In Arumville, among those young children with elevated levels lead in

Question

In Arumville, among those young children with elevated levels lead in their blood, few live in houses containing lead-based paint, but many live in areas where vehicular traffic is heavy. These children's elevated blood-lead levels probably result from lead added to gas, since, although gasoline sold in and around Arumville has been lead-free since 1990, lead from vehicle exhaust remains in the soil for many years.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. Sale of lead-based paint for use in homes was banned in Arumville in 1977.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A. Sale of lead-based paint for use in homes was banned in Arumville in 1977.

B. Vehicle traffic in most residential areas of Arumville is heavier today than it was twenty years ago.

C. Some lead in the soil comes from deteriorating lead-based paint on the exterior of buildings.

D. In Arumville, children's blood-lead levels typically rise during the warm summer months when children frequently play outdoors but not in the winter when children spend more time indoors.

E. If improperly carried out, the removal of lead-based paint from older houses can significantly the risk that children living in such houses will ingest lead dust.

Someone please explain the CR logic employed in arriving at the answer: effect of lead
contamination is more from lead absorbed in soil than from the lead-painted house.

FQ · Accepted Answer

Answer D

A: Sale of lead-based paint for use in homes was banned in Arumville in 1977
>> This does not eliminate the probability that a lot of people live in houses that were built and painted before that year.
B: Vehicle traffic in most residential areas of Arumville is heavier today than it was twenty years ago
>> Since lead was banned in fuel in 1990, whether traffic is heavier now or before then is irrelevant.
C: Some lead in the soil comes from deteriorating lead-based paint on the exterior of buildings
>> This does not relate the children to the lead.
D: In Arumville, children's blood-lead levels typically rise during the warm summer months when children frequently play outdoors but not in the winter when children spend more time indoors.
>> The only answer that provides a link between the children and how they might be in contact with lead.
E: If improperly carried out, the removal of lead-based paint from older houses can significantly the risk that children living in such houses will ingest lead dust.
>> There is no mention of any lead-based paint removal being initiated in that neighbourhood.

mads · Answer

Argument: Children elevated blood-lead level is due to lead from vehicule exhaust
remains in the soil for many years.

To strengthen this argument we have to prove the relation between children, blood-lead level and the soil.

D is the best answer which explains this relationship.

D. In Arumville, children's blood-lead levels typically rise during the warm summer months when children frequently play outdoors but not in the winter when children spend more time indoors.

seekmba · Answer

D is the only one that links the children's elevated blood-lead levels to the lead contained in the soil. Children spend more time outside in summer and hence have high levels of lead in their blood because they get the lead present in soil compared to winter when the children are inside the house (dont inhale the lead in soil) and hence their level of lead is low.

Bhuvanamani · Answer

One more D.
Strengthen Statements:
1.Attack the conclusion
2.Find an answer that strengthens it.Strengthening answers provide proofs outside the premise.

1.Conclusion :"since, lead from vehicle exhaust remains in the soil for many years."
2.Details about lead from paints and vehicle exhaust are in the premise but the conclusion says that the remains in the soil is the cause.
3.So the answer that strengthens here which supports the "remains in the soil is the cause" is D.

mbaiseasy · Answer

ARGUMENT: 
The rising lead-levels in blood in children resulted from lead in gasoline.
Although gasoline today is lead free, lead remains in the soil for several years.

POSSIBLE WEAKENER: Lead-free gasoline today
COUNTERARGUMENT BY AUTHOR: Lead remains in the sol

We are looking for a strengthener

A: This info has no bearing on the lead in gasoline. OUT!

B: This cannot strengthen because gasoline today is already lead-free. We need something confirming that despite gasoline today being lead-free there is still a source of lead (from gasoline) which is actually in the soil. OUT!

C: This supports the fact that there is lead in the soil but whether it is the source of problem, we cannot confirm. Keep this for now.

D: BINGO! Lead-level in blood rises when children are outdoor than when indoors. Soil is outside. This is better than C.

E: Another possible lead-exposure but this doesn't support that lead in gasoline from soil - inhaled by kids. OUT!

Answer: D

jlgdr · Answer

So we are basically being asked to strengthen the claim that the lead comes from the soil as opposed as the lead coming from paint or gasoline etc.. In D since they children have higher blood levels when playing outdoors it means that the lead is coming from the soil rather than from the other two Hence D is our best choice here Cheers! J

shashankism · Answer

In Arumville, among those young children with elevated levels lead in their
blood, few leave in houses containing lead-based paint, but many leave in 
areas where vehicular traffic is heavy. These children's elevated blood-lead
levels probably result from lead added to gas, since, although gasoline sold in and around Arumville has been lead-free since 1990, lead from vehicule exhaust
remains in the soil for many years.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A: Sale of lead-based paint for use in homes was banned in Arumville in 1977 
Sale was banned in 1977. But there may be houses which has been painted before 1977.

B: Vehicle traffic in most residential areas of Arumville is heavier today than it was twenty years ago 
Gasoline has been lead -free since 1990. So, it doesn't matter if traffic is heavier today or not.

C: Some lead in the soil comes from deteriorating lead-based paint on the exterior of buildings 
If lead in the soil is coming from lead based paint buildings, it doesn't explain how soil is related to children.. may be vegetables grown in that area.. Not very clear.

D: In Arumville, children's blood-lead levels typically rise during the warm summer months when children frequently play outdoors but not in the winter when children spend more time indoors. 
It shows that the blood lead level rise during summer months, when children frequently play outdoors.. and not in winters .. So, here children gets contact from soil.

E: If improperly carried out, the removal of lead-based paint from older houses can significantly the risk that children living in such houses will ingest lead dust. 
Out of scope.. No idea about this thing in the stem.

mba757 · Answer

Conclusion : These children's elevated blood-lead levels probably result from lead added to gasoline
 Prethink : a little strange conclusion but we should likely remove any point leading to the paint -> elevated blood-lead levels
 A. Sales of lead-based paint for use in homes was banned in Arumville in 1977.
 Out of scope – sales are out of consideration. It doesn’t have any immediate bearing on the argument.

B. Vehicle traffic in most residential areas of Arumville is heavier today than it was twenty years ago.
 Not the most direct – we already know that the exhaust remains in the soil for MANY YEARS

C. Some lead in the soil comes from deteriorating lead-based paint on the exteriors of buildings.
 Opposite, if anything – this would show that it’s not necessarily the vehicle exhaust wouldn’t be the primary proponent (thus not gasoline either), weakening the argument’s claim that it is.

D. In Arumville, children's blood-lead levels typically rise during the warm summer months when children frequently play outdoors but not in the winter when children spend more time indoors.
 This is it. We can make a logical connection between outdoors and soil, which is present outdoors for children to potentially have a higher chance of exposure, strengthening the argument

E. If improperly carried out, the removal of lead-based paint from older houses can significantly increase the risk that children living in such houses will ingest lead dust.
 Opposite, if anything. This would show that the paint may be a pretty big factor, rather than the remains of the vehicle exhaust in the soil

jabhatta2 · Answer

hi  IanStewart

The issue with this argument is – I am not really sure, what is you want me to strengthen ?

Are you asking me to strengthen 
(1) The  assumption  between the   blue   and the  yellow highlight  
OR 
Are you asking me to strengthen 
(2) The  assumption  between the   green   and the  yellow highlight

How do you decide (prior to scanning the answer choices obviously)   ?

Do you keep an open mind to be on the lookout for one or the other ?

If  option 1  – I think (A) is a strengthener because (A) makes it  more likely  that the alternative cause ( lead-paint ) is NOT the cause for why kids have elevated blood levels.

If  option 2  – then (D) is a strengthener.

IanStewart · Answer

I assume you mean to ask what the question wants you to strengthen -- I don't want you to strengthen anything.

Answer A is not a very good answer here, because we know as a premise that "few live in houses containing lead-based paint". So it already seems unlikely that lead paint explains the high lead levels. The argument contends that lead in the soil is the cause, and that this lead comes from leaded gas from car exhaust from years ago. We could strengthen that argument in different ways -- maybe lead paint is actually the cause, and these children are exposed to lead paint in other houses, say. That doesn't seem plausible, because the children living in those houses should probably be affected (and we know they aren't), but an answer like A that makes lead paint even less likely as an explanation is a very weak strengthener. A better strengthener would rule out a third cause unmentioned in the argument; if we knew paint and exhaust were the only possible explanations, then because paint seems very unlikely, we'd have a strong reason to believe it's lead in soil that explains the high lead levels. Or if we had stronger evidence connecting lead in soil with lead in children, that would also strengthen the argument. So when I read a question like this, I'm looking for an answer that does one of those two things, and answer D does one of them -- it suggests that when children are more often exposed to soil (when they're outside) their lead levels go up.

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.

In Arumville, among those young children with elevated levels lead in

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

In Arumville, among those young children with elevated levels lead in

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