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 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.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 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.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
14 Jun 2021, 06:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
73% (02:02) correct
27%
(01:58)
wrong
based on 172
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The number of dogs infected by a deadly tick disease has dropped significantly in a rural district this year, as opposed to last year. Veterinary officials believe that this decrease is due entirely to improved chemical pesticides, which make it difficult for the deadly ticks to survive, thus reducing the incidence of the disease.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously undermine the explanation for the lower incidence of the disease put forth by the veterinary officials?
A Because of veterinary tools, new this year, that can pinpoint conditions which were difficult to diagnose, many dogs who were incorrectly diagnosed as having the deadly tick disease actually had a minor blood infection.
B Many improved chemical pesticides have been used in the district over the course of the past ten years.
C Statistics for dogs with the deadly tick disease were not taken for other rural districts, and were thus not considered when veterinary officials made their statements.
D Because of improvements in veterinary medicine, fewer dogs that contract the deadly tick disease will die from the disease.
E The chemical pesticides in the rural district were brought in line with those of neighbouring districts more than five years ago.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously undermine the explanation for the lower incidence of the disease put forth by the veterinary officials?
A Because of veterinary tools, new this year, that can pinpoint conditions which were difficult to diagnose, many dogs who were incorrectly diagnosed as having the deadly tick disease actually had a minor blood infection.
B Many improved chemical pesticides have been used in the district over the course of the past ten years.
C Statistics for dogs with the deadly tick disease were not taken for other rural districts, and were thus not considered when veterinary officials made their statements.
D Because of improvements in veterinary medicine, fewer dogs that contract the deadly tick disease will die from the disease.
E The chemical pesticides in the rural district were brought in line with those of neighbouring districts more than five years ago.
19 Jun 2021, 06:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
This is a weaken the argument question.
Identify the argument. In this question, the argument is that improved chemical pesticides are responsible for the lower incidence of a deadly tick disease in dogs in a rural district.
If possible, anticipate what the answer will be. What would weaken the argument in this question would be to show that the improved chemical pesticides are not responsible for the lower incidence of a deadly tick disease in dogs - that perhaps something else is responsible.
Eliminate answer choices that do not weaken the argument. Choices B, D and E have nothing to do with the argument at all, and are easily eliminated. Choice C attempts to confuse the argument itself, but the argument is not weakened in not considering other districts because we need only be concerned with the validity of the argument as it applies to a rural district, and not ALL rural districts. Choice A is the best answer because it contradicts the idea that the deadly tick disease existed to the degree that it had been previously reported.
General Discussion
14 Jun 2021, 10:38
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
The only answer that seems good here is E, though I can't really tell what answer E means when it says "brought in line with", since that phrase is so vague. If answer E means "the pesticides used in the district were changed to match those used in neighbouring districts more than five years ago, and have been used in the same way ever since", then naturally it's a good answer here, because it suggests pesticide use hasn't changed over the last year, so a change in pesticides doesn't explain the change in incidence of dog ticks.
I fear, though, that the OA might be A here, and A is certainly wrong. The question tells us, as a premise, that fewer dogs have been infected this year. That's a premise, so it's an absolute fact, and must be true. Even if doctors misdiagnosed some cases last year, it still must be true that there were more cases last year than this year, since premises are always true. Answer A would be a great answer if the question instead said "doctors diagnosed more cases of tick disease last year than this year, and they think the decrease is because of new pesticides that control the ticks that are responsible for the disease". Then an answer that suggests some diagnoses were mistaken would be very relevant to the argument.
