Bunuel
The village of Eyam in central England is often referred to as “plague village.” In the summer of 1665, an outbreak of the plague was discovered in the village, and the people of the village cut off all outside contacts and let the disease run its course. For almost a year and a half, the plague touched families throughout Eyam, and when villagers finally reopened their village to outsiders, over 75% of the population had died. More interesting, however, was the fact that nearly 25% of the population was still living. In some cases, the plague carried off all but one member of a family: Elizabeth Hancock is remembered for having lost her husband and six children, but she never contracted the plague, even while nursing them. Hancock’s story is not unique; most of the survivors proved to be immune to the infection altogether. Some researchers have found that a large proportion of the descendents of plague survivors from Eyam carry a mutation of a gene known as delta 32.Which of the following, if true, most undermines the implications made within the passage?(A) In laboratory studies with rats, other researchers have discovered that the delta 32 mutation does not contribute to resisting contraction of the plague.(B) The delta 32 gene has been found in people throughout Europe, as well as in America in people of European ancestry.(C) Some researchers believe that the delta 32 gene also protects individuals against the contraction of HIV.(D) During the seventeenth century, it was believed that vinegar stopped the spread of plague by killing off the disease.(E) The plague that struck Eyam (in Derbyshire) also struck London around the same time.
Overview: Questions is based on information contained within a passage about the English village of Eyam, widely known as “plague village” because of the village’s decision in 1665 to isolate itself during an outbreak of plague, rather than risk infecting others. Over a year later, more than 75% of the people in the village had died from the plague. But almost 25% had not died, and most of these survivors never caught the plague at all. The passage concludes by noting that researchers have discovered that descendents of plague survivors from Eyam carry a specific gene mutation known as delta 32. Question then asks the student to consider which answer choice would most undermine the conclusion implied in the passage.
The Correct Answer:A Answer choice (A) presents a situation in which other researchers have discovered that the delta 32 mutation does not actually resist plague infection in lab rats, with the suggestion that the conclusion drawn by earlier researchers (about the gene’s resistance to the plague) is false. If true, answer choice (A) would most clearly undermine the conclusion of the passage and is thus the correct answer.
The Incorrect Answers:B As the passage does not imply that the delta 32 mutation was exclusive to the village of Eyam, answer choice (B) does not undermine the conclusion of the passage in any way. In fact, the presence of the delta 32 mutation in others suggests that the gene did contribute to plague resistance and might go toward supporting the conclusions of the passage. Answer choice (B), therefore, is incorrect.
C Answer choice (C) provides an interesting piece of information, but this information does not undermine the conclusions of the passage. That the delta 32 mutation might also appear to resist HIV infection merely suggests a possible connection between plague infection and HIV. This is, however, irrelevant to the conclusions made in the passage, so it can be eliminated as an answer choice.
D, E Neither answer choice (D) nor answer choice (E) offers any information that undermines the conclusions implied in the passage. Both present potentially apocryphal details that add context to the passage but have no clear connection to its purpose or conclusion. Therefore, both answer choices (D) and (E) are incorrect.