GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 29 Mar 2020, 10:59

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### 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

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

# Two alternative drugs are available to prevent blood clots from develo

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 62290
Two alternative drugs are available to prevent blood clots from develo  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2020, 03:48
00:00

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

75% (02:46) correct 25% (02:49) wrong based on 48 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Two alternative drugs are available to prevent blood clots from developing after a heart attack. According to two major studies, drug Y does this no more effectively than the more expensive drug Z, but drug Z is either no more or only slightly more effective than drug Y. Drug Z’s manufacturer, which has engaged in questionable marketing practices such as offering stock options to doctors who participate in clinical trials of drug Z, does not contest the results of the studies but claims that they do not reveal drug Z’s advantages. However, since drug Z does not clearly treat the problem more effectively than drug Y, there is no established medical reason for doctors to use drug Z rather than drug Y on their heart-attack victims.

Which one of the following principles, if established, would most help to justify a doctor’s decision to use drug Z rather than drug Y when treating a patient?

(A) Only patients to whom the cost of an expensive treatment will not be a financial hardship should receive that treatment rather than a less expensive alternative one.

(B) Doctors who are willing to assist in research on the relative effectiveness of drugs by participating in clinical trials deserve fair remuneration for that participation.

(C) The decision to use a particular drug when treating a patient should not be influenced by the marketing practices employed by the company manufacturing that drug.

(D) A drug company’s criticism of studies of its product that do not report favorably on that product is unavoidably biased and therefore invalid.

(E) Where alternative treatments exist and there is a chance that one is more effective than the other, the possibly more effective one should be employed, regardless of cost.

_________________
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Jan 2017
Posts: 376
Location: India
Re: Two alternative drugs are available to prevent blood clots from develo  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Feb 2020, 10:00
Bunuel wrote:
Two alternative drugs are available to prevent blood clots from developing after a heart attack. According to two major studies, drug Y does this no more effectively than the more expensive drug Z, but drug Z is either no more or only slightly more effective than drug Y. Drug Z’s manufacturer, which has engaged in questionable marketing practices such as offering stock options to doctors who participate in clinical trials of drug Z, does not contest the results of the studies but claims that they do not reveal drug Z’s advantages. However, since drug Z does not clearly treat the problem more effectively than drug Y, there is no established medical reason for doctors to use drug Z rather than drug Y on their heart-attack victims.

Which one of the following principles, if established, would most help to justify a doctor’s decision to use drug Z rather than drug Y when treating a patient?

(A) Only patients to whom the cost of an expensive treatment will not be a financial hardship should receive that treatment rather than a less expensive alternative one.

(B) Doctors who are willing to assist in research on the relative effectiveness of drugs by participating in clinical trials deserve fair remuneration for that participation.

(C) The decision to use a particular drug when treating a patient should not be influenced by the marketing practices employed by the company manufacturing that drug.

(D) A drug company’s criticism of studies of its product that do not report favorably on that product is unavoidably biased and therefore invalid.

(E) Where alternative treatments exist and there is a chance that one is more effective than the other, the possibly more effective one should be employed, regardless of cost.

IMO the correct answer is E

(A) Only patients to whom the cost of an expensive treatment will not be a financial hardship should receive that treatment rather than a less expensive alternative one - Out of context

(B) Doctors who are willing to assist in research on the relative effectiveness of drugs by participating in clinical trials deserve fair remuneration for that participation - Out of context

(C) The decision to use a particular drug when treating a patient should not be influenced by the marketing practices employed by the company manufacturing that drug - this answer choice is doing nothing but making the conclusion less reliable - Incorrect

(D) A drug company’s criticism of studies of its product that do not report favorably on that product is unavoidably biased and therefore invalid - Out of context

(E) Where alternative treatments exist and there is a chance that one is more effective than the other, the possibly more effective one should be employed, regardless of cost - This correctly identifies the reason why a doc should prescribe drug Z rather than drug Y - as there is a probability that Drug Z is having a chance of being more effective, a doctor should use this drug regardless of the cost.
Re: Two alternative drugs are available to prevent blood clots from develo   [#permalink] 19 Feb 2020, 10:00
Display posts from previous: Sort by