blood bank

Expert replies

annrae: Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts; Posts: 8; Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:34 pm

by annrae » Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:07 pm

Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.
19. The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.
(B) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, develop the disease themselves at any point.
(C) The estimate of the number of donors who would be disqualified by tests for NANB hepatitis is an underestimate.
(D) The incidence of NANB hepatitis is lower among the potential blood donors than it is in the population at large.
(E) The donors who will still supply NANB-contaminated blood will donate blood at the average frequency for all donors.

OA A...why not E?

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Mon Nov 05, 2007 5:07 pm

camitava: Legendary Member; Posts: 645; Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:37 amFollowed by: 5 members; Location: India; Thanked: 34 times

by camitava » Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:51 am

Hey Guest, this is from Kaplan 800! But I would like to say something here. annrae, now E is saying that donors with NANB contaminated will donate blood with the frequency that other donors do. Right? If it is so, then obviously that new test will not be introduced. Rather about this, the poeple who introduce this new test to check NANB in blood, should not have any idea before-hand. You can say this is a kind of outcome/ statistics or something like that.
Now if the people who introduced the new test, presume that the donors with NANB contaminated blood will not have any other severe infections to spread out. And then only they can introduce the test in the market or so. So A and I am still with it.
Am I clear to explain?

Correct me If I am wrong

Regards,

Amitava

vishubn: Legendary Member; Posts: 574; Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 8:48 am; Location: Bangalore; Thanked: 28 times

by vishubn » Thu Dec 11, 2008 6:30 pm

Still not convinced

!!

Any more takes one this ??

vishu

KILL !! DIE !! or BEAT my FEAR !!! de@D END!!

pbanavara: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 279; Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:26 am; Location: Portland, OR; Thanked: 6 times

by pbanavara » Thu Dec 11, 2008 9:22 pm

I went with C ... just did the percentage calculations and the 5% seemed unreal ..

Kaplan 800 ??? I finished that book sometime last week and don't remember seeing this question. Oh well I have the old edition I guess.

- pradeep

4meonly: Legendary Member; Posts: 891; Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 4:21 amFollowed by: 1 member; Thanked: 27 times; GMAT Score:660(

by 4meonly » Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:43 am

Happy to say that I marked A

Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument assumes that only screening for NANB hepatitis can disqualify NANB-contaminated blood. If there were any other test that can disqualify prospective donors, than they will NOT miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis.

(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

A directly states this

niraj_a: Legendary Member; Posts: 708; Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 4:59 amFollowed by: 1 member; Location: USA; Thanked: 13 times

by niraj_a » Fri Dec 12, 2008 6:39 am

isn't A using outside info here? the stem doesn't mention / care about other infections, and outside info is not allowed on assumption questions.

duke: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 95; Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 4:03 pm

by duke » Fri Dec 12, 2008 9:07 am

4meonly wrote:Happy to say that I marked A

Blood banks will shortly start to screen all donors for NANB hepatitis. Although the new screening tests are estimated to disqualify up to 5 percent of all prospective blood donors, they will still miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis. Therefore, about 10 percent of actual donors will still supply NANB-contaminated blood.

The argument assumes that only screening for NANB hepatitis can disqualify NANB-contaminated blood. If there were any other test that can disqualify prospective donors, than they will NOT miss two-thirds of donors carrying NANB hepatitis.

(A) Donors carrying NANB hepatitis do not, in a large percentage of cases, carry other infections for which reliable screening tests are routinely performed.

A directly states this

I agree on this point. Thanks. A should be the one.

Looking for 780~

brb588: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 61; Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:35 pmFollowed by: 1 member; Thanked: 6 times

by brb588 » Sat Dec 13, 2008 3:20 pm

niraj_a wrote:isn't A using outside info here? the stem doesn't mention / care about other infections, and outside info is not allowed on assumption questions.

The stimulus states that blood will now be screened for something new, a special type of Hepatitis; it doesn't say that blood was never screened for anything before Hepatitis came along. This is not something foreign we are bringing in--we all know universally that blood banks screen their blood for infections. While you can't use what you know from the outside, there are certain concepts that all people know about. This is equivalent to "most grass is green" unless I am told otherwise.

A is saying that you can assume that people with Hepatitis don't have anything else that may show up on other types of screen.

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

by ashley.com » Fri May 13, 2016 2:23 am

Answer A seems to be logical one out of other answer choices

GMAT Course Reviews

563 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (563 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review