-
beat_gmat_09
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 5:06 am
- Location: India
- Thanked: 50 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:580
According to a recent study, a diet that is free of meat and diary products greatly reduces the risk of suffering a hear attack. The study cites the fact that only 10% of those who consume such a diet suffer a heart attack at some point in their lives.
Which if the following would most seriously weaken the argument above ?
A) Diets free of meat and diary are low in calcium, which can lead to bone density decreases.
B) Those who consume only diary but not meat are twice as likely to suffer a heart attack as those who consume neither
meat nor diary.
C) Some people who consume neither diary nor meat suffer 2 or more heart attacks over the course of a lifetime.
D) Meat and diary products are high in low-density cholesterol,which is known to harden arteries and cause other heart
problems.
E) 7% of those who consume dairy and meat regularly suffer heart attacks over the course of their lifetime.
Source : Kaplan.
To weaken the argument we have to give a evidence which shows that consuming meat and diary products do not reduce the risk of heart attack (less number of people are affected). Whenever arguments involve percentages, they have to be dealt with possibilities of the number of people surveyed/studied. Here in this case(According to E) if the number of people who consume meat and diary products are less in number as compared to the assumed figure (out of which 10% suffer from heart attack) lets say 100 people do not consume meat and diary;therefore 10 people suffer from heart attack, now lets assume only 10 people consume meat and diary then as per E, 7 people suffer from heart attack, the argument is weakened here, if we now expand the the number of people who consume meat and diary products to 1000, then we have 70 cases of heart attack, the argument gets strengthened now, I considered this possibility while considering option E.
While comparing two sides (a survey to be more specific) do we have to take into account the same number (Number picked for evaluating the survey) ? That is consider the same number of people (say 100) for both groups - people who consume diary and meat and people who do not consume diary and meat.
I face problems dealing with survey arguments (rather percent arguments). Please suggest valuable thoughts on the above problem and also how to deal with percent arguments.
Thanks.
Which if the following would most seriously weaken the argument above ?
A) Diets free of meat and diary are low in calcium, which can lead to bone density decreases.
B) Those who consume only diary but not meat are twice as likely to suffer a heart attack as those who consume neither
meat nor diary.
C) Some people who consume neither diary nor meat suffer 2 or more heart attacks over the course of a lifetime.
D) Meat and diary products are high in low-density cholesterol,which is known to harden arteries and cause other heart
problems.
E) 7% of those who consume dairy and meat regularly suffer heart attacks over the course of their lifetime.
Source : Kaplan.
To weaken the argument we have to give a evidence which shows that consuming meat and diary products do not reduce the risk of heart attack (less number of people are affected). Whenever arguments involve percentages, they have to be dealt with possibilities of the number of people surveyed/studied. Here in this case(According to E) if the number of people who consume meat and diary products are less in number as compared to the assumed figure (out of which 10% suffer from heart attack) lets say 100 people do not consume meat and diary;therefore 10 people suffer from heart attack, now lets assume only 10 people consume meat and diary then as per E, 7 people suffer from heart attack, the argument is weakened here, if we now expand the the number of people who consume meat and diary products to 1000, then we have 70 cases of heart attack, the argument gets strengthened now, I considered this possibility while considering option E.
While comparing two sides (a survey to be more specific) do we have to take into account the same number (Number picked for evaluating the survey) ? That is consider the same number of people (say 100) for both groups - people who consume diary and meat and people who do not consume diary and meat.
I face problems dealing with survey arguments (rather percent arguments). Please suggest valuable thoughts on the above problem and also how to deal with percent arguments.
Thanks.
