Woodco Plywood Manufacturer: Ten years ago a study linked the high

Question

Woodco Plywood Manufacturer: Ten years ago a study linked the high rates of respiratory ailments in Loganville to airborne pollutants released in the manufacture of plywood. In response, the city government imposed strict regulations on emissions from our plant, which we have followed at great cost to our production capacity. But after an initial dip, the rate of respiratory ailments rose to new levels, so the high rate was never a result of pollution from our plant.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Over the last decade, a series of studies linking respiratory ailments to dietary deficiencies has been published.

B. Seven years ago, the Woodco plant installed equipment to increase production capacity without increasing annual pollutant emissions.

C. Pollutant emissions at Woodco plywood plants in other towns have declined during the past twelve years.

D. Nine years ago, a competing plywood manufacturer opened a plant just across the river from Woodco’s plant.

E. There are more facilities for treating respiratory ailments in Loganville today than there were eleven years ago.

MartyMurray · Answer

Woodco Plywood Manufacturer: Ten years ago a study linked the high rates of respiratory ailments in Loganville to airborne pollutants released in the manufacture of plywood. In response, the city government imposed strict regulations on emissions from our plant, which we have followed at great cost to our production capacity. But after an initial dip, the rate of respiratory ailments rose to new levels, so the high rate was never a result of pollution from our plant.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Over the last decade, a series of studies linking respiratory ailments to dietary deficiencies has been published.

If anything, this strengthens the case for the conclusion by suggesting that respiratory ailments are caused by something other than airborne pollutants.

Eliminate.

B. Seven years ago, the Woodco plant installed equipment to increase production capacity without increasing annual pollutant emissions.

This makes no difference. Installing equipment to increase capacity without increasing emissions would not result in an increase in emissions or in the rate of ailments.

Eliminate.

C. Pollutant emissions at Woodco plywood plants in other towns have declined during the past twelve years.

This makes no difference since it doesn't indicate anything about whether the emissions in those other towns cause ailments.

Eliminate.

D. Nine years ago, a competing plywood manufacturer opened a plant just across the river from Woodco’s plant.

This choice is interesting.

The reasoning of the argument is basically that, since the rate of respiratory ailments increased after Woodco began following the regulations, and presumably reduced the quantity of pollutants released by the plant, pollution from the plant was never the cause of the ailments.

However, a new plywood plant opened after the regulations were implemented. So, so it could be that emissions from that plywood plant have caused the increase in ailments.

In that case, even though Woodco's plant itself may no longer be causing ailments, it could still be the case that, in general, pollution from plywood manufacturing does.

That fact weakens the case for the conclusion that "the high rate was never a result of pollution from our plant" because it indicates that the following could have happened:

Woodo plywood manufacturing pollution was making people sick. Then, Woodco started following the regulations, and the rate of ailments dipped. Then, the new plywood plant started up, and started causing ailments again.

So, this choice weakens the argument by indicating that plywood manufacturing pollution could have been the problem all along, first as caused by Woodco and now as caused by the new plant.

Keep.

E. There are more facilities for treating respiratory ailments in Loganville today than there were eleven years ago.

This doesn't connect emissions to ailments. So, it doesn't affect the case for the conclusion.

Eliminate.

Correct answer:   D

iamjayysingh · Answer

WHT??? We have to weaken the argument not strengthen it, argument was that the high rates was not becuz of the pollution from his factory.

SecretFlight · Answer

The manufactures argument is that they're not responsible as mentioned in the conclusion by using the word "our". On that basis shouldn't d also be eliminated??.

None of the options in the question are legit. I agree with the reasoning with the rest off the options but option a.so doesn't work.

In fact we might even be able to make option e work since more clinics means people can be diagnosed and hence the reported numbers will increase showing a rise in the number of cases

guddo · Answer

Woodco Plywood Manufacturer: Ten years ago a study linked the high rates of respiratory ailments in Loganville to airborne pollutants released in the manufacture of plywood. In response, the city government imposed strict regulations on emissions from our plant, which we have followed at great cost to our production capacity. But after an initial dip, the rate of respiratory ailments rose to new levels, so the high rate was never a result of pollution from our plant.
 
 Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

The manufacturer argues that because respiratory ailments rose again after Woodco reduced emissions, Woodco’s pollution was never the cause.  The weak point  is that another source of similar pollution may have appeared after Woodco’s emissions were reduced. That would explain the initial dip and later rise without clearing Woodco of earlier responsibility.

A. Over the last decade, a series of studies linking respiratory ailments to dietary deficiencies has been published.

This gives another possible cause of respiratory ailments, so it does not weaken Woodco’s argument.

B. Seven years ago, the Woodco plant installed equipment to increase production capacity without increasing annual pollutant emissions.

This does not weaken the argument. It says Woodco increased production without increasing emissions.

C. Pollutant emissions at Woodco plywood plants in other towns have declined during the past twelve years.

This is irrelevant. The issue is respiratory ailments in Loganville and pollution from the Loganville plant.

D. Nine years ago, a competing plywood manufacturer opened a plant just across the river from Woodco’s plant.

This is correct. If another plywood plant opened nearby after Woodco’s emissions were restricted, then the later rise in respiratory ailments could have been caused by pollution from that new plant. That means the initial dip may still have been caused by reducing Woodco’s emissions, so Woodco’s conclusion is not justified.

E. There are more facilities for treating respiratory ailments in Loganville today than there were eleven years ago.

This might affect detection or treatment, but it does not directly show that Woodco’s pollution was not responsible before or that another pollution source caused the later rise.

Answer: (D)

titashmandal123 · Answer

Is this a genuine OG question?. We have to weaken the argument and not strengthen it. Why is B wrong ???

WildSnow · Answer

Conclusion is:  high rate was  NEVER  a result of pollution from  OUR  plant.

Note the word NEVER & OUR. Option (D) lays this out beautifully, suggesting that Woodco was responsible SOMETIME.

Read the lines below from Marty's explanation: Woodo plywood manufacturing pollution was making people sick. Then, Woodco started following the regulations, and the rate of ailments dipped. Then, the new plywood plant started up, and started causing ailments again.

WildSnow · Answer

Why do you think (B) is correct? The only issue that matters is whether Woodco is responsible for the pollution, and (B) does not seem to provide any evidence or indication one way or the other on that end.

AbhishekP220108 · Answer

Hi  titashmandal123  yes its a genuine OG ques from OG 26 27. The explanation has been given by experts and do check them for option choice analysis.

Woodco Plywood Manufacturer: Ten years ago a study linked the high

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

Woodco Plywood Manufacturer: Ten years ago a study linked the high

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