Two investigative journalists have raised the question whether the

Question

Two investigative journalists have raised the question whether the new blood pressure drug, Transerythropaxil, has sensitized patients to develop fish allergies.  The study was published last month in a major newspaper, and has been picked up by media throughout the country.  Lab data has long shown that Transerythropaxil reacts strongly with Eicosapentaenoic acid, found in abundance in fish oil, and this reaction can produce biological irritants.  Despite strenuous objections from Transerythropaxil's manufacturer, scientists working in federal labs have just published papers that provide conclusive evidence to the journalists' claim.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.

(B) The first provides support for conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.

(C) The first provides support for conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion

(D) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.

(E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:

Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Data Insights Butler

bhargavhhhhhhhh · Answer

The argument involves two bolded portions:
 - First: "Lab data has long shown that Transerythropaxil reacts strongly with Eicosapentaenoic acid, found in abundance in fish oil, and this reaction can produce biological irritants."
 - Second: "Despite strenuous objections from Transerythropaxil's manufacturer, scientists working in federal labs have just published papers that provide conclusive evidence to the journalists' claim."

- We need to determine the roles these two portions play in the argument.

Answer Choices Analysis

- (A) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
 - Incorrect: The first portion doesn't state the conclusion; it provides a background fact about the drug's potential reaction.
 
- (B) The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.
 - Incorrect: The second part does not call the conclusion into question. It provides further evidence supporting the claim.
 
- (C) The first provides support for conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion.
 - Incorrect: The second part does not directly identify the conclusion, but supports the conclusion.

- (D) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.
 - Correct: The first part provides the background (evidence) to support the argument's conclusion, and the second part provides further evidence supporting the conclusion (papers published by scientists).
 
- (E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.
 - Incorrect: The first part provides evidence, but the second part gives further support, not both providing support equally.

Conclusion:
- The correct answer is (D).

hr1212 · Answer

Background/Premise -  Two investigative journalists have raised the question whether the new blood pressure drug, Transerythropaxil, has sensitized patients to develop fish allergies.  
Background - The study was published last month in a major newspaper, and has been picked up by media throughout the country. 
Premise -  Lab data has long shown that Transerythropaxil reacts strongly with Eicosapentaenoic acid, found in abundance in fish oil, and this reaction can produce biological irritants.  
Conclusion - Despite strenuous objections from Transerythropaxil's manufacturer, scientists working in federal labs have just published papers that provide conclusive evidence to the journalists' claim.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.

(B) The first provides support for conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.

(C) The first provides support for conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion

(D) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.

(E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument

IMO: E

Whoisdmx15 · Answer

(A) The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.  Eliminated  A statement which raises question that has been concluded later in the stem, cannot be considered as a Conclusion. 2nd BF actually supports the passage's conclusion.

(B) The first provides support for conclusion of the argument; the second calls that conclusion into question.  Eliminated  For 1st BF to support the conclusion, it should had presented with some evidence, hence not true. 2nd BF actually supports the passage's conclusion.

(C) The first provides support for conclusion of the argument; the second identifies the content of that conclusion  Eliminated  For 1st BF to support the conclusion, it should had presented with some evidence, hence not true. The 2nd BF actually provides some evidence (so it can only support or refute the premise/conclusion)

(D) The first identifies the content of the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.  Suitable  The 1st BF identifies what the conclusion is about (But not a conclusion in itself as "it raises question"). The 2nd BF provides evidence to support the conclusion.

(E) Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument  Eliminated  Both BFs are not providing evidence in support/opposition of conclusion.

Gmat750aspirant · Answer

(A) The first statement gives the conclusion of the argument, while the second questions it. This makes A incorrect because a statement that questions the conclusion can't be considered as a conclusion. The second statement actually supports the conclusion.

(B) The first statement is supposed to support the conclusion, but it doesn't present any evidence, so it's not true. The second statement actually supports the conclusion.

(C) The first statement identifies the conclusion, but it doesn't support it with evidence, so it's not true. The second statement provides evidence, so it can only support or challenge the conclusion.

(D) The first statement identifies what the conclusion is about, and the second provides support for it. This is the correct answer. The first statement raises a question but doesn’t state the conclusion directly. The second statement supports the conclusion with evidence.

(E) Both statements are supposed to support the conclusion, but neither provides evidence, so this is incorrect.

And D

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation

The credited answer is (D). The first bold statement is stated tentatively, as a question, but it is ultimately validated, and so it is the conclusion of the argument. In the second bold statement, "lab data" has to be evidence, and this evidence provides strong support for what the journalists suggest: in other words, it is evidence that supports the conclusion.

It is true that the first bold statement is the conclusion, but the second bold statement does not call it into question: by contrast, it completely supports the conclusion. Choice (A) is incorrect.

If the first bold statement is not the conclusion, it's unclear what else would be; furthermore, even if we are going to say something else is the conclusion beside the first bold statement, the two bold statements still support the same perspective, one can't be supporting something that the other calls into question. Choice (B) is incorrect.

The second bold statement is "lab data". Lab data is evidence, and can be neither a conclusion nor the content of a conclusion. We use this phrasing, "content of a conclusion", most often when the conclusion is not explicitly stated (e.g. "P says: XYZ. Then, Q disagrees with P" and Q's position, not explicitly stated, is the argument's conclusion). Choice (C) is incorrect.

Choice (E) is tempting, but nothing else in the paragraph besides the first bold statement could serve as the conclusion. Both the second bold sentence and the second half of the concluding sentence are just statements of scientific data, which are evidence, not conclusions. Choice (E) is incorrect.

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.

Two investigative journalists have raised the question whether the

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

Two investigative journalists have raised the question whether the

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