• Free Trial & Practice Exam
BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• 1 Hour Free
BEAT THE GMAT EXCLUSIVE

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Magoosh
Study with Magoosh GMAT prep

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Free Veritas GMAT Class
Experience Lesson 1 Live Free

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• 5 Day FREE Trial
Study Smarter, Not Harder

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• Free Practice Test & Review
How would you score if you took the GMAT

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

• FREE GMAT Exam
Know how you'd score today for $0 Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • 5-Day Free Trial 5-day free, full-access trial TTP Quant Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Get 300+ Practice Questions 25 Video lessons and 6 Webinars for FREE Available with Beat the GMAT members only code • Award-winning private GMAT tutoring Register now and save up to$200

Available with Beat the GMAT members only code

## A new drug, taken twice daily for one month

tagged by: ceilidh.erickson

This topic has 1 expert reply and 0 member replies

### Top Member

NandishSS Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Joined
05 Jun 2015
Posted:
344 messages
Followed by:
2 members
3

#### A new drug, taken twice daily for one month

Wed Dec 14, 2016 11:13 pm
A new drug, taken twice daily for one month, is an effective treatment for a certain disease. The drug now most commonly prescribed for the disease occasionally has serious side effects such as seizures; the new drug has side effects much more frequently, but the worst of them is mild nausea. Therefore, the new drug is clearly preferable as a treatment.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A) It is possible that the drug now most commonly prescribed has side effects that have not yet been attributed to it.
B) People who experience nausea are prone to discontinue use of the new drug prematurely.
C) Other drugs for the disease have typically been prescribed only for patients allergic to the most commonly prescribed drug.
D) People who have received effective treatment for disease do not generally contract the disease again.
E) There is a nonprescription medication that when taken with the new drug prevents the onset of nausea.

OA:B

Source:GMATPrep EP2

### GMAT/MBA Expert

ceilidh.erickson GMAT Instructor
Joined
04 Dec 2012
Posted:
1805 messages
Followed by:
230 members
1443
Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:31 pm
Whenever we want to WEAKEN an argument, we must first assess the line of reasoning, and see where it is flawed.

Conclusion:
- the new drug is clearly preferable as a treatment

Premises:
- drug now most commonly prescribed for the disease occasionally has serious side effects such as seizures
- the new drug has side effects much more frequently, but the worst of them is mild nausea

Assumptions:
- the only important criteria in assessing which drug is "preferable" is the severity of side effects
- or, the drugs are equally effective
- frequent but mild side effects are preferable to infrequent but severe ones

In order to WEAKEN the argument, we must find an answer choice that attacks one of these assumptions.

A) It is possible that the drug now most commonly prescribed has side effects that have not yet been attributed to it.
This would strengthen rather than weaken; it gives us more reason to believe that the new drug is preferable.

B) People who experience nausea are prone to discontinue use of the new drug prematurely.
If this is true, then people will stop taking the new drug, limiting its effectiveness. This gives us reason to doubt whether this drug will be preferable. Correct.

C) Other drugs for the disease have typically been prescribed only for patients allergic to the most commonly prescribed drug.
Irrelevant. The conclusion is only concerned with the comparison between these two drugs, so we don't care about other (presumably less preferable) drugs.

D) People who have received effective treatment for disease do not generally contract the disease again.
Irrelevant to this argument. It gives us no reason to conclude that one drug is preferable to the other, as both are presumed effective.

E) There is a nonprescription medication that when taken with the new drug prevents the onset of nausea.

This would strengthen rather than weaken. The new drug's worst side effect is easily prevented, giving us more reason to prefer it. We need an answer that says the opposite.

_________________

Ceilidh Erickson
Manhattan Prep GMAT & GRE instructor
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education

Manhattan Prep instructors all have 99th+ percentile scores and expert teaching experience.
Sign up for a FREE TRIAL, and learn why we have the highest ratings in the GMAT industry!

Free Manhattan Prep online events - The first class of every online Manhattan Prep course is free. Classes start every week.

### Top First Responders*

1 GMATGuruNY 64 first replies
2 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma... 48 first replies
3 Brent@GMATPrepNow 39 first replies
4 Jay@ManhattanReview 24 first replies
5 Terry@ThePrinceto... 10 first replies
* Only counts replies to topics started in last 30 days
See More Top Beat The GMAT Members

### Most Active Experts

1 GMATGuruNY

The Princeton Review Teacher

128 posts
2 Rich.C@EMPOWERgma...

EMPOWERgmat

114 posts
3 Scott@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

92 posts
4 Jeff@TargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep

90 posts
5 Max@Math Revolution

Math Revolution

85 posts
See More Top Beat The GMAT Experts