The number of hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew more

Question

The number of hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew more than 25 percent during the 1980s. Clearly, then, the use of heroin rose in that decade.

The author’s conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

(A) Those who seek medical care because of heroin use usually do so in the later stages of addiction.

(B) Many heroin users visit hospital emergency rooms repeatedly.

(C) The number of visits to hospital emergency rooms by heroin users is proportional to the incidence of heroin usage.

(D) The methods of using heroin have changed since 1980, and the new methods are less hazardous.

(E) Users of heroin identify themselves as such when they come to hospital emergency rooms.

arora1 · Answer

Is the OA C? 
If number of visits to hospital emergency rooms is NOT propotional to the incidences of heroin usage, the argument breaks. This is because the argument assumes that 25% more vists to emergency rooms was propotional to rise in usage of heroin

Kanika3agg · Answer

The increase in visits are the main determinant factor for assuming that the usage has increased. But what if the increase in visits was due to the same number of patients only. So, (C) is our assumption.

nightblade354 · Answer

This is a justify question; negation will not work on it!

unraveled · Answer

The number of hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew more than 25 percent during the 1980s. Clearly, then, the use of heroin rose in that decade.

The author’s conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

The jump/gap in the argument is when  visits increase(1)  the  heroin usage(2)  must have increased too.

(A) Those who seek medical care because of heroin use usually do so in the  later stages of addiction . - WRONG. Goes against the argument instead.

(B)  Many heroin users  visit hospital emergency rooms repeatedly. - WRONG. Many might be negligible also.

(C) The number of visits to hospital emergency rooms by heroin users is proportional to the incidence of heroin usage. - CORRECT.

(D) The  methods of using heroin have changed  since 1980, and the new methods are less hazardous. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

(E) Users of heroin identify themselves as such when they come to hospital emergency rooms. - WRONG. Irrelevant.

Only C fills the gap, rest are irrelevant.

Answer C.

chloreton · Answer

Can someone explain whats wrong with E? I mean if you don't identify yourself as heroin user when you visit to hospital emergency rooms, how will you be able conclude that use of heroin was high? It breaks the argument right?

guddo · Answer

The number of hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew more than 25 percent during the 1980s. Clearly, then, the use of heroin rose in that decade.

The author’s conclusion is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

The evidence is about ER visits, but the conclusion is about heroin use overall. To make that jump valid, we must assume ER visits by heroin users track the level of heroin use in the population, rather than changing for some other reason. That is the  missing link .

(A) Those who seek medical care because of heroin use usually do so in the later stages of addiction.

Even if this is true, ER visits could rise because more users reached later stages, or because later stage users became more likely to go to the ER, without heroin use overall rising. Not sufficient.

(B) Many heroin users visit hospital emergency rooms repeatedly.

This actually makes the conclusion less secure, because a rise in visits could come from the same users visiting more often, not from more heroin use. Not the needed assumption.

(C) The number of visits to hospital emergency rooms by heroin users is proportional to the incidence of heroin usage.

This is exactly what the argument needs. If visits are proportional to usage, then a 25 percent rise in visits supports a rise in heroin use. This makes the conclusion properly drawn.

(D) The methods of using heroin have changed since 1980, and the new methods are less hazardous.

If anything, less hazardous methods could reduce ER visits even if heroin use rose, so this does not support the inference. Not required.

(E) Users of heroin identify themselves as such when they come to hospital emergency rooms.

This helps with classification accuracy, but even perfectly labeled visits could increase for reasons other than increased heroin use. It does not supply the key link.

Answer: (C)

guddo · Answer

(E) is about whether the ER can correctly label visits as “by heroin users.” That’s about  measurement , not the missing assumption.

The argument’s gap is: more heroin related ER visits implies  more heroin use . Even if every user  does  identify themselves, the visits could still rise for other reasons, like more ER use per user, or more dangerous heroin, or better reporting. So (E) is not enough to justify the conclusion, because it does not connect visits to overall use.

The number of hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew more

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

The number of hospital emergency room visits by heroin users grew more

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