CR-Damaged Nerves

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:23 pm
Thanked: 11 times
GMAT Score:590

CR-Damaged Nerves

by nitya34 » Sat Mar 21, 2009 10:38 pm
Damaged nerves in the spinal cord do not regenerate themselves naturally, nor even under the spur of nerve-growth stimulants. The reason, recently discovered, is the presence of nerve-growth inhibitors in the spinal cord. Antibodies that deactivate those inhibitors have now been developed. Clearly, then, nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in the foreseeable future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most serious doubt on the accuracy of the prediction above?

(A) Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth.
(B) Certain nerve-growth stimulants have similar chemical structures to those of the antibodies against nerve-growth inhibitors.
(C) Nerves in the brain are similar to nerves in the spinal cord in their inability to regenerate themselves naturally.
(D) Researchers have been able to stimulate the growth of nerves not located in the spinal cord by using only nerve-growth stimulants.
(E) Deactivating the substances inhibiting nerve growth for an extended period would require a steady supply of antibodies

Need explanation
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 424
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:15 pm
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 12 times

Re: CR-Damaged Nerves

by piyush_nitt » Sat Mar 21, 2009 11:24 pm
nitya34 wrote:Damaged nerves in the spinal cord do not regenerate themselves naturally, nor even under the spur of nerve-growth stimulants. The reason, recently discovered, is the presence of nerve-growth inhibitors in the spinal cord. Antibodies that deactivate those inhibitors have now been developed. Clearly, then, nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in the foreseeable future.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most serious doubt on the accuracy of the prediction above?

(A) Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth.
(B) Certain nerve-growth stimulants have similar chemical structures to those of the antibodies against nerve-growth inhibitors.
(C) Nerves in the brain are similar to nerves in the spinal cord in their inability to regenerate themselves naturally.
(D) Researchers have been able to stimulate the growth of nerves not located in the spinal cord by using only nerve-growth stimulants.
(E) Deactivating the substances inhibiting nerve growth for an extended period would require a steady supply of antibodies

Need explanation
IMO A

Conclusion: nerve repair will be a standard medical procedure in near future and it will be possible due to the discovery of Antibodies that deactivate inhibitors in spinal cord.

Basically , we need to weaken the conclusion.

So what if , substance that responsible for the inhibition of growth of nerves actually performs more critical tasks/main functions in body and deactivation of the substances could lead to other disease/damages to body.

Hence it weakens the conclusion.

OA pls ?

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 7:02 am
Location: Azerbaijan/Baku
Thanked: 2 times

by S0laris » Sun Mar 22, 2009 6:27 am
OMO A - bc it says that drug-preventor prevents all nerves growth - means that desirable nerves growth would be prevented also.
we are the champions !

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 247
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2008 1:39 am
Thanked: 2 times
GMAT Score:660

by orel » Sun Mar 22, 2009 1:47 pm
conclusion does not say anything about prevention. It says that damaged nerve cells will be regenerated.

How about B? Nerve-growth stimulants and new antibodies have similar chemical structures. Since nerve-growth stimulants didn't help in regeneration, neither will new antibodies...

OA?

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 53
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2009 7:58 pm
Location: india
Thanked: 2 times
GMAT Score:700

by moorthy76 » Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:48 pm
IMO A..... but it can be B ...

OA?
Best Regards,
Surya

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 7:02 am
Location: Azerbaijan/Baku
Thanked: 2 times

by S0laris » Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:18 pm
Feruza Matyakubova wrote:conclusion does not say anything about prevention. It says that damaged nerve cells will be regenerated.

How about B? Nerve-growth stimulants and new antibodies have similar chemical structures. Since nerve-growth stimulants didn't help in regeneration, neither will new antibodies...

OA?
similar chemical structure doesn't mean same effect in application
and it's given by stimulus that antibodies can restrict inhibitors' activities - vice versa isn't possible - this answer contradicts the premise
we are the champions !

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 131
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 7:02 am
Location: Azerbaijan/Baku
Thanked: 2 times

by S0laris » Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:24 pm
we are the champions !

Legendary Member
Posts: 594
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 11:51 pm
Thanked: 12 times

by nervesofsteel » Mon Mar 23, 2009 10:12 pm
(A) Prevention of the regeneration of damaged nerves is merely a by-product of the main function in the human body of the substances inhibiting nerve growth.

If we assume that the "substances inhibiting nerve growth." have certain other main functions ... it doesn't say that the main function will be harmful to body.... So these can be implied as "a standard medical procedure"

(B) Certain nerve-growth stimulants have similar chemical structures to those of the antibodies against nerve-growth inhibitors. <- correct IMO

But use of certain doesn't imply that these are the same stimulants used in experiment...

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 179
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:23 pm
Thanked: 11 times
GMAT Score:590

by nitya34 » Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:22 am
yes OA-A
sorry for the dalay :oops:

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 4:32 am

by ashley.com » Sun May 15, 2016 2:40 am
I would go for A as well