GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 18 Nov 2018, 19:54

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
Events & Promotions in November
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
28293031123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829301
Open Detailed Calendar
  • How to QUICKLY Solve GMAT Questions - GMAT Club Chat

     November 20, 2018

     November 20, 2018

     09:00 AM PST

     10:00 AM PST

    The reward for signing up with the registration form and attending the chat is: 6 free examPAL quizzes to practice your new skills after the chat.
  • The winning strategy for 700+ on the GMAT

     November 20, 2018

     November 20, 2018

     06:00 PM EST

     07:00 PM EST

    What people who reach the high 700's do differently? We're going to share insights, tips and strategies from data we collected on over 50,000 students who used examPAL.

Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 May 2007
Posts: 210
Schools: Cornell
Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 08 Oct 2018, 23:36
4
30
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  25% (medium)

Question Stats:

72% (01:15) correct 28% (01:02) wrong based on 1605 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of serious complications from influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?


(A) Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal spray vaccine as well.

(B) The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do.

(C) The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.

(D) Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.

(E) The nasal spray vaccine is not effective when administered to adults.


"Injectable vaccines" Strengthen Question

Originally posted by solidcolor on 01 Sep 2007, 00:23.
Last edited by Bunuel on 08 Oct 2018, 23:36, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Community Reply
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 May 2014
Posts: 81
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
Schools: HKUST '15, ISB '15
GMAT Date: 12-26-2014
GPA: 3
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Oct 2014, 22:35
11
1
haneefmrn wrote:
Im not able to understand how to conclude to the OA, could someone please provide insights. :x

Premise 1: injectable vaccines are painful so Parents do not vaccine the child.However, Adults who have serious complications are commonly vaccinated.
Premise 2: A new influenza vaccine is painless and can be used to vaccine children.

Conclusion: As children rarely develop serious complication, there is no health benefit for this new vaccination.

The conclusion is quite strong in that There is NO health benefit for this medicine.It means it doesn't help at all but the stated reason is only for children (they seldom develop serious complications) but what about adults ?
As this is an assumption question , we need to fill a gap between premise and conclusion.

Now the options:-
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.
Incorrect: Irrelevant.Conclusion is regarding health benefits.Argument doesn't compare the safety of any of the vaccines.
B. The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as jnjectable vaccines do.
Incorrect: Irrelevant.Argument is about the health benefits of the vaccine not the mechanism by which it achieves that.
C. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
Incorrect: Irrelevant.Argument is about the health benefits of the vaccine not its cost
D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
Correct: Lets negate it.if Adults do contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza, then we need to vaccinate the children otherwise Adults will contract.So there are health benefits for this vaccine.
As described above.if this option is not true, then Argument is not true.Hence it is the necessary assumption.

E. The nasal spray vaccine is mot effective when administered to adults.
Incorrect: Out of scope.Argument doesn't compare the effectiveness of any vaccine.If we take this option as true, It weakens the conclusion because if it is most effective then there will be benefits of this medicine.

Press Kudos if it helps :)
_________________

Success has been and continues to be defined as Getting up one more time than you have been knocked down.

General Discussion
Director
Director
User avatar
Status: Done with formalities.. and back..
Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 595
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Schools: Olin - Wash U - Class of 2015
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Oct 2012, 18:09
2
tingting85114 wrote:
Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of serious complications from influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of childrenusing the nasal spray.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.
B. The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as jnjectable vaccines do.
C. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults.
D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
E. The nasal spray vaccine is mot effective when administered to adults.


In the highlighted statement, the conclusion “no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children” is based on fact that since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza
However, the fact is limited only to children. What about adults? What if they develop serious complication from influenza spread by a child? Note the fact is that children ‘seldom develop serious complications’; they still may catch influenza and spread it, resulting in an adult developing serious complication from it.
So to assert that no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children, primary assumption is that Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
Hence Ans D.
_________________

Lets Kudos!!! ;-)
Black Friday Debrief

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 15 Sep 2011
Posts: 329
Location: United States
WE: Corporate Finance (Manufacturing)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Feb 2014, 17:15
4
1
Conclusion: no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

Reasoning: A correct answer choice for assumption is a defender or supporter. If it's a supporter, conclusion + "only if" + answer choice makes sense. Also, the conclusion is necessarily committed to one of the answer choices below. Why would there be no significant public health benefit should children be administered the nasal spray?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal spray vaccine as well. Wrong - This is indeed an assumption, but not one that the conclusion is committed to.

B. The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do. Wrong - shell game. New mechanisms or not, this is not what the conclusion is committed to.

C. The injectable vaccine is affordable for all adults. Wrong - The conclusion is not committed to this assumption.

D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza. Correct - The conclusion is committed to this assumption because both adults and children are actors, and it follows the premise + conclusion.

E. The nasal spray vaccine is mot effective when administered to adults. Wrong - Out of scope.

IMO D
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Posts: 2
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Oct 2014, 12:31
Im not able to understand how to conclude to the OA, could someone please provide insights. :x
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 12 Jan 2015
Posts: 200
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2016, 21:30
Hi chetan2u / daagh ,

Please help me in this question. I am not able to negate E.

Breaking down argument-
Fact 1. Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available.
Fact 2. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections.
Fact 3. But adults, who are at risk of serious complications from influenza, are commonly vaccinated.
Fact 4. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children.

Until now only facts are given. Now
Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray. WHY
Because (Premise)- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza


Now lets read it in reverse manner-

Premise- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza
GAP- ______________________________________
Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

So now we need to fill this gap to this make argument strong.

__________________________________________________________

Option D-

A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children
Premise- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza
GAP- Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza

Negating D- Adults do notcontract influenza primarily from children who have influenza

Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

Option D makes the argument strong PERFECT. Hence OA.

__________________________________________________________

Now lets look at option E as well
Before that I would like to clarify that in option E where "MOT" is written actually its "NOT"
Some people tried to change it with "MOST" But its wrong


A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children

Premise- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza

GAP- The nasal spray vaccine is not effective when administered to adults

Negating E- The nasal spray vaccine is noteffective when administered to adults[

Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children
since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza
The nasal spray vaccine is not effective when administered to adults.
Therefore, No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.


This option is also working fine.
Where is my reasoning wrong..

Please assist.
_________________

Thanks and Regards,
Prakhar

Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 7037
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Mar 2016, 21:44
2
PrakharGMAT wrote:
Hi chetan2u / daagh ,

Please help me in this question. I am not able to negate E.

Breaking down argument-
Fact 1. Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available.
Fact 2. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections.
Fact 3. But adults, who are at risk of serious complications from influenza, are commonly vaccinated.
Fact 4. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children.

Until now only facts are given. Now
Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray. WHY
Because (Premise)- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza


Now lets read it in reverse manner-

Premise- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza
GAP- ______________________________________
Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

So now we need to fill this gap to this make argument strong.

__________________________________________________________

Option D-

A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children
Premise- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza
GAP- Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza

Negating D- Adults do notcontract influenza primarily from children who have influenza

Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

Option D makes the argument strong PERFECT. Hence OA.

__________________________________________________________

Now lets look at option E as well
Before that I would like to clarify that in option E where "MOT" is written actually its "NOT"
Some people tried to change it with "MOST" But its wrong


A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children

Premise- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza

GAP- The nasal spray vaccine is not effective when administered to adults

Negating E- The nasal spray vaccine is noteffective when administered to adults[

Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children
since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza
The nasal spray vaccine is not effective when administered to adults.
Therefore, No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.


This option is also working fine.
Where is my reasoning wrong..

Please assist.


Hi Prakhar,

let me touch only on E..

as written by you..

Quote:
A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children

Premise- since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza

GAP- The nasal spray vaccine is not effective when administered to adults

Negating E- The nasal spray vaccine is noteffective when administered to adults[

Conclusion- No significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray


you have your PREMISE and CONCLUSION talking of CHILDREN, but the gap you are talking of is concerning ONLY ADULTS..
the gap/assumption has to be something related in some way to CHILDREN..
Irrespective of MOST or NOT, the problem is that the choice is unable to fill the gap as argument is about CHILDREN
and chice D tells us that ADULTS do not catch influenza from children. Thus CHILDREN has been a part of thi schoice..

_________________

1) Absolute modulus : http://gmatclub.com/forum/absolute-modulus-a-better-understanding-210849.html#p1622372
2)Combination of similar and dissimilar things : http://gmatclub.com/forum/topic215915.html
3) effects of arithmetic operations : https://gmatclub.com/forum/effects-of-arithmetic-operations-on-fractions-269413.html


GMAT online Tutor

Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 26 Oct 2016
Posts: 641
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, International Business
Schools: HBS '19
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 4
WE: Education (Education)
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Apr 2017, 22:15
Conclusion :- "no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray".

The conclusion of the argument is that there is no significant health benefit from administering the nasal vaccine to kids. The evidence offered is that kids are not at risk from serious complications. The argument is assuming that this is the only problem that could be addressed by the vaccine. D presents another problem: adults, who suffer from serious complications from influenza, primarily get it from kids.

D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
Negating D :- Adults do contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.{So, if adults are getting contracted influenza via children then widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray will bring significant benefit to public health, hence shattering the conslusion.}

E. The nasal spray vaccine is not effective when administered to adults.
Negating E :- The nasal spray vaccine is effective when administered to adults.{It doesn't get related to conslusion from any where}.

Option D is correct.
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch

Manager
Manager
User avatar
S
Status: Aiming MBA!!
Joined: 19 Aug 2017
Posts: 114
Location: India
GMAT 1: 620 Q49 V25
GPA: 3.75
WE: Web Development (Consulting)
Reviews Badge
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Oct 2017, 01:44
Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of serious complications from influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.
This is a strengthener. Good to know. But it does not directly attack the conclusion, which is regarding the SIGNIFICANT HEALTH BENEFITS. As its not a necessary condition for the argument to hold, therefore, its not an assumption.

D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
I picked D as the correct answer.
On negating this option statement, the argument breaks.

Can someone elaborate more on the option A statement?

abhimahna, can you please review my explanation for option A? You can even add more on to that, if I am missing something for option A.
Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3615
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Oct 2017, 02:30
aceGMAT21 wrote:
Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. Parents are reluctant to subject children to the pain of injections, but adults, who are at risk of serious complications from influenza, are commonly vaccinated. A new influenza vaccine, administered painlessly in a nasal spray, is effective for children. However, since children seldom develop serious complications from influenza, no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A. Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.
This is a strengthener. Good to know. But it does not directly attack the conclusion, which is regarding the SIGNIFICANT HEALTH BENEFITS. As its not a necessary condition for the argument to hold, therefore, its not an assumption.

D. Adults do not contract influenza primarily from children who have influenza.
I picked D as the correct answer.
On negating this option statement, the argument breaks.

Can someone elaborate more on the option A statement?

abhimahna, can you please review my explanation for option A? You can even add more on to that, if I am missing something for option A.



Hi aceGMAT21 ,

Here is the catch:

A is actually not a strengthener.

Conclusion is "no significant public health benefit would result from widespread vaccination of children using the nasal spray."

In short, even if you give them nasal spray, you won't have any benefit.

A is saying "Any person who has received the injectable vaccine can safely receive the nasal-spray vaccine as well.". What relation does it have with health benefits? Are we saying they will get health benefits from one or the other? No, right? Hence, your reasoning for A is incorrect.

Does that make sense?
_________________

My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog
GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.
New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!
Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free
Check our new About Us Page here.

Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 3388
Premium Member
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Oct 2018, 05:55
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________

-
April 2018: New Forum dedicated to Verbal Strategies, Guides, and Resources

GMAT Club Bot
Re: Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa &nbs [#permalink] 27 Oct 2018, 05:55
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Until now, only injectable vaccines against influenza have been availa

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.