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.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
10 Oct 2019, 21:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
84% (01:33) correct
16%
(01:57)
wrong
based on 194
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A pharmaceutical company developed a new diuretic reported to cause fewer side effects than their old diuretic, which was still being manufactured. During the first year that both were sold, the earlier medication far outsold the new one; the manufacturer thus concluded that reducing side effects was not the customers' primary consideration.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the manufacturers conclusion?
A. Both hospitals and patients buy diuretics from this pharmaceutical company.
B. Many customers consider older medications a better safety risk than new ones, since more is usually known about the safety of the earlier drugs.
C. Many customers of this pharmaceutical company also bought medications from companies who did not produce new diuretics reported to cause fewer side effects.
D. The newer diuretic can be used by all the patients who could use the earlier diuretic.
E. There was no significant difference in price between the newer diuretic and the earlier diuretic.
10 Oct 2019, 22:51
Kudos
Bookmarks
The right answer is option B.
If a new diuretic is manufactured by a pharmaceutical company that has fewer side effects than an existing diuretic, the only logical reason why it won't receive higher patronage is if the users are apprehensive about the new drug, since very little information is available about the new drug. It would take some time after the new diuretic has been used by many and proofs of the benefits become well known before it's usage will receive the necessary patronage. This is what option B essentially states, hence it is the best weakener of the conclusion drawn by the argument.
The fact that both hospitals and patients buy medicine from the pharmaceutical company in question is irrelevant. It does not weaken nor strengthen the argument, hence we can discard A.
Option C did not weaken the conclusion made by the argument, but instead it strengthens the argument. We can, therefore, discard C as well.
The fact that the new diuretic can be used by patients who use the old diuretic does not offer any objection or weaken the conclusion made in the argument. D can also be discarded.
The fact that there is no price difference between the old and new diuretic does not provide any objection or weaken the conclusion made in the argument. E can also be discarded.
If a new diuretic is manufactured by a pharmaceutical company that has fewer side effects than an existing diuretic, the only logical reason why it won't receive higher patronage is if the users are apprehensive about the new drug, since very little information is available about the new drug. It would take some time after the new diuretic has been used by many and proofs of the benefits become well known before it's usage will receive the necessary patronage. This is what option B essentially states, hence it is the best weakener of the conclusion drawn by the argument.
The fact that both hospitals and patients buy medicine from the pharmaceutical company in question is irrelevant. It does not weaken nor strengthen the argument, hence we can discard A.
Option C did not weaken the conclusion made by the argument, but instead it strengthens the argument. We can, therefore, discard C as well.
The fact that the new diuretic can be used by patients who use the old diuretic does not offer any objection or weaken the conclusion made in the argument. D can also be discarded.
The fact that there is no price difference between the old and new diuretic does not provide any objection or weaken the conclusion made in the argument. E can also be discarded.
10 Oct 2019, 22:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
A pharmaceutical company developed a new diuretic reported to cause fewer side effects than their old diuretic, which was still being manufactured. During the first year that both were sold, the earlier medication far outsold the new one; the manufacturer thus concluded that reducing side effects was not the customers' primary consideration.
Conclusion: The manufacturer thus concluded that reducing side effects was not the customers' primary consideration. It can be weakened by mentioning that reduction of side effect was the only primary consideration of the customers.
Reasoning of the premises may be are as follows,
What if the new diuretic is having too much cost than earlier one.
What if the new diuretic is far more efficient than the old one.
Such consideration weakens the manufacturer's conclusion regarding primary considerations of customers.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the manufacturers conclusion?
A. Both hospitals and patients buy diuretics from this pharmaceutical company. - Irrelevant
B. Many customers consider older medications a better safety risk than new ones, since more is usually known about the safety of the earlier drugs. - If new diuretic poses more risk to the safety of the patient than the old one, then many customers opted for the old one rather than new one. Old diuretic is more safer than the new one, indicating the customers are considering safety as the primary reason So, it weakens the conclusion.
C. Many customers of this pharmaceutical company also bought medications from companies who did not produce new diuretics reported to cause fewer side effects.- So what?
D. The newer diuretic can be used by all the patients who could use the earlier diuretic. - so what? irrelevant.
E. There was no significant difference in price between the newer diuretic and the earlier diuretic. - If there no difference in price, then customers could have bought the new one as it's having fewer side effects. But, it's out of context.
Conclusion: The manufacturer thus concluded that reducing side effects was not the customers' primary consideration. It can be weakened by mentioning that reduction of side effect was the only primary consideration of the customers.
Reasoning of the premises may be are as follows,
What if the new diuretic is having too much cost than earlier one.
What if the new diuretic is far more efficient than the old one.
Such consideration weakens the manufacturer's conclusion regarding primary considerations of customers.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the manufacturers conclusion?
A. Both hospitals and patients buy diuretics from this pharmaceutical company. - Irrelevant
B. Many customers consider older medications a better safety risk than new ones, since more is usually known about the safety of the earlier drugs. - If new diuretic poses more risk to the safety of the patient than the old one, then many customers opted for the old one rather than new one. Old diuretic is more safer than the new one, indicating the customers are considering safety as the primary reason So, it weakens the conclusion.
C. Many customers of this pharmaceutical company also bought medications from companies who did not produce new diuretics reported to cause fewer side effects.- So what?
D. The newer diuretic can be used by all the patients who could use the earlier diuretic. - so what? irrelevant.
E. There was no significant difference in price between the newer diuretic and the earlier diuretic. - If there no difference in price, then customers could have bought the new one as it's having fewer side effects. But, it's out of context.
