Because lead is one of the metals used to solder cans of tuna fish

Question

Because lead is one of the metals used to solder cans of tuna fish, some medical experts  argued that frequent canned-tuna eaters are susceptible to lead poisoning, with even trace amounts of ingested lead remaining  in the human body for years.

(a) argued that frequent canned-tuna eaters are susceptible to lead poisoning, with even trace amounts of ingested lead remaining
(b) argued that frequent canned-tuna eaters are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remained
(c) argue that frequent eaters of canned tuna are susceptible to lead poisoning, with even trace amounts of ingested lead remaining
(d) argue that those who eat canned tuna frequently are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remain
(e) argue that those who eat canned tuna are susceptible to frequent lead poisoning, because even trace amounts of the lead they ingested remained

daagh · Accepted Answer

The key is the adverb ‘frequent or frequently'. It should modify the eaters and be placed before. A and B can be dismissed for using the past tense. In C, the word frequent duly modifies eaters and hence is the correct answer. In D, the word frequently modifies are susceptible and hence is wrong. Similarly, E also changes the meaning of frequently modifying lead poisoning.

The correct answer is C.

The correct answer is C.

ravikiranp · Answer

Interesting! There is an ambiguity here. I suppose if there was a comma before frequently, what you say is correct. On the other hand, if there is one after, it modifies tuna eaters.

ex:
Before: argue that those who eat canned tuna ,  frequently are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remain
After: argue that those who eat canned tuna frequently ,  are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remain

Although in the latter case, the comma after poisoning needs to go.

jefferyk · Answer

I answered C, and got it wrong. I don't know the OA, but it is not C.

budhni · Answer

Sir, Can we consider that when two options are grammatically correct, then the option more close original can be picked.? kindly explain.

ShreyasJavahar · Answer

Yes, it is my understanding as well that a comma before frequently would be needed for it to modify 'are susceptible'.
In light of this, would you please tell us what would push one to pick C over D  daagh ? Assuming, of course, that the presence of a comma is a valid concern.

himtheGMATE · Answer

Let's go by answer choices
A: argued that frequent canned-tuna eaters are susceptible to lead poisoning, with even trace amounts of ingested lead remaining : Problem here is with   frequent canned-tuna eaters  wrong usage of modifier

B: argued that frequent canned-tuna eaters are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remained : Same as A also usage of because with since even make it redundant

(d) argue that those who eat canned tuna frequently are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remain : use of frequently and since even make it redundant

(e) argue that those who eat canned tuna are susceptible to frequent lead poisoning, because even trace amounts of the lead they ingested remained : Frequent lead poisoning and because.. because even are wrong usage

C: argue that frequent eaters of canned tuna are susceptible to lead poisoning, with even trace amounts of ingested lead remaining :  Correct  usage of Modifier frequent eater and because.. with make it suitable grammatical arrangement

Pranjal3107 · Answer

Can someone please provide the official explanation ? I am confused b/w c and d. those who eat canned tuna fish frequently. Why is the usage of frequently wrongly placed here ? 
Also, can someone explain why "since even trace amounts" is redundant ?

himtheGMATE · Answer

In option D frequently is pointing to susceptible hence it is creating ambiguity in meaning of the sentence

Posted from my mobile device

LSwetha · Answer

daagh  Sir considering your reasoning, what is wrong with A and B. I chose D because 'remain' implies general characteristic of traces of tuna in body.

AkkadBakkad · Answer

Hey  GMATNinja  could you please clarify why D is wrong and C is the right answer

empower · Answer

As per the OA correct answer is 'D'. Can anyone explain as per the reasoning 'C' also seems okay. The only problem mentioned is in 'remaining'

Official Explanation:

The underlined portion of the sentence contains the construction argued…are susceptible…remaining, so check to make sure these are all in the same form. The simple past tense argued implies that the medical experts once argued that people who eat tuna are susceptible to lead poisoning, but that the experts no longer argue that position. The simple present tense are indicates that the canned-tuna eaters are still susceptible to lead poisoning. The participle remaining indicates an ongoing action. Therefore, the sentence as currently constructed is not parallel. So, eliminate choice A and look for obvious repeaters. Because each of the answer choices must be independently evaluated to determine if the sentence is parallel, there are no obvious repeaters. Evaluate the remaining answer choices individually, looking for reasons to eliminate each.

Choice B changes the participle remaining to remained, which is in agreement with the simple past tense verb argued. However, argued and remained are not in agreement with the simple present tense verb are susceptible, so this is a parallel construction error. Eliminate choice B. Choice C changed the simple past tense argued to the simple present tense argue, which is in agreement with the simple present tense are susceptible. However, this participle remaining is not parallel with argued and are susceptible, so eliminate choice C. Choice D fixes the original parallel construction error by using the construction argue…are susceptible…remain. This choice also introduces no new errors, so keep choice D. Choice E uses the simple present tense argue and are susceptible, but then uses the simple past tense remained, which is not parallel, so eliminate choice E.

Alternatively, if it is difficult to spot the grammar rule the sentence is testing, another strategy is to identify an error from the answers by looking for either a 2/3 split or differences among the answers. Because three of the answer choices begin with the word argue and two of the answer choices begin with the word argued this is an indication to look for verb tense or parallel construction errors.

Choice A: No. The construction argued…are susceptible…remaining is not parallel. Parallel construction.

Choice B: No. The construction argued…are susceptible…remained is not parallel. Parallel construction.

Choice C: No. The construction argue…are susceptible…remaining is not parallel. Parallel construction.

Choice D: Correct.

Choice E: No. The construction argue…are susceptible…remained is not parallel. Parallel construction.

The correct answer is choice D

cigarboy · Answer

Please explain why option C is wrong and option D is right?

(a) argued that frequent canned-tuna eaters are susceptible to lead poisoning, with even trace amounts of ingested lead remaining - frequent canned-tuna eaters is problematic

(b) argued that frequent canned-tuna eaters are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remained - frequent canned-tuna eaters is problematic

(c) argue that frequent eaters of canned tuna are susceptible to lead poisoning, with even trace amounts of ingested lead remaining - no such problem with the placement of the word frequent

(d) argue that those who eat canned tuna frequently are susceptible to lead poisoning, since even trace amounts of ingested lead remain - no such problem with the placement of the word frequent

(e) argue that those who eat canned tuna are susceptible to frequent lead poisoning, because even trace amounts of the lead they ingested remained - frequent lead poisoning - meaning changed from frequent eater to frequent poisoning

I could not find any difference between C and D. I thought that D won't be a good option since there is a dependent because clause in the beginning therefore I went with option C. I feel this is not a good way to discard options.

Where am I wrong in my reasoning?

mysterymanrog · Answer

I picked C over D as D uses "those" and "they" which has no proper referrent. There is no subject that those and they replaces, so it should not be correct. I am also confused by the OA

Posted from my mobile device

Because lead is one of the metals used to solder cans of tuna fish

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 Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

Because lead is one of the metals used to solder cans of tuna fish

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