Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in

Question

Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in their homes. After someone becomes ill, specialists are often hired to eradicate the mold. These specialists look in damp areas of the house, since mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture. If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Mold itself does not create moisture.
(B) Most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition.
(C) Mold cannot grow in dry areas.
(D) No varieties of mold are harmless.
(E) Mold spores cannot be filtered from the air.

TommyWallach · Accepted Answer

Hey All,

Even though the right answer was eventually arrived at here, there was enough confusion I thought it might be worth outlining. Let's do it.

Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in their homes. After someone becomes ill, specialists are often hired to eradicate the mold. These specialists look in damp areas of the house, since mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture. If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold.

Conclusion: To avoid mold poisoning, keep plumbing in good condition.
Premises: Specialists check in damp areas of the house/mold is almost always in moist places
Assumption: Plumbing is the only thing that causes moisture.

Now I swear on a stack of bibles I wrote this assumption before looking at the answer choices. Think about it. The argument is airtight, other than this little issue. The conclusion involves plumbing, but that seems pretty specific, doesn't it? What about fixing the roof, so rain water can't get in? Truth is, there are plenty of ways moisture could get into the house.

As for a pattern, this is an eliminate alternate cause question. These are very common on the GMAT CR section, and there's a great thing to know about them: very often, when the question posits that A causes B, the assumption is that B doesn't cause A. It's called a causation/correlation mistake (we see two things happening, for example moisture and mold, and assume that moisture causes mold). Though sometimes the answer will just be any other old cause (like the leaky roof I suggested), very often it's just a reversal (mold might cause moisture). Be on the lookout!

1]Mold itself does not create moisture.
ANSWER: Uh-oh. Think about it. If mold DID create moisture, then it wouldn't be enough to check the plumbing, because the mold could be anywhere. This would explain why it's always found in moist places.

2]Most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition.
PROBLEM: This is a tricky one. If the conclusion were, "Homeowners should thus have no problem finding mold on their own," this would be the assumption. But the conclusion is that plumbing needs to be kept in good condition. If you don't know, you'd just have to learn.

3]Mold cannot grow in dry areas.
PROBLEM: We don't need to assume this, because the conclusion is not that all mold will be eradicated if plumbing is checked. It's only that if one wishes to avoid mold, one should keep plumbing in check. Even if mold can grow in dry places, the facts point towards moisture being the most common place to find it, and thus the conclusion would still hold.

4]No varieties of mold are harmless.
PROBLEM: Not the issue. Even if some are harmless, some aren't.

5]Mold spores cannot be filtered from the air.
PROBLEM: This might suggest another way that mold poisoning can be avoided (some type of filtration system), but as the conclusion relates to actually getting rid of the mold where it comes from, this answer choice is out of scope.

Hope that helps!

-t

TommyWallach · Answer

Hey Kiski,

Also, always be aware of really strong statements. C says "Mold cannot grow in dry places". Would we need to assume that mold NEVER grows in dry places? If it happened one out of a million times, would that compromise our argument? Probably not. Always be wary of terms like "cannot", "never", and "always".

-t

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

The basic structure of this argument is fact that “mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture,” so therefore, to avoid mold and the resultant mold poisoning, then people should take steps to prevent wet areas. This argument assumes that wet areas occur first, causing mold to grow. Conversely, this assumption requires that the mold growth itself does not occur first, creating wet areas as a result.

(A) CORRECT.  The argument depends on the assumption that the reason mold and wetness are observed together is that wet areas cause mold growth. If the reverse causation (mold causes wetness) were true, then keeping all plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage would do little to prevent the growth of old. This choice eliminates the alternate causation.

(B) If most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition, then the recommendation made in this argument would be more useful. However, this is not an assumption on which the argument depends.

(C) Even if mold could grow in dry areas, the fact that mold is almost always found in wet areas is still valid. This is the fact upon which the argument is based, so the argument does not depend on the unnecessarily absolute assertion that mold cannot grow in dry areas.

(D) Even if some varieties of mold are harmless, the conclusion of this argument, that “one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage” and minimize mold growth, could still be valid. Therefore, this argument does not depend on the unnecessarily absolute assertion that no varieties of mold are harmless.

(E) Whether mold spores can be filtered from the air may be relevant to a conclusion about the health effects of mold in the home, but it is not directly relevant to this conclusion, that “one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage” and minimize mold growth.

Kiski · Answer

Caught between A and C

The stem states,"..mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture"

Going with A for this reason.OA pls.

ChiranjeevSingh · Answer

Conclusion: If  one wishes to avoid mold poisoning , then,  one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold 
Premise: specialists look in damp areas of the house, since mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture

As we can see that the premise says that the mold is almost always found in moist areas and then the conclusion asks us to keep plumbing in order to prevent  leakage that could serve as breeding ground for mold . Thus, the observation that mold is almost always found in moist areas is led to mean that moist areas lead to molds, not the other way around.

In other words, the observations is like X and Y are always found together. Then, we conclude from this that X leads to Y. In deriving this conclusion, we are assuming that Y does not lead to X and there is no other substance Z, which could lead to both X and Y.

Thus, when we derive that moist areas act as breeding grounds for mold, we are assuming that Mold itself does not create moisture (option A).

Therefore, option A is correct.

Regards,
CJ

IanSolo · Answer

if the argument were "..since mold is  always  found in places where there is substantial moisture.." The C would be correct?!

KarishmaB · Answer

Actually, no. C would still not be correct. There is no material change in the argument if you remove 'almost'.

The conclusion of the argument is: If you want to avoid mold poisoning, keep all plumbing in good condition.

The point is that moisture could be created by something else - excessive rain, water sprinklers, mold itself - so by just keeping plumbing in good condition, you may not be able to avoid mold. 
If mold actually creates moisture, it will  always  be found in places where there is moisture.

If at all, (C) can be an inference in case you remove 'almost'. The premise gives you that mold is always found in moist places. We must take the premise to be true so we can infer that it cannot grow in dry areas (though, the inference is not perfect. We can say that it can grow in dry areas but it cannot be found there because it is not visible or something...).

Narenn · Answer

Correct Choice is A.  Here is my explanation.

Here the author has attributed the dampening of areas to the leakage thru internal plumbing. While doing so he assumes that there are no causes other than internal plumbing responsible for dampening of places. We would look for similar reasoning

A) This choice eliminates the posibility of other cause. Correct.

B) This choice is fantastic and tempting, however passage says homeowner's responsibility is to keep the plumbing in good condition, which he/she can do by calling plumber also and not necessary to personally determine the condition. So incorrect.

C) Wrong. Premise clearly states that molds almost always found in places where there is moisture (We can not refute premises in assumption/weaken questions)

D) irrelevant

E) irrelevant

Vercules · Answer

Hi mun23, The argument shows a causal relationship between the premises and the conclusion. The conclusion states that one should avoid any moisture at home if one wants to stay away form mold poisoning. The causal relationship is that moisture causes mold. The assumption in this causal argument should support the causal direction of the conclusion. i.e. the assumption must prove that A causes B or moisture causes obesity and nervousness. The assumptions in a causal arguments are often of two types: i) Assumptions that support the causality of the argument either by eliminating an alternate cause of the conclusion OR ii) by demonstrating that the conclusion, it it exists, is in proper direction. In other words A is caused by B and not B has caused A. Any option which does not tell us anything about the causal link between moisture and mold growth can be safely eliminated. Lets analyze the answer choices. (A)Mold itself does not create moisture. This is in fact ii) from above, i.e. it states that the conclusion exists in proper direction. If mold itself does not cause moisture then it only the moisture that causes mold and the conclusion that "one has to stay away from moisture to avoid mold poisoning" is validated. (B)Most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition. Not relevant, no link between moisture and mould (C)Mold cannot grow in dry areas. Again, irrelevant, the stimulus talks about mold growing in areas with moisture. (D)No varieties of mold are harmless. Harmfulness of varieties is again irrelevant. (E)Mold spores cannot be filtered from the air. Again irrelevant, whether molds can be filtered will have no effect on our conclusion. You can try a similar example for practice from the post below. the-popular-belief-that-a-snake-s-age-can-be-determined-by-147522.html#p1184417 Hope that helps, Vercules

gloomybison · Answer

Hi  ExpertsGlobal5

Doesn't choice A attack the premises? our conclusion is about people controlling plumbing systems to prevent poisoning
do we really care about if mold can pop up in other places?

rLit · Answer

"Mold itself does not create moisture".

My  problem  with A is the possibility that mold forms in places in which there is moisture, and only then does mold create additional moisture (/increases the already existing moisture). If mold forms where there is already moisture, answer choice A does not weaken the argument at all.

IN2MBB2PE · Answer

Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in their homes. After someone becomes ill, specialists are often hired to eradicate the mold. These specialists look in damp areas of the house, since mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture.   : If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold.

My thoughts –

AMP (Avoid Mold Poisoning) -> PGC (Plumbing in Good Condition)

A. Mold cannot grow in dry areas.

Negation: Mold can grow in dry areas

Premise already covers this – “Mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture.” 
It means there are other cases when mold could also grow, including in dry areas. 
This statement negation does not effect  .

B. Most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition.

Negation: Most homeowners  does not  know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition.

The homeowners do not have to know themselves, they can just hire professionals to check for them! 
This negation will not hurt the   – Sneaky! I picked this TWICE myself!

C. Mold itself does not create moisture.

Negation: Mold itself creates moisture.

If this is true that mold create moisture then preventing leakage will not help, so the advice by the   is BS and holds no ground as moisture itself is not the root cause, it is merely an effect! This is our answer! Negation works 90% of the time!

D. Varieties of mold are harmless. Irrelevant 
E. Mold spores be filtered from the air. Irrelevant

testtango · Answer

Its actually a very easy question if you think logically and write down the info. correctly, the argument says that - 
cause - molds ---> effect - illness
damp areas --> higher chances of molds 
then also mentioned that 
cause - leakage ----> effect - molds increases by breeding 
but what if this cause and effect is not correct what if effect leads to cause? in cause and effect questions always ask - 
whether effect leads to cause? or think of alternative causes or situation where NO cause then NO effect. 
here our correct answer is A since it mentions that - effect doesn't leads to cause i.e., high volume of molds does not lead to situation where moisture increases.

Rickooreoisb · Answer

KarishmaB

While I agree on the reasoning mentioned for the A, however, I need your help with the below

Conclusion is - If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold.

But if Mold grow in dry areas, this means that even if plumbing is in good condition there will be still mold poisoning happening.

KarishmaB · Answer

Conclusion is - If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold.

What this means is that if you wish to avoid mold poisoning, you must keep all internal plumbing in good condition.

So 'keeping all internal plumbing in good condition' is necessary to avoid mold poisoning. The argument is not assuming that it is sufficient. It is not assuming that "keeping all internal plumbing in good condition" will lead to no mold poisoning. It is not assuming that mold cannot grow in dry areas. The premise mentions that " mold is  almost  always found in places where there is substantial moisture."
It leaves open the possibility of mold in dry areas in some rare circumstances. That is why (C) is not correct.

But to me (E) looks good too. Mold poisoning would mean the mold spores affecting people and poisoning them. To avoid mold poisoning, another method could be filtering out the mold spores from the air. Then one may not need to care whether mold is growing anywhere and hence "keeping all internal plumbing in good condition" may not be required. By saying that it is necessary to "keep all internal plumbing in good condition," the argument is assuming that filtering mold spores out from air is not possible.

gamebird96 · Answer

Hi  Bunuel  ,  KarishmaB ,
I have a doubt here, the actual Kaplan question doesn't say "avoid mold poisoning", rather it says "To minimize the risk of mold poisoning in the home, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold."

This basically means (minimize version), that it's okay that there could be other reasons for mold, but plumbing is one of the reasons. Here isn't it the case that B could be a reasonable assumption (imo better than A?) Here it feels like attacking the premise...

kind of confused

KarishmaB · Answer

The reason "minimize the risk of molding" would have been changed to "avoid molding" is to ensure that the scenario of getting mold and then cleaning it up (to minimize) doesn't come into play. Fair, I would say.

Current conclusion:  If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition (to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold)
All this tells us is that keeping plumbing in good condition is necessary to avoid mold poisoning.

But it is based on the assumption that dampness causes mold and not the other way around. What if mold were causing dampness? Then is it necessary to keep plumbing in good condition. May not be. Plumbing and initial dampness may have nothing to do with causing mold. Mold may be happening because of some virus in the air!!! Perhaps the reason dampness and mold are found together is that mold produces dampness. Hence option (A) is necessary for the conclusion.

(B) Most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition.

This is irrelevant to the conclusion. The conclusion just says that if you want to avoid mold, take care of your plumbing - you can do it in whatever way possible. Call a plumber every 6 months, ask a friend for help or do it yourself - irrelevant. Just take care of it. So whether the home owner knows how to or not, the conclusion doesn't care. Hence (B) is out.

egmat · Answer

Hi gamebird96,

Good instinct to notice the wording, but let's test whether "minimize" actually changes what the argument  needs .

You're right that "minimize the risk" is softer than "avoid." It lowers the bar for the conclusion: we no longer need plumbing repair to wipe out  all  mold, just to  reduce  it. So far, so good.

But here's the catch:  even the "minimize" version only works if fixing plumbing actually cuts down on moisture that feeds mold. Run the negation on (A):  "Mold itself DOES create moisture."  If that's true, then mold generates its own damp conditions, and keeping plumbing in top shape does  nothing  - it can't even  minimize  the mold. The recommendation collapses under either wording. That's why (A) stays required.

Now (B).  An assumption is something the argument  depends  on - kill it and the argument breaks. Negate (B):  "Most homeowners do NOT know enough about plumbing to judge its condition."  Does the advice fall apart? No - they can just  hire a plumber  to keep it in good condition. The conclusion is "keep plumbing in good condition," not "personally diagnose it yourself." So (B) would be  nice to have , but the argument doesn't need it. Under "minimize" that's still true.

On your "attacking the premise" worry:  (A) doesn't refute the premise ("mold is almost always found in moist places"). It secures the  direction  behind it - that moisture causes mold, not the reverse. That's exactly what an assumption does.

Quick parallel to lock it in:  "To minimize weight gain, cut out soda."  This still assumes soda contributes to weight gain. If instead weight gain caused the soda cravings (reverse direction), cutting soda wouldn't minimize anything. Notice the "minimize" wording doesn't rescue it from the reverse-causation gap - same as here.

Answer: A

Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in

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

Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in

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