Critical Reasoning

Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking anti-psychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years. That is greater than the increase in the number of adults taking anti-psychotic medicines during the same period.

Lucy: But the use of anti-psychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on anti-psychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children.

Lucy's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

A) The current level of anti-psychotic drug use among children is extremely high

B) The fact that number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high

C) If only 6.6 of every 1000 children are taking an anti psychotic medicine, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage that Antoine cites

D)It is unlikely that the increase in the use of anti-psychotic medicines by children will continue at the same rate

E) If the number of children taking anti-psychotoc drugs is given as a certain number, the actual rate of such drug use is even higher

OA:B

Source: Manhattan


In Antoine's argument he compares percentage 73% (pure percentage) in kids with an INCREASE in adults? Is it correct to compare percentage with percentage change? or does 'soar" imply change in percentage??

Mo2men wrote:Antoine: The alarming fact is that among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking anti-psychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years. That is greater than the increase in the number of adults taking anti-psychotic medicines during the same period.

Lucy: But the use of anti-psychotic drugs by adults is considered normal at the current rate of 11 adults per 1,000 taking the drugs. In contrast, the number of children on anti-psychotic medication last year was 6.6 per 1,000 children.

Lucy's argument is structured to lead to which of the following as a conclusion?

A) The current level of anti-psychotic drug use among children is extremely high

B) The fact that number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is not an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high

C) If only 6.6 of every 1000 children are taking an anti psychotic medicine, the increase in the use of such medicines cannot be the percentage that Antoine cites

D)It is unlikely that the increase in the use of anti-psychotic medicines by children will continue at the same rate

E) If the number of children taking anti-psychotoc drugs is given as a certain number, the actual rate of such drug use is even higher

In a CR with two speakers, the second speaker's conclusion will be the OPPOSITE of the first speaker's.

Antoine's premise:
Among children aged 19 years and younger, the number taking anti-psychotic medicines soared 73 percent in the last four years.
Antoine's conclusion:
This fact is ALARMING.

Lucy's conclusion is the OPPOSITE of Antoine's:
The 73% increase among children is NOT alarming.

B is the equivalent of the statement in blue:
The fact that the number of children taking anti-psychotic drugs increased 73% over the last 4 years is NOT an indication that the current level of use is abnormally high.

The correct answer is B.