Last visit was: 16 Jul 2025, 01:03 It is currently 16 Jul 2025, 01:03
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
User avatar
anilnandyala
Joined: 07 Feb 2010
Last visit: 19 Jun 2012
Posts: 101
Own Kudos:
4,517
 [23]
Given Kudos: 101
Posts: 101
Kudos: 4,517
 [23]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
20
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 15 Jul 2025
Posts: 16,110
Own Kudos:
74,347
 [36]
Given Kudos: 475
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,110
Kudos: 74,347
 [36]
29
Kudos
Add Kudos
7
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Vercules
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Last visit: 07 Aug 2019
Posts: 440
Own Kudos:
5,646
 [7]
Given Kudos: 82
Status:Making every effort to create original content for you!!
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Expert
Expert reply
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
ankujgupta
Joined: 21 Jan 2016
Last visit: 04 Aug 2018
Posts: 63
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99
Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q50 V30
WE:Engineering (Computer Software)
GMAT 1: 670 Q50 V30
Posts: 63
Kudos: 19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Isn't D a kind of assumption here ?
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 15 Jul 2025
Posts: 16,110
Own Kudos:
74,347
 [2]
Given Kudos: 475
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,110
Kudos: 74,347
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ankujgupta
Isn't D a kind of assumption here ?

Note that the question is between nasal sprays and injections. Injections were available but why is it that availability of nasal sprays will bring about a change in the situation?
(D) Few older adults catch flu from children

Few means hardly any. If anything, it is against our conclusion "If nasal sprays are made available for children, it will greatly reduce the spread of flu across the population."
Why will nasal spray made available to children reduce flu across the population?
avatar
Kprasoon29
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 18 Oct 2020
Last visit: 22 Apr 2022
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 57
Location: India
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V35
GPA: 3
Products:
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V35
Posts: 16
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can anyone explain why Option C is not a strengthener?

While i do believe option E to be a much better strengthener.

Here is my reasoning for Option C ( Please correct me if i am wrong) :

In the passage its given that Injection is primarily taken by Adults.
Now , nasal spay comes and its effective for children. So ,if new vaccine is widely available for children, Influenza spread will greatly reduce across POPULATION.

Option C: So, if the Injection is still affordable for Adults it means that there will be no decrease in the number of adults taking vaccines. And we know that nasal spray is now widely available so, number of children getting vaccinated is expected to Increase . So if there is NO DECREASE IN ADULTS GETTING VACCINATED and an INCREASE IN CHILDREN GETTING VACCINATED, Influenza spread will surely decrease across POPULATION ( adults + children) .
User avatar
MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Last visit: 11 Aug 2023
Posts: 3,476
Own Kudos:
5,488
 [2]
Given Kudos: 1,430
Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 3,476
Kudos: 5,488
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Kprasoon29
Can anyone explain why Option C is not a strengthener?

While i do believe option E to be a much better strengthener.

Here is my reasoning for Option C ( Please correct me if i am wrong) :

In the passage its given that Injection is primarily taken by Adults.
Now , nasal spay comes and its effective for children. So ,if new vaccine is widely available for children, Influenza spread will greatly reduce across POPULATION.

Option C: So, if the Injection is still affordable for Adults it means that there will be no decrease in the number of adults taking vaccines. And we know that nasal spray is now widely available so, number of children getting vaccinated is expected to Increase . So if there is NO DECREASE IN ADULTS GETTING VACCINATED and an INCREASE IN CHILDREN GETTING VACCINATED, Influenza spread will surely decrease across POPULATION ( adults + children) .
Notice that the conclusion is not that influenza spread will decrease.

The conclusion is that making the new vaccine widely available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza across the population.

So, the conclusion is specifically about the effects of the making the new vaccine available.

Thus, the correct answer must support the conclusion that making the new vaccine available for children will have those effects.

(C) does not provide any support for the conclusion that making the new vaccine available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza.

(E) supports the conclusion of the argument presented.
User avatar
svasan05
User avatar
CrackVerbal Representative
Joined: 02 Mar 2019
Last visit: 24 Feb 2023
Posts: 269
Own Kudos:
293
 [2]
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 269
Kudos: 293
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Pre-thinking:

Conclusion: Making the new (nasal) vaccine widely available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza across the population.

Premise on which it is based:
i) A new vaccine administered in a nasal spray form has proven effective in preventing influenza in children.
ii) Children are significantly more likely than adults to contract and spread influenza.
iii) Until now only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. They have been primarily used by older adults.

Notice the subtle language shift between the premises and the conclusion - the conclusion talks about "reduce" and "availability" whereas the premises talk about "administered". If the new vaccines must reduce the spread of influenza across the population, then we are looking for something that bridges the gap between the "availability" of the vaccine for children and its administration in children (since we know that, if administered, it is effective in preventing influenza in children). Let us examine the answer options.


A. If a person receives both the nasal spray and the injectable vaccine, they do not interfere with each other. Does not bridge the gap between availability and administration. Eliminate.

B. The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do. Mechanism of functioning is irrelevant to the conclusion. Eliminate.

C. Government subsidies have kept the injectable vaccines affordable for adults. This does not address the new vaccine at all, which is central to the conclusion. Eliminate.

D. Of the older adults who contract influenza, relatively few contract it from children with influenza. If anything, this acts as a weakener, since preventing influenza in children will not help in preventing influenza in adults. Eliminate.

E. Many parents would be more inclined to have their children vaccinated against influenza if it did not involve an injection. Correct answer as it bridges a gap between availability and usage, as discussed in our pre-thinking.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
Raman109
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 16 Jun 2025
Posts: 811
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 33
Products:
Posts: 811
Kudos: 144
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Understanding the argument -
Until now only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. - Fact
They have been primarily used by older adults who are at risk for complications from influenza. - Fact.
A new vaccine administered in a nasal spray form has proven effective in preventing influenza in children. - Fact
Since children are significantly more likely than adults to contract and spread influenza, making the new vaccine widely available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza across the population. - Conclusion.

Just "availability" will not be enough for something to reduce the spread. Right? Yes, we need to put it into use as well. So, the assumption here is that it'll be administered as well. And we are looking for a strengthener. Right? So, assumptions are a 100% strengthener.

Option Elimination -

A. If a person receives both the nasal spray and the injectable vaccine, they do not interfere with each other. - The scope of our argument is to strengthen the idea that "making the new vaccine widely available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza." This choice is out of scope.

B. The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do. - It's still the same issue. If something is available, it'll have no effect until it's given to children. We still don't know whether it's given or not given to the children; it's out of scope.

C. Government subsidies have kept the injectable vaccines affordable for adults. - It doesn't even talk about vaccines; it's out of scope.

D. Of the older adults who contract influenza, relatively few contract it from children with influenza. - Weakener.

E. Many parents would be more inclined to have their children vaccinated against influenza if it did not involve an injection. - This is conditional. If there is no injection, parents would be inclined to have their children vaccinated. So, it intends towards that the children can get vaccinated, a critical step towards the reduction os cases. Ok.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,448
Own Kudos:
Posts: 18,448
Kudos: 953
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7357 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts