Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 02:57 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 02:57
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
User avatar
rohan2345
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2015
Last visit: 29 Aug 2024
Posts: 1,366
Own Kudos:
3,184
 [8]
Given Kudos: 144
Location: India
WE:General Management (Consumer Packaged Goods)
Products:
Posts: 1,366
Kudos: 3,184
 [8]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
5
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Madhavi1990
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Last visit: 15 Jul 2021
Posts: 250
Own Kudos:
93
 [5]
Given Kudos: 931
Posts: 250
Kudos: 93
 [5]
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
abhimahna
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Last visit: 06 Jul 2024
Posts: 3,481
Own Kudos:
5,779
 [2]
Given Kudos: 346
Status:Emory Goizueta Alum
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,481
Kudos: 5,779
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
spetznaz
Joined: 08 Jun 2015
Last visit: 14 Jul 2024
Posts: 254
Own Kudos:
96
 [1]
Given Kudos: 147
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 700 Q48 V38
GPA: 3.33
Products:
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Option C is be the right answer. Here , though the fact that colonization by Europeans began with the arrival of Columbus is known from our general knowledge the prompt should have ideally mentioned it. As far as I know GMAT does not test our knowledge of history or any other subject on the verbal part.
avatar
dadoprso
Joined: 29 Nov 2016
Last visit: 15 Nov 2018
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 275
Location: United States (TX)
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V38
GPA: 3.58
GMAT 1: 690 Q47 V38
Posts: 10
Kudos: 3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
spetznaz
Option C is be the right answer. Here , though the fact that colonization by Europeans began with the arrival of Columbus is known from our general knowledge the prompt should have ideally mentioned it. As far as I know GMAT does not test our knowledge of history or any other subject on the verbal part.

Why C over D?

If the black death rates were higher in specific areas, than the conclusion that the death rate is too high is wrong, as there is no limit to how high the death rate could be.
User avatar
AMsac123
Joined: 08 Jun 2017
Last visit: 09 Oct 2017
Posts: 46
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 24
Posts: 46
Kudos: 4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
No where in the argument it is mentioned about Columbus. So how can we consider that option. ? mike carcass egmat Veritas help needed expert s
User avatar
Madhavi1990
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Last visit: 15 Jul 2021
Posts: 250
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 931
Posts: 250
Kudos: 93
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Anazeer
No where in the argument it is mentioned about Columbus. So how can we consider that option. ? mike carcass egmat Veritas help needed expert s

It is commonly believed that he discovered America (there are some disputes to it also),the continent; like Vasco de Gama discovered India, the sub-continent - i.e - he and his crew were one of the first to be on the land. And the immunity logic follows through - if he was one of the first to visit that land and they weren't exposed to anything else he could have spread some virus which would have had more virulent effect than usual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christoph ... tinct_land
Hope this helpful :)
User avatar
AMsac123
Joined: 08 Jun 2017
Last visit: 09 Oct 2017
Posts: 46
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 24
Posts: 46
Kudos: 4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I agree to that. but generally we dont take new facts right in CR
User avatar
nightblade354
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,769
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3,305
Status:He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Going to Business School -- Corruptus in Extremis
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,769
Kudos: 7,114
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Anazeer
I agree to that. but generally we dont take new facts right in CR

New facts in CR are allowed for certain types of questions: strengthen the argument, weaken the argument, assumption problems, and paradox problems. We do not consider outside information for: main point, method of reasoning, or find the flaw problems (I believe).
avatar
HarpreetSinghBajwa
Joined: 27 Jan 2017
Last visit: 27 Nov 2017
Posts: 6
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 29
Posts: 6
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Madhavi1990
C is correct - I used the following reasoning:
Sara: Anthropologists estimate that diseases brought to the Western Hemisphere by the first Europeans, including smallpox, hepatitis, typhus, and measles, killed 95 percent of the Native American population and allowed Europeans to begin their conquest of the continent. If the Native American population had been twenty times greater, only 4.75 percent of the population would have died, and the Europeans would never have been able to conquer North and South America.

Michele: Those death rates are way too high. The average rate of death in Europe from the most virulent epidemic in recorded history, the Black Death of the 14th century, was only 33 percent. Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases, the cumulative death rate of all of the diseases should not have been more than 50 to 75 percent on average.Essentially she says that there was a greater population in America than the dialogue above has explained - so we need to undermine this

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken Michele’s conclusion?

(A) Native Americans generally lacked the enzyme that would allow them to digest the sugars in milk.:/ completely irrelevant - sugar and digestion as a cause has not been mentioned anywhere
(B) Knowledge of medicine in Native America was much more advanced than in Europe at the time of Columbus.Strengthens Michelle's conclusion
(C) At the time of Columbus, Native Americans were much less genetically diverse than Europeans, so there were fewer possibilities of natural immunity.Yes can help explain why S's argument makes sense - if they had no immunity the slightest infection could have killed several more
(D) The death rates from the Black Death were higher than 33 percent in specific locations.Black death is an extreme example used by Michelle to drive a point - whether or not it came to America that was mentioned by S (she only mentioned hepatitis/ typhus etc not black death. So D is out of scope and distracting
(E) Diseases that quickly kill more than 75 percent of their infected hosts usually die off with their host’s extinction.randome fact

Hope this was helpful to anyone looking for reasons for C. Hit kudos if it was useful :)

my doubt here is that the passage explicitly mentions "Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases, the cumulative death rate of all of the diseases should not have been more than 50 to 75 percent on average"
even with extreme vulnerability the death rate should not have been more than 75%
so even if Americans were genetically less diverse than Europeans and had low natural immunity the death rate should not have been more than 50 to 75 percent on average
I am confused :cry:
User avatar
Madhavi1990
Joined: 15 Jan 2017
Last visit: 15 Jul 2021
Posts: 250
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 931
Posts: 250
Kudos: 93
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
We need to basically undermine the second conclusion - "which of the following, if true, would most weaken Michele’s conclusion" - her conclusion is that the death rate mentioned by S is too high (she mentions 95% of pop); it is realistically between 50-75%. It strengthens S's conclusion that the first Europeans lowered the population by introducing them to lots of diseases --> C talks about lack of genetic diversity which means more people could have died.
User avatar
gmatexam439
User avatar
Moderator
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Last visit: 18 Oct 2024
Posts: 1,054
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 200
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Products:
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
Posts: 1,054
Kudos: 2,194
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
abhimahna
Sara said: Europeans brought diseases and these diseases killed 95% of the Americans.

Michele said: No Man, your numbers are too high. Max declined could be 75%.

Assumption: He is thinking not all people are same.

We need to weaken it.

(A) Native Americans generally lacked the enzyme that would allow them to digest the sugars in milk. : What is this milk and sugar? Non sense. Incorrect
(B) Knowledge of medicine in Native America was much more advanced than in Europe at the time of Columbus. If they knew it, then Michelle could be right. A strengthener.
(C) At the time of Columbus, Native Americans were much less genetically diverse than Europeans, so there were fewer possibilities of natural immunity. : Yes, so people were of same genetics and could be impacted more.
(D) The death rates from the Black Death were higher than 33 percent in specific locations. : OFS. No relevance
(E) Diseases that quickly kill more than 75 percent of their infected hosts usually die off with their host’s extinction. Whether they die or not is irrelevant.

Hi abhimahna bruh,

I am really confused now.

See, my understanding in general of a GMAT question is that the premise is always correct. Conclusion can be flawed.
For example: If a GMAT questions states that "Sun is rectangle. So, all squares are sun." --> This may not be logical in real world, but it is perfectly logical argument as far as GMAT is concerned.

Coming back to the question at hand.

gmatexam439
Michele: Those death rates are way too high. The average rate of death in Europe from the most virulent epidemic in recorded history, the Black Death of the 14th century, was only 33 percent. Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases, the cumulative death rate of all of the diseases should not have been more than 50 to 75 percent on average.

The highlighted part strictly takes into consideration that the American could have been extremely vulnerable, and option "C" talks about the "low immunity". Isn't this the same information from the passage? Isn't it restating what is written in the passage?

Awaiting your reply bro.
Regards
User avatar
nightblade354
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,769
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3,305
Status:He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Going to Business School -- Corruptus in Extremis
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,769
Kudos: 7,114
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gmatexam439
abhimahna
Sara said: Europeans brought diseases and these diseases killed 95% of the Americans.

Michele said: No Man, your numbers are too high. Max declined could be 75%.

Assumption: He is thinking not all people are same.

We need to weaken it.

(A) Native Americans generally lacked the enzyme that would allow them to digest the sugars in milk. : What is this milk and sugar? Non sense. Incorrect
(B) Knowledge of medicine in Native America was much more advanced than in Europe at the time of Columbus. If they knew it, then Michelle could be right. A strengthener.
(C) At the time of Columbus, Native Americans were much less genetically diverse than Europeans, so there were fewer possibilities of natural immunity. : Yes, so people were of same genetics and could be impacted more.
(D) The death rates from the Black Death were higher than 33 percent in specific locations. : OFS. No relevance
(E) Diseases that quickly kill more than 75 percent of their infected hosts usually die off with their host’s extinction. Whether they die or not is irrelevant.

Hi abhimahna bruh,

I am really confused now.

See, my understanding in general of a GMAT question is that the premise is always correct. Conclusion can be flawed.
For example: If a GMAT questions states that "Sun is rectangle. So, all squares are sun." --> This may not be logical in real world, but it is perfectly logical argument as far as GMAT is concerned.

Coming back to the question at hand.

gmatexam439
Michele: Those death rates are way too high. The average rate of death in Europe from the most virulent epidemic in recorded history, the Black Death of the 14th century, was only 33 percent. Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases, the cumulative death rate of all of the diseases should not have been more than 50 to 75 percent on average.

The highlighted part strictly takes into consideration that the American could have been extremely vulnerable, and option "C" talks about the "low immunity". Isn't this the same information from the passage? Isn't it restating what is written in the passage?

Awaiting your reply bro.
Regards

Hi Gmat,

The reason (C) works in this case is because immunity and diversity are two different things. Immunity is resistance within a person or group, whereas diversity is how different the people are. A group could be diverse, but still have no immunity to a common cold. On the flip side, the group could not be diverse, but have an immunity to a certain disease. Question: Native Americans not diverse -- less immunity -- more death. Your highlighted part talks about low immunity, so death must occur. The answer relates low immunity to low diversity, and subsequently death. I think this is where you became confused.

I hope this helps!
User avatar
gmatexam439
User avatar
Moderator
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Last visit: 18 Oct 2024
Posts: 1,054
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 200
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Products:
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
Posts: 1,054
Kudos: 2,194
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nightblade354

Hi Gmat,

The reason (C) works in this case is because immunity and diversity are two different things. Immunity is resistance within a person or group, whereas diversity is how different the people are. A group could be diverse, but still have no immunity to a common cold. On the flip side, the group could not be diverse, but have an immunity to a certain disease. Question: Native Americans not diverse -- less immunity -- more death. Your highlighted part talks about low immunity, so death must occur. The answer relates low immunity to low diversity, and subsequently death. I think this is where you became confused.

I hope this helps!

Hi Night,

Option C: "At the time of Columbus, Native Americans were much less genetically diverse than Europeans, so there were fewer possibilities of natural immunity"
This option is relating the diversity to immunity.

While the - "Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases" - part in the passage is correlating immunity with exposure to diseases.

In both the scenarios, death is happening because of the lack of immunity. If we see cause and effect, the cause of death is same. The cause of immunity can be different, since the passage is just taking into account only 1 scenario in the aforesaid lines. So, is it really a weakener?

What are your thoughts?

Regards
User avatar
nightblade354
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,769
Own Kudos:
7,114
 [2]
Given Kudos: 3,305
Status:He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Going to Business School -- Corruptus in Extremis
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 1,769
Kudos: 7,114
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gmatexam439
nightblade354

Hi Gmat,

The reason (C) works in this case is because immunity and diversity are two different things. Immunity is resistance within a person or group, whereas diversity is how different the people are. A group could be diverse, but still have no immunity to a common cold. On the flip side, the group could not be diverse, but have an immunity to a certain disease. Question: Native Americans not diverse -- less immunity -- more death. Your highlighted part talks about low immunity, so death must occur. The answer relates low immunity to low diversity, and subsequently death. I think this is where you became confused.

I hope this helps!

Hi Night,

Option C: "At the time of Columbus, Native Americans were much less genetically diverse than Europeans, so there were fewer possibilities of natural immunity"
This option is relating the diversity to immunity.

While the - "Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases" - part in the passage is correlating immunity with exposure to diseases.

In both the scenarios, death is happening because of the lack of immunity. If we see cause and effect, the cause of death is same. The cause of immunity can be different, since the passage is just taking into account only 1 scenario in the aforesaid lines. So, is it really a weakener?

What are your thoughts?

Regards

Hi Gmat,

The passage states "Michele: Those death rates are way too high. The average rate of death in Europe from the most virulent epidemic in recorded history, the Black Death of the 14th century, was only 33 percent. Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases, the cumulative death rate of all of the diseases should not have been more than 50 to 75 percent on average."

In the argument, there is a reference to JUST diseases and not diversity. Her argument does not account for diversity as a reason why there might be death. This fact weakens her argument that the number should be lower. She pins the death toll solely on disease and immunity, not on diversity. If Europeans were as diverse as Native American's, then her comparison would stand. But, because Native American's are less diverse, her numbers cannot be accurate by simply pointing out their exposure to diseases. It would low-ball the figure, most likely. Less diversity would mean MORE death. Her argument doesn't account for this.

Does this satisfy? If not, I can take another crack at it from a different point of view!
User avatar
gmatexam439
User avatar
Moderator
Joined: 28 Mar 2017
Last visit: 18 Oct 2024
Posts: 1,054
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 200
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
GPA: 4
Products:
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
Posts: 1,054
Kudos: 2,194
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
nightblade354
gmatexam439
nightblade354

Hi Gmat,

The reason (C) works in this case is because immunity and diversity are two different things. Immunity is resistance within a person or group, whereas diversity is how different the people are. A group could be diverse, but still have no immunity to a common cold. On the flip side, the group could not be diverse, but have an immunity to a certain disease. Question: Native Americans not diverse -- less immunity -- more death. Your highlighted part talks about low immunity, so death must occur. The answer relates low immunity to low diversity, and subsequently death. I think this is where you became confused.

I hope this helps!

Hi Night,

Option C: "At the time of Columbus, Native Americans were much less genetically diverse than Europeans, so there were fewer possibilities of natural immunity"
This option is relating the diversity to immunity.

While the - "Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases" - part in the passage is correlating immunity with exposure to diseases.

In both the scenarios, death is happening because of the lack of immunity. If we see cause and effect, the cause of death is same. The cause of immunity can be different, since the passage is just taking into account only 1 scenario in the aforesaid lines. So, is it really a weakener?

What are your thoughts?

Regards

Hi Gmat,

The passage states "Michele: Those death rates are way too high. The average rate of death in Europe from the most virulent epidemic in recorded history, the Black Death of the 14th century, was only 33 percent. Even if the Native American populations were extremely vulnerable due to their never having been exposed to these diseases, the cumulative death rate of all of the diseases should not have been more than 50 to 75 percent on average."

In the argument, there is a reference to JUST diseases and not diversity. Her argument does not account for diversity as a reason why there might be death. This fact weakens her argument that the number should be lower. She pins the death toll solely on disease and immunity, not on diversity. If Europeans were as diverse as Native American's, then her comparison would stand. But, because Native American's are less diverse, her numbers cannot be accurate by simply pointing out their exposure to diseases. It would low-ball the figure, most likely. Less diversity would mean MORE death. Her argument doesn't account for this.

Does this satisfy? If not, I can take another crack at it from a different point of view!

Thanks mate :)
avatar
ronnieshee
Joined: 02 Jul 2014
Last visit: 30 Mar 2019
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105
Posts: 5
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hello,

I understand why C weakens the argument. But in the passage nowhere is columbus mentioned in relation to native americans. So in this case, taking something to the true during something(eg, "at the time of columbus" which is unrelated to the argument) - isnt this something which we should not assume?
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 19,422
Own Kudos:
Posts: 19,422
Kudos: 1,009
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
501 posts
358 posts