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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
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.
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....
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and.....
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.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0%
(00:00)
correct 0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 11
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Advertisement: In experiments by a leading cardiologist, people who ate two bowls of Health Crunch cereal daily, as one element of a reduced calorie diet, lost an average of ten pounds and reduced many of their risk factors for heart disease. This shows that eating Health Crunch cereal is an effective way to improve your health.
The advertisement's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
A. It confuses a statement that would support the argument's conclusion with a statement that is supported by the argument's conclusion. B. It confuses two possible meanings of an ambiguous term. C. It uses value-laden language unrelated to the argument's reasoning in order to influence the reader's opinion. D. The conclusion assumes an explanation for the experimental results that is no better supported by the reported data than other explanation that is at least as probable. E.It overlooks the possibility that an effective way to achieve a result may be neither necessary to achieve that result nor the most effective way to do so.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Advertisement: In experiments by a leading cardiologist, people who ate two bowls of Health Crunch cereal daily, as one element of a reduced calorie diet, lost an average of ten pounds and reduced many of their risk factors for heart disease. This shows that eating Health Crunch cereal is an effective way to improve your health.
The advertisement's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?
A. It confuses a statement that would support the argument's conclusion with a statement that is supported by the argument's conclusion. B. It confuses two possible meanings of an ambiguous term. C. It uses value-laden language unrelated to the argument's reasoning in order to influence the reader's opinion. D. The conclusion assumes an explanation for the experimental results that is no better supported by the reported data than other explanation that is at least as probable. E.It overlooks the possibility that an effective way to achieve a result may be neither necessary to achieve that result nor the most effective way to do so.
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.