Two different cages of rabbits were given injections of mild toxins.

Question

Two different cages of rabbits were given injections of mild toxins. In addition, the first cage was also exposed to cold temperature; three-fourths of the rabbits in this cage became sick. Only one-fifth of the rabbits in the normal temperature cage became sick. The lab technicians concluded that cold temperature increases the likelihood of illness in rabbits.

The technicians' conclusion logically depends on which of the following assumptions?

(A) The exposure to cold temperature acted as a catalyst for the toxins which made more rabbits in the first cage sick.

(B) The toxins given to the rabbits in the two cages were of varying strength.

(C) Injecting the rabbits with toxins made them sick.

(D) Even without the exposure to cold temperature, the rabbits in the first cage would have probably gotten sick.

(E) Even exposing rabbits to slight variances in temperature is likely to induce illness.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:
 
  Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler

dhart · Answer

Some expr on rabbits in two groups with conlusion , rabbits in group 1 kept in colder temparatures have gotten more sick
(A) The exposure to cold temperature acted as a catalyst for the toxins which made more rabbits in the first cage sick.
it talks about the more rabiits in grp 1 being affected due to cold as colder tempareture , it is giving a reason for the conslusion, can be kept

(B) The toxins given to the rabbits in the two cages were of varying strength.
A bit out of scope

(C) Injecting the rabbits with toxins made them sick.
Iss'nt agruing about the conclusion of the pragrph

(D) Even without the exposure to cold temperature, the rabbits in the first cage would have probably gotten sick.
may ve gotten sick but doesnt explain more rabbits getting sick in the first group

(E) Even exposing rabbits to slight variances in temperature is likely to induce illness.
isn't in line with reasoning of low temprature

TheAdmissionHub · Answer

Two different cages of rabbits were given injections of mild toxins. In addition, the first cage was also exposed to cold temperature; three-fourths of the rabbits in this cage became sick. Only one-fifth of the rabbits in the normal temperature cage became sick. The lab technicians concluded that cold temperature increases the likelihood of illness in rabbits.
 
 The technicians' conclusion logically depends on which of the following assumptions?
 
 (A) The exposure to cold temperature acted as a catalyst for the toxins which made more rabbits in the first cage sick.
 Correct:  if we asssume that the cold exposure itself somehow contributed to the higher illness rate then we can conclude that cold temperature increases the likelihood of illness in rabbits
 
 (B) The toxins given to the rabbits in the two cages were of varying strength.
 Wrong: Weakens the conclusion: if the toxins differed in strength, that could explain the different illness rates.
 
 (C) Injecting the rabbits with toxins made them sick.
 Wrong:  conclusioni s about cold making them possibly sick alongside toxins.
 
 (D) Even without the exposure to cold temperature, the rabbits in the first cage would have probably gotten sick.
 Wrong:  it weakens because we need to prove that “The lab technicians concluded that cold temperature increases the likelihood of illness in rabbits”. So cold= likelihood of illness in rabbits
 
 (E) Even exposing rabbits to slight variances in temperature is likely to induce illness.
 Wrong:  it is too broad; the experiment concerns this particular cold exposure, not slight temperature changes in general.

Vivek1707 · Answer

A. The argument needs the cold to actually interact with the toxin and increase the chance of illness. Otherwise, the higher sickness rate can't really be attributed to the cold. Looks correct
B. If the toxins had different strengths, that would actually undermine the experiment. The difference in sickness could simply be due to the toxin.
C. Whether the toxin itself causes illness isn't the key issue. The argument is about whether cold increases the likelihood of illness.
D. This would actually make the conclusion harder to support. If the first group would have gotten sick anyway, cold may have had nothing to do with it.
E. The experiment isn't about small temperature variations; it's specifically comparing cold vs. normal temperature.

UpHa · Answer

IMO, A. As this directly corelates that cold temperature is the differential between the two cages which results in greater proportion of sick rats in first cage.

Bunuel · Answer

The OA is A.

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

If more rabbits became sick in the cage where they were exposed to colder temperature, as opposed to the warmer cage where fewer rabbits became sick, after being injected with the same toxins, it can be assumed that the combination of cold temperature and the toxin makes more rabbits sick. Choice A is the best answer. All other choices can be true on a stand-alone basis. However, they do not support the technicians' conclusion.

Two different cages of rabbits were given injections of mild toxins.

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

­Two different cages of rabbits were given injections of mild toxins.

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

Two different cages of rabbits were given injections of mild toxins.