Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Aug 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Save up to $1,000 on select GMAT prep now. This Fall, achieve your most ambitious goals with millions of student success stories behind you.
Aug 2710:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sept. 6, 9:30am-12:30pm EST
Sep 0907:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2108:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Oct. 13, 2026 - Jan. 7, 2027, 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
07 Feb 2022, 09:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
In a meta-analysis of several hundred studies designed to identify relationships between cardiovascular health and cholesterol levels, researchers found that the two most statistically significant variables on decreasing the incidence of major cardiovascular events, defined as hardening of the arteries, heart attacks, and strokes, were high serum HDL cholesterol levels and a high HDL-to-LDL ratio. The researchers also found, after adjusting for confounding variables such as smoking or exercise, that one subset of study participants, those who consumed no animal products and thus no dietary cholesterol, had the lowest HDL cholesterol levels and relatively low HDL-to-LDL ratios, yet suffered a markedly lower incidence of any major cardiovascular event than did any other subset of participants.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the conflicting findings of the meta-analysis?
A. The participants who consumed no animal products represented one-tenth of the total number of participants across all studies, just meeting the standard for statistical significance.
B. The human body is capable of producing all the cholesterol it needs to function, both HDL and LDL, without any dietary cholesterol.
C. HDL cholesterol is necessary for the removal of fat molecules out of artery walls, thereby increasing cardiovascular function, only when such molecules are derived from animal products.
D. Because of the duration of some of the studies, not all participants accurately reported what they consumed.
E. Earlier studies, which represented half of all the studies analyzed, incorporated methods for measuring serum cholesterol that were later replaced by more refined procedures.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the conflicting findings of the meta-analysis?
A. The participants who consumed no animal products represented one-tenth of the total number of participants across all studies, just meeting the standard for statistical significance.
B. The human body is capable of producing all the cholesterol it needs to function, both HDL and LDL, without any dietary cholesterol.
C. HDL cholesterol is necessary for the removal of fat molecules out of artery walls, thereby increasing cardiovascular function, only when such molecules are derived from animal products.
D. Because of the duration of some of the studies, not all participants accurately reported what they consumed.
E. Earlier studies, which represented half of all the studies analyzed, incorporated methods for measuring serum cholesterol that were later replaced by more refined procedures.
07 Feb 2022, 09:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
In a meta-analysis of several hundred studies designed to identify relationships between cardiovascular health and cholesterol levels, researchers found that the two most statistically significant variables on decreasing the incidence of major cardiovascular events, defined as hardening of the arteries, heart attacks, and strokes, were high serum HDL cholesterol levels and a high HDL-to-LDL ratio. The researchers also found, after adjusting for confounding variables such as smoking or exercise, that one subset of study participants, those who consumed no animal products and thus no dietary cholesterol, had the lowest HDL cholesterol levels and relatively low HDL-to-LDL ratios, yet suffered a markedly lower incidence of any major cardiovascular event than did any other subset of participants.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the conflicting findings of the meta-analysis?
A. The participants who consumed no animal products represented one-tenth of the total number of participants across all studies, just meeting the standard for statistical significance.
B. The human body is capable of producing all the cholesterol it needs to function, both HDL and LDL, without any dietary cholesterol.
C. HDL cholesterol is necessary for the removal of fat molecules out of artery walls, thereby increasing cardiovascular function, only when such molecules are derived from animal products.
D. Because of the duration of some of the studies, not all participants accurately reported what they consumed.
E. Earlier studies, which represented half of all the studies analyzed, incorporated methods for measuring serum cholesterol that were later replaced by more refined procedures.
Taking a look at the question stem, we can see that we are aiming to resolve a paradox. But be careful: do not assume that the paradox that needs to be addressed is the one and only paradox, or you might shift into territory that can be detrimental to your CR success.
Believe it or not, we are dealing with just two sentences here. The first outlines that studies were conducted to identify relationships between cardiovascular health and cholesterol levels, and two variables proved most statistically significant in decreasing the incidence of major cardiovascular events: 1) high serum HDL cholesterol levels and 2) a high HDL-to-LDL ratio.
The second sentence tells us that a certain group of study participants, those who consumed no animal products and thus no dietary cholesterol, had the opposite of what was deemed most desirable in sentence one, the lowest HDL cholesterol levels and low HDL-to-LDL ratios, but this group had a significantly lower incidence of any major cardiovascular event compared to all other groups.
There are two logical directions in which this paradox could go. We either want to know what caused the no-animal-product group (hereafter referred to as NAP) to suffer from the fewest cardiac events, comparatively, or we want to know how that same group was able to enjoy health benefits that would fall more in line with participants who had high serum HDL cholesterol and high HDL-to-LDL ratios.
I hope that by now, three CR questions into this challenge, you have developed a keen eye for what is a premise, and you have to remember, attacking a premise should not be your goal in nearly all types of CR questions. (A weaken the force of the evidence question can be thought of as an exception.) In this case, if the subset of participants in question has met a standard for statistical significance, then if anything, the findings about this group should warrant further study and consideration, not a dismissal. Red light.
This is an interesting fact, but the human body refers to all bodies, those that either ingest animal products or do not, so we still gain no insight into why the two groups of participants, with different markers for cholesterol, achieved similar cardiovascular benefits. This answer choice touches on the right notes, but it is a blind alley, too broad in scope. Red light.
Although this does not resolve one of our two likely paradoxes—we still have no idea why the NAP group enjoys the same cardiovascular benefits as the group with the highest statistical significance—it does shed light on why the NAP group would have low HDL cholesterol levels and a lower HDL-to-LDL ratio. There appears to be some unknown mechanism or correlation besides high serum HDL cholesterol that is providing protection for the NAP participants in the studies. Keep this one for now and look to disprove other answer choices. Green light.
This one seems easier to target after those first three. We have a double weakener in some and not all. The studies do not need to have been conducted in a vacuum to produce valid findings, and, of course, we have no notion of just how many studies some may be referring to. Let out a sigh of relief and keep moving. Red light.
This answer choice runs in the same vein (sorry, I told you I like puns) as (A), actually. You should hope to get these sorts of options when you hit a more challenging CR question. Again, we are meant to doubt the validity of the studies, a distraction that keeps us from doing what we are asked to do: resolve the conflicting findings of those studies. We cannot resolve anything if we toss out all the data. Red light
There you have it. Another question done and dusted. I feel the need to reiterate that you should not pursue a solution to a CR question blinded by what you think must be the one and only answer to the question. Here, it is perfectly reasonable to look for an answer to the question, What causes the NAP group to get even better results than the other group? But the passage and answer choices provide no insights into the matter. However, one answer choice does provide an explanation that allows us to appreciate why the NAP group had a lower level of a statistically significant factor, and that is the answer we should get behind.
Answer: C
In a meta-analysis of several hundred studies designed to identify relationships between cardiovascular health and cholesterol levels, researchers found that the two most statistically significant variables on decreasing the incidence of major cardiovascular events, defined as hardening of the arteries, heart attacks, and strokes, were high serum HDL cholesterol levels and a high HDL-to-LDL ratio. The researchers also found, after adjusting for confounding variables such as smoking or exercise, that one subset of study participants, those who consumed no animal products and thus no dietary cholesterol, had the lowest HDL cholesterol levels and relatively low HDL-to-LDL ratios, yet suffered a markedly lower incidence of any major cardiovascular event than did any other subset of participants.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the conflicting findings of the meta-analysis?
A. The participants who consumed no animal products represented one-tenth of the total number of participants across all studies, just meeting the standard for statistical significance.
B. The human body is capable of producing all the cholesterol it needs to function, both HDL and LDL, without any dietary cholesterol.
C. HDL cholesterol is necessary for the removal of fat molecules out of artery walls, thereby increasing cardiovascular function, only when such molecules are derived from animal products.
D. Because of the duration of some of the studies, not all participants accurately reported what they consumed.
E. Earlier studies, which represented half of all the studies analyzed, incorporated methods for measuring serum cholesterol that were later replaced by more refined procedures.
Quote:
Taking a look at the question stem, we can see that we are aiming to resolve a paradox. But be careful: do not assume that the paradox that needs to be addressed is the one and only paradox, or you might shift into territory that can be detrimental to your CR success.
Quote:
Believe it or not, we are dealing with just two sentences here. The first outlines that studies were conducted to identify relationships between cardiovascular health and cholesterol levels, and two variables proved most statistically significant in decreasing the incidence of major cardiovascular events: 1) high serum HDL cholesterol levels and 2) a high HDL-to-LDL ratio.
The second sentence tells us that a certain group of study participants, those who consumed no animal products and thus no dietary cholesterol, had the opposite of what was deemed most desirable in sentence one, the lowest HDL cholesterol levels and low HDL-to-LDL ratios, but this group had a significantly lower incidence of any major cardiovascular event compared to all other groups.
There are two logical directions in which this paradox could go. We either want to know what caused the no-animal-product group (hereafter referred to as NAP) to suffer from the fewest cardiac events, comparatively, or we want to know how that same group was able to enjoy health benefits that would fall more in line with participants who had high serum HDL cholesterol and high HDL-to-LDL ratios.
Quote:
I hope that by now, three CR questions into this challenge, you have developed a keen eye for what is a premise, and you have to remember, attacking a premise should not be your goal in nearly all types of CR questions. (A weaken the force of the evidence question can be thought of as an exception.) In this case, if the subset of participants in question has met a standard for statistical significance, then if anything, the findings about this group should warrant further study and consideration, not a dismissal. Red light.
Quote:
This is an interesting fact, but the human body refers to all bodies, those that either ingest animal products or do not, so we still gain no insight into why the two groups of participants, with different markers for cholesterol, achieved similar cardiovascular benefits. This answer choice touches on the right notes, but it is a blind alley, too broad in scope. Red light.
Quote:
Although this does not resolve one of our two likely paradoxes—we still have no idea why the NAP group enjoys the same cardiovascular benefits as the group with the highest statistical significance—it does shed light on why the NAP group would have low HDL cholesterol levels and a lower HDL-to-LDL ratio. There appears to be some unknown mechanism or correlation besides high serum HDL cholesterol that is providing protection for the NAP participants in the studies. Keep this one for now and look to disprove other answer choices. Green light.
Quote:
This one seems easier to target after those first three. We have a double weakener in some and not all. The studies do not need to have been conducted in a vacuum to produce valid findings, and, of course, we have no notion of just how many studies some may be referring to. Let out a sigh of relief and keep moving. Red light.
Quote:
This answer choice runs in the same vein (sorry, I told you I like puns) as (A), actually. You should hope to get these sorts of options when you hit a more challenging CR question. Again, we are meant to doubt the validity of the studies, a distraction that keeps us from doing what we are asked to do: resolve the conflicting findings of those studies. We cannot resolve anything if we toss out all the data. Red light
There you have it. Another question done and dusted. I feel the need to reiterate that you should not pursue a solution to a CR question blinded by what you think must be the one and only answer to the question. Here, it is perfectly reasonable to look for an answer to the question, What causes the NAP group to get even better results than the other group? But the passage and answer choices provide no insights into the matter. However, one answer choice does provide an explanation that allows us to appreciate why the NAP group had a lower level of a statistically significant factor, and that is the answer we should get behind.
Answer: C
29 May 2023, 00:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question mentions that the paradox is : high serum HDL cholesterol levels and a high HDL-to-LDL ratio reduces incidence of major cardiovascular events. But one subset who consumed no animal products and thus no dietary cholesterol, had the lowest HDL cholesterol levels and relatively low HDL-to-LDL ratios and still had lower incidence of major cardiovascular events.
Option C tells us that HDL cholesterol aids in removal of fat molecules out of artery walls, thereby increasing cardiovascular function, only when such molecules are derived from animal products. The subset doesnt eat animal products so it doesnt need High Cholesterol for removal the fat molecules. Hence C is the answer.
Option C tells us that HDL cholesterol aids in removal of fat molecules out of artery walls, thereby increasing cardiovascular function, only when such molecules are derived from animal products. The subset doesnt eat animal products so it doesnt need High Cholesterol for removal the fat molecules. Hence C is the answer.
