Last year, the United States introduced compulsory vaccination for all

Question

Last year, the United States introduced compulsory vaccination for all children of a certain age against rotavirus. Without the vaccination, rotavirus hospitalized 55,000 to 70,000 children in the United States per year; this year, the number of hospitalizations has been reduced by 20%. Based on this data, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that the rotavirus vaccine prevents more than 50,000 doctor visits per year.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the estimate prepared by the CDC?

A) A 2-year-old child is much more susceptible to attacks by rotavirus than a five year old child.
B) Not all children affected by rotavirus go to the doctor.
C) Generally, a patient affected by rotavirus has a weaker than normal immune system and thus is more susceptible to other diseases.
D) The vaccine for Zetavirus, which also affects children of the same age as rotavirus does, prevents no more than 10,000 doctor visits per year.
E) Rotavirus vaccine is administered to 2 year old children and rotavirus attacks children above the age of four.

syedmohammad211 · Answer

The correct answer is E because it destroys the conclusion.

Since the vaccine was introduced only last year and can be administered to children at the age of 2 , then how will it show its effects this year as the disease affects children above the age of 4? The 2 year olds will be 3yolds this year.

kapstone1996 · Answer

Would this be an actual GMAT question?

It seemed, very straight forward. I spent more time doubting myself.

Rajdeep1989 · Answer

Its not a current scenerio based question. Silly analysis.

Posted from my mobile device

AnirudhaS · Answer

What is your take on this question?

Pran1990 · Answer

Please note that in the question, it is nowhere mentioned that vaccination caused the reduction in hospitalization this year. It is just stated that hospitalization this year reduced by 20%. Hence the basic assumption here is - "Vaccination caused the reduction in hospitalization". If this assumption is wrong, then the study on which CDC based their conclusion falls apart.

Option E is in line with this. If two year old children were vaccinated last year and rotavirus attacks only children above four, then the reduction in hospitalization this year is not due to the vaccination, since rotavirus, if at all, will attack these children next year (when they reach four years of age). This means the reduction in hospitalization this year is due to some other reason. i.e the study conducted by CDC is flawed. Hence option E tears apart the conclusion by CDC, that is based on a flawed study.

syedmohammad211 · Answer

Rajdeep1989  If you're such an expert , why don't you answer?

And please read the question before answering or commenting, such buffoonery is very unbecoming of MBA aspirants.

It is nowhere based on the current scenario if by that you're referring to the Pandemic.

And it clearly states "this year" if you're referring to the time period.

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.

Last year, the United States introduced compulsory vaccination for all

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

Last year, the United States introduced compulsory vaccination for all

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