Asbestos, an almost indestructible mineral once installed as building insulation, poses no health risk unless the asbestos is disturbed and asbestos fibers are released into the environment. Since removing asbestos from buildings disturbs it, thereby releasing asbestos fibers, the government should not require removal of all asbestos insulation.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Asbestos poses far less risk to health than does smoking, drug and alcohol abuse, improper diet or lack of exercise.
(B) Asbestos can post a health threat to workers who remove it without wearing required protective gear.
(C) Some kinds of asbestos, when disturbed, pose greater health risks than do other kinds.
(D) Asbestos is inevitably disturbed by building renovations or building demolition.
(E) Much of the time, removed asbestos is buried in landfills and forgotten with no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again.
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Asbestos
This topic has expert replies
-
dream700
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 64
- Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 4:15 am
- Thanked: 1 times
- Followed by:1 members
IMO E.
(A) Asbestos poses far less risk to health than does smoking, drug and alcohol abuse, improper diet or lack of exercise.
==> Out of scope. "Asb and smoking"?
(B) Asbestos can post a health threat to workers who remove it without wearing required protective gear.
==>This weakens. If they do wear the masks and all, no threat to the workers.
(C) Some kinds of asbestos, when disturbed, pose greater health risks than do other kinds.
==>Out of scope.
(D) Asbestos is inevitably disturbed by building renovations or building demolition.
==> Weakens the arg. If they are to be disturbed anyhow, it makes sense to remove them now.
(E) Much of the time, removed asbestos is buried in landfills and forgotten with no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again.
==>This supports. Even after removing, there is no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again, then what's the point of removing it at the first place?
Deutsch750
(A) Asbestos poses far less risk to health than does smoking, drug and alcohol abuse, improper diet or lack of exercise.
==> Out of scope. "Asb and smoking"?
(B) Asbestos can post a health threat to workers who remove it without wearing required protective gear.
==>This weakens. If they do wear the masks and all, no threat to the workers.
(C) Some kinds of asbestos, when disturbed, pose greater health risks than do other kinds.
==>Out of scope.
(D) Asbestos is inevitably disturbed by building renovations or building demolition.
==> Weakens the arg. If they are to be disturbed anyhow, it makes sense to remove them now.
(E) Much of the time, removed asbestos is buried in landfills and forgotten with no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again.
==>This supports. Even after removing, there is no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again, then what's the point of removing it at the first place?
Deutsch750
-
ssgmatter
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 549
- Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
- Thanked: 16 times
- Followed by:3 members
Perfect!dream700 wrote:IMO E.
(A) Asbestos poses far less risk to health than does smoking, drug and alcohol abuse, improper diet or lack of exercise.
==> Out of scope. "Asb and smoking"?
(B) Asbestos can post a health threat to workers who remove it without wearing required protective gear.
==>This weakens. If they do wear the masks and all, no threat to the workers.
(C) Some kinds of asbestos, when disturbed, pose greater health risks than do other kinds.
==>Out of scope.
(D) Asbestos is inevitably disturbed by building renovations or building demolition.
==> Weakens the arg. If they are to be disturbed anyhow, it makes sense to remove them now.
(E) Much of the time, removed asbestos is buried in landfills and forgotten with no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again.
==>This supports. Even after removing, there is no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again, then what's the point of removing it at the first place?
Deutsch750
Cheers
Phil
Best-
Amit
Amit
-
reply2spg
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1261
- Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2008 3:46 am
- Thanked: 27 times
- GMAT Score:570
I neither like any of the options nor the passage. however, E is my answer.
ssgmatter wrote:Asbestos, an almost indestructible mineral once installed as building insulation, poses no health risk unless the asbestos is disturbed and asbestos fibers are released into the environment. Since removing asbestos from buildings disturbs it, thereby releasing asbestos fibers, the government should not require removal of all asbestos insulation.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
(A) Asbestos poses far less risk to health than does smoking, drug and alcohol abuse, improper diet or lack of exercise. - Out of scope
(B) Asbestos can post a health threat to workers who remove it without wearing required protective gear. - what happen if workers wear protective gear? Out of scope
(C) Some kinds of asbestos, when disturbed, pose greater health risks than do other kinds. - Then Govt. should use other kinds of asbestos. Passage talks about the asbestos and not about certain type, out
(D) Asbestos is inevitably disturbed by building renovations or building demolition. - Passage talks the same, out.
(E) Much of the time, removed asbestos is buried in landfills and forgotten with no guarantee that it will not be disturbed again. - Best among the worst
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
