BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

CR-passive smoking

Expert replies
by nitya34 » Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:20 pm
Virtually all health experts agree that second-hand smoke poses a serious health risk. After the publication of yet another research paper explicating the link between exposure to second-hand smoke and a shorter life span, some members of the State House of Representatives proposed a ban on smoking in most public places in an attempt to promote quality of life and length of lifespan.

Which of the following, if true, provides the most support for the actions of the State Representatives?

A) The amount of damaging chemicals and fumes released into the air by cigarette smoke is far less than the amount released from automobiles, especially from older models.
B) Banning smoking in most public places will not considerably reduce the percent of the population in the state in question that smokes.
C) The state whose legislators are proposing the tough smoking legislation has a relatively high percent of its population that smoke.
D) Another state that enacted a similar law a decade ago saw a statistically significant drop in lung-cancer rates among non-smokers.
E) A nearby state up-wind has the highest number of smokers in the country.

OA is.....[spoiler]...D...but is it not OOS(out of scope).[/spoiler]..........
Many of the great achievements of the world were accomplished by tired and discouraged men who kept on working.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by italian7745 » Sat Jul 25, 2009 12:20 am
OA shall be D only...coz in questions such as strengthen , weaken and assumption...it is possible that new information can be presented in the Answer choices which were never mentioned in the passage.....you just have to understand whether it fits in or not...all said.., this does not mean that it is impossible that no answer choice can be out of scope....

Now justfication for Why D - As per the question - " Which of the following , if true , provides most support for the actions of the state representatives" -

The state representatives proposing a ban on smoking in most public places in an attempt to promote quality of life and length of lifespan ....but whose quality of life and length of lifespan...this discussion is about second hand smokers...

A)The amount of damaging chemicals and fumes released into the air by cigarette smoke is far less than the amount released from automobiles, especially from older models - This is a comparison between damaging chemicals released by cigarettes and old automobiles...it has no effect on action of state represenatatives

B) Banning smoking in most public places will not considerably reduce the percent of the population in the state in question that smokes.- the banning is being done for second hand smokers and people who already smoke here have nothing to do with the action of state representatives...

C) The state whose legislators are proposing the tough smoking legislation has a relatively high percent of its population that smoke. - again same explanation

D) Another state that enacted a similar law a decade ago saw a statistically significant drop in lung-cancer rates among non-smokers. - this supports the action of state representatives as such a law has been enacted somewhere else and it led to a significant drop in lung cancer rates among non smokers ... so non smokers got benefitted by such a law...so its possible that ban on smoking in most public places in this particular state will promote quality of life and length of life span of non smokers...

E) A nearby state up-wind has the highest number of smokers in the country - Irrelevant...
Join the discussion

by raghavsarathy » Sat Jul 25, 2009 8:51 am
IMO - C

The ban would have minimal effect if the state in which the ban is proposed has very few smokers.

C states that the state has a large number of smokers. Hence if the ban is imposed then it would reduce the effect of smoke on non-smokers.

I don't understans how the OA is D !

Help !
Join the discussion

by pandeyvineet24 » Sat Jul 25, 2009 12:03 pm
I chose D,

I was tempted by A,C and D. But i think the thing here is that the conclusion "Ban to smoke in public places --> longer life + healthy life"

A assumes too much.

in C, i think the author says, even if 90% of ppl in the state smoke, its ok, until unless they smoke in public places" if ppl don't smoke in public places they do not harm the non smokers.
Join the discussion

by crackgmat007 » Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:05 pm
I had C & D as contenders. I skipped C coz of the following reason.

Objective of the proposed legislation --> increase life span and quality of life.

We need to strengthen by picking something which confirms proposed objective will be met.

To me D is better as C just talks about % of population that smoke. With that we are not sure whether the project obj will be achieved unless we assume further that, if its high, then....we cant go this far..

D states that it is a SIMILAR law and that state has achieved what the proposed objective wants to achieve.

HTH
Join the discussion

D

by sumank8216 » Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:25 pm
D: the same plan has been successhul so there is a possibility of the plan being successful in this state too. this is not the best answer but best in the given 5 choices.

C: cannot be right as we are talking about 'no of people smoking in public places' not 'just no smokers'.
Join the discussion

by viju9162 » Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:47 am
Answer is D. C & D looks to be contenders, but C talks about smoker's population. However, the author is trying to stress about the non-smokers who are getting affected by the pollution
"Native of" is used for a individual while "Native to" is used for a large group
Join the discussion

by micheal_kr » Sun May 15, 2016 11:39 pm
I feel the answer will be E.
Join the discussion