Compared to people who live in other environments, people who live in

Question

Compared to people who live in other environments, people who live in urban areas have high rates of infection. Such people also have among the lowest levels of physical fitness. Clearly, infection can result from low levels of physical fitness.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?

A) Rates of infection vary widely among different urban areas. 
B) People who live in urban areas are exposed to extreme concentrations of pollutants, which are known to cause infection. 
C) Many people who live in urban areas have high levels of physical fitness.
D) Some of the cases of infection in people who are very physically fit are not documented.
E) Infections are the most infrequently occurring form of illness in either rural or urban areas.

onedayill · Answer

Any other condition through which we can deduce that infection can be caused and B states that properly.

souvik101990 · Answer

P1: Urban = High Infection 
P2: Urban = Low Fitness 
C: Low Fitness --> Infection. 
Doubts: Even if Infection and Fitness relate to Urban dwelling, couldn't they be unrelated to each other? Even if Infection and Fitness are related to each other, that doesn't necessarily mean that one CAUSED the other...

(a) Rates of infection vary widely among different urban areas: Suggests that P1 is simplified statement, but does not contradict P1. Does not directly relate to conclusion.

b) People who live in urban areas are exposed to extreme concentrations of pollutants, which are known to cause infection: Suggests an alternate cause of infection, which directly relates to C.

c) Many people who live in urban areas have high levels of physical fitness: Suggests exceptions to P2 exist, but does not contradict generality of P2. Does not directly relate to conclusion.

d) Some of the cases of infection in people who are very physically fit are not documented: Suggests there is missing info on P1/P2 overlap. Does not directly relate to conclusion.

e) Infections are the most infrequently occurring form of illness in either rural or urban areas: Attempts to expand P1 with data about frequency and rural areas. Does not directly relate to conclusion.

Note how the wrong answers all focus on the Premises, while the right answer focuses on the Conclusion and/or the missing link between Conclusion and Premises!

dasa2013 · Answer

Argument : Based on 2 facts
1.Urban people suffers from Infection 
2. Urban people lack physical fitness

Conclusion: infection can result from low levels of physical fitness. 
Assumption: No other factor cause the infection

Weakness : Possible answer choice will be make the conclusion less believable by removing strengthening points or break the assumption.

Choice Analysis: 
A. Rate of infection on different urban people does not weaken the conclusion. 
B. Break the assumption, so it is the correct answer
C. Answer choice try to confuse us with using similar words, though many people are fit in urban area , but that does not weaken the argument that Infection result from lack of fitness. out of scope
D. Again out of scope "some" can be 1 to n 
E. Out of scope

BassanioGratiano · Answer

In order to weaken the conclusion we would need information that would indicate the infection is from another source than lack of physical fitness.

B) People who live in urban areas are exposed to extreme concentrations of pollutants, which are known to cause infection.
 This is the only answer choice that suggests the infection is from another source.

scofield1521 · Answer

How to assume number for words  many, most  and others?
As All = 100% & None = 0%.

aragonn · Answer

Conclusion: Clearly, infection can result from low levels of physical fitness.

Premise: People who live in urban areas have high rates of infection. Such people also have among the lowest levels of physical fitness.

Assumption: (1) It's not a coincidence. It’s not a coincidence that people who live in urban areas and have high rates of infection also have low levels of physical fitness. (2) There's no other cause. Nothing else but low levels of physical fitness caused the high rates of infection.

The phrase, most seriously weakens, in the question stem identifies this as a weaken question. Identify the conclusion, premises, and assumption. The indicator word, clearly, in the last sentence points toward the conclusion of the passage, infection can result from low levels of physical fitness. The phrase can result from indicates that this is a causal pattern. The premises of the argument, people who live in urban areas have high rates of infection. Such people also have among the lowest levels of physical fitness, provide a correlation between high rates of infection and low levels of physical fitness.

The standard assumptions of a causal reasoning pattern are that it’s not a coincidence and there’s no other cause. Because this is a weaken question, the correct answer will attack one of these assumptions. For example, the correct answer may show that the correlation between infection and residence in urban areas is only a coincidence by providing a counterexample. The correct answer could also break the causal link by introducing an alternate cause for the high rates of infection for people who live in urban areas. Evaluate the answer choices, looking for one that reflects either of these ideas.

Choice A: No. The phrase Rates of infection vary widely is out of scope. There could still be a high level of infection in all cities, even with the variation. This new information does not weaken the link between high levels of infection and low levels of physical fitness because this choice does not provide a counterexample or an alternate cause.

Choice B: Correct. This answer choice weakens the argument by providing another possible cause for the high rate of infection—exposure to extreme concentrations of pollutants—that is not related to physical fitness levels.

Choice C: No. High levels of physical fitness is out of scope. The passage is concerned with people who live in urban areas who have high rates of infection. Even if many people who live in urban areas have high levels of physical fitness, the link between high rates of infection and low levels of physical fitness is not weakened because this choice does not provide a counterexample or an alternate cause.

Choice D: No. Cases of infection in people who are very physically fit is out of scope. The passage is concerned with people who live in urban areas who have high rates of infection and have among the lowest levels of physical fitness.

Choice E: No. The most infrequently occurring form of illness is out of scope. The passage is not concerned with the frequency of forms of illness in rural or urban areas. This choice does not provide a counterexample or an alternate cause.

The correct answer is choice B.

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.

Compared to people who live in other environments, people who live in

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

Compared to people who live in other environments, people who live in

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