Since smoking-related illnesses are a serious health problem in Count

Question

Since smoking-related illnesses are a serious health problem in Country X, and since addiction to nicotine prevents many people from quitting smoking, the government of Country X plans to reduce the maximum allowable quantity of nicotine per cigarette by half over the next five years. However, reducing the quantity of nicotine per cigarette will probably cause people addicted to nicotine to smoke more cigarettes. Therefore, implementing this plan is unlikely to reduce the incidence of smoking-related illnesses.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument about the consequences of implementing the Country X government's plan?

(A) Over half of the nonsmoking adults in Country X have smoked cigarettes in the past.

(B) If the Country X government's plan is implemented, the brands of cigarettes sold in Country X will differ less from each other than they do now in terms of their nicotine content.

(C) Inexpensive, smoke-free sources of nicotine, such as nicotine gum and nicotine skin patches, have recently become available in Country X.

(D) Many smokers in Country X already spend a large proportion of their disposable income on cigarettes.

(E) The main cause of smoking-related illnesses is not nicotine but the tar in cigarette smoke.

Show SpoilerSource

Attachment:

Screen Shot 2023-06-23 at 08.36.58.png [ 98.09 KiB | Viewed 8551 times ]

Note: an older version of the question with a slightly different passage and answer choices can be found here.

Show Answer

Official Answer

Official Answer and Stats are available only to registered users. Register/Login.

Solving this question helps. Taking a timed set of similar questions in GMAT Club Forum Quiz → is even better.

_________________

I am no longer contributing to GMAT Club. Please request an active Expert or a peer review if you have questions.

Signature Read More

achloes · Answer

Two strengthening scenarios possible with option E:

The best case scenario is that people smoke the same number of cigs as before, therefore reducing their nicotine intake whilst maintaining their tar intake, causing no change in the incidence of smoking-related illnesses.

The worst case scenario is that people increase the number of cigs they smoke to meet their daily nicotine requirement, thus increasing their tar intake, ramping up the incidence of smoking-related illnesses.

CityOfStar · Answer

Conclusion: 
The government’s plan to reduce the maximum allowable quantity of nicotine per cigarette will not help reduce the incidence of smoking-related illnesses.

Premises: 
1)Smoking-related illnesses are serious in the country. 
2)Nicotine Addiction prevents people from quitting smoking; 
3)The government’s plan might make people smoke more.

A.)People have smoked before. Out of scope;

B)The cigarettes brand will differ less respect to the nicotine content. Out of Scope.

C)Nicotine products are available now. Out of Scope.

D)Smokers spend lot of money on cigarettes. Out of scope.

E)The illness are mainly caused by the tar in cigarette smoke. —->If people start to smoke more, there will be more illness. STRGHTHEN.

iamchinu97 · Answer

Goal:  To reduce the smoking-related illnesses
 Plan: To reduce maximum allowable quantity of nicotine per cigarette
 Conclusion:  Plan will fail
 Premise:  People will smoke more cigarettes

Question says we have so support the argument about the consequences of implementing plan
So we have so see which option gives new info inline with the info above.

(A) Over half of the nonsmoking adults in Country X have smoked cigarettes in the past. =>  What happened in the past is irrelevant to the argument that we want to support.

(B) If the Country X government's plan is implemented, the brands of cigarettes sold in Country X will differ less from each other than they do now in terms of their nicotine content. =>  Brands will differ less in their nicotine content will not have impact on argument that plan will fail

(C) Inexpensive, smoke-free sources of nicotine, such as nicotine gum and nicotine skin patches, have recently become available in Country X. =>  This is trap. even when other smoke-free sources are available we are concerned about the plan to less nicotine content will not decrease smoke related illnesses. so this is wrong

(D) Many smokers in Country X already spend a large proportion of their disposable income on cigarettes. =>  Out of scope how much they spent on cigarette has no impact on argument

(E) The main cause of smoking-related illnesses is not nicotine but the tar in cigarette smoke. => This is Answer. this clearly supports our argument that less nicotine will not have help in reducing smoke related illness as it is tar which is main culprit. it also supports our reasoning that people will smoke more and that may increase tar content in their body.

Miyo311 · Answer

I chose B with the following thinking...
If each brand is less different from each other, people would have more options to smoke (many people choose brands/types depending on nicotine content), potentially leading to increase in smoking. If there are more sodas that you enjoy in the market, you typically drink more soda. I guess this thinking was too out, and I get why E is a better choice now.

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

Yeah, be careful of lines of reasoning that require you to make additional assumptions. We don't know that reducing the difference between brands will increase the number of brands. You could just as well argue it would do the opposite, or nothing at all! We also don't know that the availability of more brands will encourage people to smoke more. The right answer should work without those kinds of assumptions. If the problem with cigarettes is tar, and nothing has been said about reducing tar, then we can be confident that this plan won't help, and we don't need any new assumptions to get there.

samarpan.g28 · Answer

We can see the conclusion is that "smoking-related illness will not be reduced". Now I will attach a 'because' at the end of the conclusion and check each option.

Option A: Smoking-related illness will not be reduced because  Over half of the nonsmoking adults in Country X have smoked cigarettes in the past.  This does not give us a reason to believe that illness is not reducing.
Option B: Smoking-related illness will not be reduced because  If the Country X government's plan is implemented, the brands of cigarettes sold in Country X will differ less from each other than they do now in terms of their nicotine content.  It does not matter if the contents differ when we are concerned about illness.
Option C: Smoking-related illness will not be reduced because  Inexpensive, smoke-free sources of nicotine, such as nicotine gum and nicotine skin patches, have recently become available in Country X.  This gives more reason to be concerned about why the illness is still not reducing.
Option D: Smoking-related illness will not be reduced because  Many smokers in Country X already spend a large proportion of their disposable income on cigarettes.  Does not make sense.
Option E: Smoking-related illness will not be reduced because  The main cause of smoking-related illnesses is not nicotine but the tar in cigarette smoke.  Okay, the main reason is the tar which has not been reduced therefore even if people are smoking cigs with less nicotine, the tar is causing them harm. Option E is correct.

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.

Since smoking-related illnesses are a serious health problem in Count

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Since smoking-related illnesses are a serious health problem in Count

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