Last visit was: 27 Apr 2026, 16:24 It is currently 27 Apr 2026, 16:24
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
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 27 Apr 2026
Posts: 16,765
Own Kudos:
51,950
 [7]
Given Kudos: 6,336
GPA: 3.62
Products:
Posts: 16,765
Kudos: 51,950
 [7]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
6
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
yashikaaggarwal
User avatar
Senior Moderator - Masters Forum
Joined: 19 Jan 2020
Last visit: 29 Mar 2026
Posts: 3,088
Own Kudos:
3,158
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,510
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE:Analyst (Internet and New Media)
Posts: 3,088
Kudos: 3,158
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
rs47
Joined: 12 Feb 2014
Last visit: 27 Jun 2022
Posts: 75
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 21
Location: India
Schools: LBS MIF '19
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.3
Schools: LBS MIF '19
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V40
Posts: 75
Kudos: 387
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
aletheia225
Joined: 16 Jul 2020
Last visit: 03 Mar 2025
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
GRE 1: Q167 V169
GRE 1: Q167 V169
Posts: 17
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
(B) is not a necessary assumption. The negation of (B) is that the stats cited include deaths from alcohol-related events like automobile accidents, i.e. include deaths from things other than a life-threatening disease. That doesn't destroy the leap from an increased death rate to a greater susceptibility to life-threatening disease. To illustrate with an extreme example -

-10,000 alcoholics, 10,000 non-alcoholics.

-9,000 pre-75 alcoholic deaths, 8,999 of which are caused by a life-threatening disease, and 1 of which is caused by a drunken automobile accident.

Is it therefore invalid to make the leap from the increased death rate to the susceptibility to life-threatening disease?
User avatar
A_Nishith
Joined: 29 Aug 2023
Last visit: 12 Nov 2025
Posts: 452
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 452
Kudos: 203
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The conclusion of the argument is that alcohol addiction increases a person’s susceptibility to life-threatening diseases, reducing life expectancy. To support this conclusion, the argument relies on the statistics that a higher percentage of alcoholics die before the age of 75 compared to non-alcoholics.

We need to find an assumption that the argument depends on. The assumption must be something that is necessary for the conclusion to be valid but is not explicitly stated in the argument. Let's evaluate each option:

(A) People who are predisposed to life-threatening diseases are more likely than other people to become alcoholic.

This option suggests that there is a correlation between having a predisposition to life-threatening diseases and becoming an alcoholic. However, this assumption introduces an alternative explanation for the correlation between alcoholism and shorter life expectancy. This weakens the argument rather than supporting it because if people who are already predisposed to diseases are more likely to become alcoholics, it would not be alcoholism causing the reduced life expectancy. Therefore, this is not a necessary assumption.

(B) The statistics cited exclude deaths due to other alcohol-related events such as automobile accidents.

This is a strong contender. The argument is about life-threatening diseases, but if the statistics include deaths caused by alcohol-related accidents (like car accidents), then the conclusion would be invalid because it would attribute deaths from accidents to diseases. To maintain the argument's focus on life-threatening diseases, it is necessary to assume that deaths from alcohol-related accidents are excluded. Therefore, this is a necessary assumption.

(C) Alcoholism does not also increase a person’s susceptibility to diseases that are not life-threatening.

The conclusion focuses on life-threatening diseases, and whether alcoholism affects susceptibility to non-life-threatening diseases is irrelevant to the argument. Therefore, this is not a necessary assumption.

(D) The life expectancy of that portion of the general population not characterized by alcoholism increases over time.

The conclusion is about the effect of alcoholism on life expectancy relative to non-alcoholics. This option talks about the life expectancy of non-alcoholics increasing over time, which does not directly affect the conclusion about the comparison between alcoholics and non-alcoholics at the present time. Therefore, this is not a necessary assumption.

(E) The author of the report is not biased in his or her personal opinion about the morality of alcohol consumption.

The personal bias of the author does not impact the validity of the statistical comparison and the conclusion drawn from it. Whether the author has a moral opinion about alcohol consumption is irrelevant to the assumption that the conclusion depends on. Therefore, this is not a necessary assumption.

Conclusion:
The best answer is (B) because it provides a necessary assumption that the statistics focus on deaths due to diseases rather than alcohol-related accidents. Without this assumption, the argument would not hold.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
507 posts
363 posts