Critical Reasoning

A survey was recently conducted among ferry passengers on the North Sea. Among
the results was this: more of those who had taken anti-seasickness medication
before their trip reported symptoms of seasickness than those who had not taken
such medication. It is clear then, that despite claims by drug companies that clinical
tests show the contrary, people would be better off not taking anti-seasickness
medications.

Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?
(A) Given rough enough weather, most ferry passengers will have some symptoms
of seasickness.
(B) The clinical tests reported by the drug companies were conducted by the drug
companies' staffs.
(C) People who do not take anti-seasickness medication are just as likely to
respond to a survey on seasickness as people who do.
(D) The seasickness symptoms of the people who took anti-seasickness medication
would have been more severe had they not taken the medication.
(E) People who have spent money on anti-seasickness medication are less likely to
admit symptoms of seasickness than those who have not.
OA after discussion

Nice choice Ashblog 02!

This is an LSAT question (one of my favorites) and it translates very well to the GMAT. Let get some good discussion on this one!

The answer here is C.
My Reasoning: "It is clear then, that despite claims by drug companies that clinical tests show the contrary, people would be better off not taking anti-seasickness medications. "

So if People who do not take anti-seasickness medication are also responding to survey on seasickness Then it is effectively weakening the conclusion

The Jock wrote:The answer here is C.
My Reasoning: "It is clear then, that despite claims by drug companies that clinical tests show the contrary, people would be better off not taking anti-seasickness medications. "

So if People who do not take anti-seasickness medication are also responding to survey on seasickness Then it is effectively weakening the conclusion

That is pretty much what I had in mind, choice (c) indicates that the survey may not have been properly conducted

My pick D.

A - Weakens to a extent.
B - No effect.
C - Strengthens. This says that the survey data used was equivalent.
D - Weakens the claim that people will be better off without the medication.
E - Strengthens.

ashblog02 wrote:A survey was recently conducted among ferry passengers on the North Sea. Among
the results was this: more of those who had taken anti-seasickness medication
before their trip reported symptoms of seasickness than those who had not taken
such medication. It is clear then, that despite claims by drug companies that clinical
tests show the contrary, people would be better off not taking anti-seasickness
medications.

Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?
(A) Given rough enough weather, most ferry passengers will have some symptoms
of seasickness.
(B) The clinical tests reported by the drug companies were conducted by the drug
companies' staffs.
(C) People who do not take anti-seasickness medication are just as likely to
respond to a survey on seasickness as people who do.
(D) The seasickness symptoms of the people who took anti-seasickness medication
would have been more severe had they not taken the medication.
(E) People who have spent money on anti-seasickness medication are less likely to
admit symptoms of seasickness than those who have not.
OA after discussion

I am going for E:

My reasoning is as follows.


Premises:
Tow groups:

G 1: Took anti-seasickness medication.
G2 : Did not take anti-seasickness medication.

More people of G1 reported seasickness than people of G2.

Conclusion: The medication is not effective.

I think if we can show that the problem is not the medication, but it's something else then the conclusion would be weakened:

May be it's the sample of the survey: the groups were not equal to start with... or the survey is biased ( conducted by a competitor ....)

A- Does not weaken the conclusion. Doesn't mean that people will be better off taking medication.
B- I think this strengthens the conclusion. If the clinical tests are done by the drug companies and not by a third party, then there is a possibility that the results are biased and may be people are better off not taking medication.
C- Shows that the survey is accurate and does not weaken the conclusion.
D- Out of scope- the severity of the seasickness is not the issue here-
E- this shows that there is a problem with the population of the survey. This is the correct answer.

'D' because the medicine actually worked and the author misrepresents that fact.

ashblog02 wrote:A survey was recently conducted among ferry passengers on the North Sea. Among
the results was this: more of those who had taken anti-seasickness medication
before their trip reported symptoms of seasickness than those who had not taken
such medication. It is clear then, that despite claims by drug companies that clinical
tests show the contrary, people would be better off not taking anti-seasickness
medications.

Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the conclusion above?
(A) Given rough enough weather, most ferry passengers will have some symptoms
of seasickness.
(B) The clinical tests reported by the drug companies were conducted by the drug
companies' staffs.
(C) People who do not take anti-seasickness medication are just as likely to
respond to a survey on seasickness as people who do.
(D) The seasickness symptoms of the people who took anti-seasickness medication
would have been more severe had they not taken the medication.
(E) People who have spent money on anti-seasickness medication are less likely to
admit symptoms of seasickness than those who have not.
OA after discussion

I go for "D"


Premise: more of those who had taken anti-seasickness medication
before their trip reported symptoms of seasickness than those who had not taken
such medication

Conclusion: people would be better off not taking anti-seasickness
medications.

To weaken the conclusion, we need to prove that it is some what better to take such medicine.
A) this is a known fact from the argument that these conditions occur on the sea. --- WRONG answer
B) Irrelevant -- WRONG answer
C) it indirectly attacks the source (the survey) -- though it, some what, weakens but --- WRONG answer
D) This option says that taking such medicine HELPS people to be survived from the severe sickness, and hence " it is some what better to take such medicine" - The ANTI-conclusion-- RIGHT answer
E) it, in a way, supports the conclusion
Please lpost the OA

IMO it shd be D.

Only D suggests that medicine worked and helped people in suppressing the sea sickness and thus weaken the conclusion.

I agree it should be D

Conclusion :people would be better off not taking anti-seasickness medications.

Reasoning :more of those who had taken anti-seasickness medication before their trip reported symptoms of seasickness than those who had not taken such medication

A weakener will somehow make it more likely that anti-seasickness medications will help reduce symptoms.

A) it's a strengthener.It says " almost everybody will have symptoms of sea-sickness".Therefore,there is no point in taking medications- supports the conclusion

B) it's irrelevant.The case at hand is whether the medications help reduce symptoms related to sea-sickness and not who conducted the tests.

C) It basically rules out the possibility that disproportionate number of people who took medications reported.If that were the case,then the data and hence the conclusion drawn from that data would be false.It's like saying in the toss of a coin the probability of landing a head is same as tails (this shows that the trial was a fair one) as to heads is twice as likely to land as compared to tails( an unfair even).So this basically strengthens the argument.

D) It says that had the people,who took the medications, not taken those medications, they would have had much more severe symptoms.In other words,it says the medication helped those people.So you can't conclude that people would be better off not taking those medications.Hence,it is a weakener

E) It says in numerical terms " if 100 people took the medication and 80 people still experienced symptoms of sea sickness, only 60 people would admit that they actually experience those symptoms."In short it says that the number of people,who took those medications and who,still,experienced those symptoms,is much higher than the number actually stated,which is already high.An even bigger strengthener.Hence incorrect.

Therefore,my answer is D

IMO D

OA- d

Great answers above! The prize for really thorough and excellent explanation on this one has to go to rishab1988. You are exactly right, especially mentioning that answer choices C and E actually strengthen. This level of knowledge is what we strive for..not only why the correct one is correct but why the others are not.