1000 children.

D) It is unlikely that the increase in the use of anti-psychotic medicines by children will continue at the same rate 
No comment has been provided by Lucy about the future rate of the use of anti-psychotic medicines.

E) If the number of children taking anti-psychotoc drugs is given as a certain number, the actual rate of such drug use is even higher No such conclusion has bee drawn..

AkshdeepS · Answer

Lucy's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion? 
 
A) The current level of anti-psychotic drug use among children  is extremely high

B) The fact that number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high

C) If only 6.6 of every 1000 children are taking an anti psychotic medicine, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the  percentage that Antoine cites

D) It is unlikely that the increase in the use of anti-psychotic medicines by children will  continue at the same rate

E) If the number of children taking anti-psychotoc drugs is given as a certain number, the actual  rate of such drug use is even higher

"B" is the best choice among available answer choices.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo

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

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and yo

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