Although perioral dermatilis rashes are believed to be

Question

Although perioral dermatilis rashes are believed to be caused by reactions to sodium laurel sulfate (SLS) found in shampoos and other personal care products, instructing patients to eliminate all products with SLS frequently does not stop perioral dermatilis. Obviously, some other cause of perioral dermatilis besides reaction to SLS exist.

Which of the following would most seriously weaken the conclusion?

a. Many personal care products elicit an allergic skin response only after several days, making it very difficult to observe between specific products patients use and the perioral dermatilis they develop
b. Skin allergies affect many people who never develop the symptom of perioral dermatilis
c. Many patients report that the personal care products that cause them perioral dermatilis are among the products they most enjoy using
d. Very few patients have allergic skin reactions as children and then live rash-free adult lives once they have eliminated products to which they have been demondstrated to be allergic
e. Very rarely do personal care products cause patients to suffer a symptom more severe than that of perioral dermatilis rashes

OA  A. WHY???????

If the reaction comes in a few days after the product was used, it means that the probability of that there are many other causes of rashes increases (there could be many more other reasons in those several days. Hence, this makes the statement even stronger! Where am I wrong?)

Please explain.

nickesha · Answer

is the answer D?

CasperMonday · Answer

I found the official explanation to this, but it is really weird...

"If it is difficult to determine which products cause dermatilis, then some products that cause rashes might not have been demonstrated to do so. Hence, eliminating products that have been demonstrated to cause dermatilis might not eliminate dermailis, even if personal care products are the only cause of dermatilis. Choice A is the best answer".

11MBA · Answer

The answer should be A. Nothing else really makes sense. But I do agree that the official explanation is very confusing.

Here is how I see it. It's stated that perioral dermatilis rashes are believed to be caused by reactions to sodium laurel sulfate (SLS). Therefore it shouldn't be used by those who don't want to get perioral dermatilis. However, the premise of the arugument is that since some people don't get a rash right after using it then it must not be the cause of perioral dermatilis.

Answer A states since that many people do not necessarily develop a reaction right away, it is difficult to determine what was the cause of the rash. So a person could have used SLS but did not develop a rash right away, but instead developed the rash at a later time. Therefore SLS was still the cause of the rash even though the person did not develop perioral dermatilis right away which weakens the argument that if no rash is observed after using SLS then it does not cause perioral dermatilis.

Although perioral dermatilis rashes are believed to be

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