It is currently 19 Nov 2017, 11:27

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Within 20 years it will probably be possible to identify the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 10 Jan 2006
Posts: 90

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

Within 20 years it will probably be possible to identify the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 03:35
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

96% (00:41) correct 4% (01:35) wrong based on 65 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Within 20 years it will probably be possible to identify the genetic susceptibility an individual may have toward any particular disease. Eventually, effective strategies will be discovered to counteract each such susceptibility. Once these effective strategies are found, therefore, the people who follow them will never get sick.

The argument above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) For every disease there is only one strategy that can prevent its occurrence.
(B) In the future, genetics will be the only medical specialty of any importance.
(C) All human sicknesses are in part the result of individualsâ€™ genetic susceptibilities
(D) All humans are genetically susceptible to some diseases.
(E) People will follow medical advice when they are convinced that it is effective.

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 915

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 0

Re: Critical Reasoning _3:Within 20 years it will probably b [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 04:43
I will go with C. The author states genetic susceptibility to any disease.

MBA2ran wrote:
Within 20 years it will probably be possible to identify the genetic susceptibility an individual may have toward any particular disease. Eventually, effective strategies will be discovered to counteract each such susceptibility. Once these effective strategies are found, therefore, the people who follow them will never get sick.

The argument above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) For every disease there is only one strategy that can prevent its occurrence.
(B) In the future, genetics will be the only medical specialty of any importance.
(C) All human sicknesses are in part the result of individualsâ€™ genetic susceptibilities
(D) All humans are genetically susceptible to some diseases.
(E) People will follow medical advice when they are convinced that it is effective.

Kudos [?]: 59 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2006
Posts: 73

Kudos [?]: 6 [1], given: 0

Location: London

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 04:46
1
KUDOS
My pick is C.

(C) All human sicknesses are in part the result of individualsâ€™ genetic susceptibilities

If all sicknesses are in part the result of individualsâ€™ genetic susceptibilities, then people who follow the strategies will never get sick.
However, if some sicknesses are a result of something other than genetic susceptibilities, then the argument won't stand.

Therefore the argument is based on C

Kudos [?]: 6 [1], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 387

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 0

Location: Boston, MA

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 08:33
C.
argument assumes that all diseases are a result of susceptibilities. Otherwise they would not be able to prevent all people from getting sick.

Kudos [?]: 148 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 358

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 08:38
buckkitty wrote:
C.
argument assumes that all diseases are a result of susceptibilities. Otherwise they would not be able to prevent all people from getting sick.

Agree C

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 257

Kudos [?]: 260 [0], given: 0

Location: California

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 12:43
very much C...

Kudos [?]: 260 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 71

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Location: India

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 15:32
Agree with C

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 25 Jun 2006
Posts: 1161

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 22:48
OG qn. C.

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Oct 2006
Posts: 266

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 0

Re: Critical Reasoning _3:Within 20 years it will probably b [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2006, 23:27
choice C..

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 19 Aug 2006
Posts: 213

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Dec 2006, 07:50
Its C.

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 24 Nov 2006
Posts: 349

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Dec 2006, 17:15
One more for C. To infer that people will never get sick, we need an assumption stating that all diseases are in fact the result of genetic susceptibilities.

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 0

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10132

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Re: Within 20 years it will probably be possible to identify the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2016, 11:49
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 362

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 17

Location: India
WE: Project Management (Telecommunications)
Re: Within 20 years it will probably be possible to identify the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jul 2016, 08:04
why is D wrong?
I had both C & D as my contenders.

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 17

Re: Within 20 years it will probably be possible to identify the   [#permalink] 03 Jul 2016, 08:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by