(A) Severity is not discussed here so OOS
(B) Treatment is not in question here...OOS
(C) how many of the 2,500 people studied suffered a second heart attack ==> Correct. WIl go with this answer
(D) the earliest age is not the conclusion here hence IMO OOS
(E) OOS

Please post the OA soon. IMo E.

You don't need to look at the options actually. Information has been given about the people who "survived" the heart attack. The conclusion generalizes about everyone. What's missing? Information about people who did not survive!

(A) the relative severity of heart attacks suffered by smokers and nonsmokers
How does the severity matter year at which heart attack occurred? Wrong!
(B) the nature of the different medical treatments that smokers and nonsmokers received after they had survived their first heart attack
Does not matter. Wrong!
(C) how many of the 2,500 people studied suffered a second heart attack
Who cares? The statement is talking about the average age of first heart attack. Out of Scope.
(D) the earliest age at which a person who smoked two packs a day had his or her first heart attack
Wrong set of people to consider the information about. We are not talking about the pack and number of cigarettes here! No.
(E) data on people who did not survive a first heart attack
Yes. Right.

D looks like the answer
Evidence is given based on Median numbers and Conclusion is drawn for general (all) people

(A) the relative severity of heart attacks suffered by smokers and nonsmokers
oos
(B) the nature of the different medical treatments that smokers and nonsmokers received after they had survived their first heart attack
oos
(C) how many of the 2,500 people studied suffered a second heart attack
oos
(D) the earliest age at which a person who smoked two packs a day had his or her first heart attack
correct
(E) data on people who did not survive a first heart attack
oos

D is the answer..

Hint over here is the author has considered median

A) is out of scope . We are not concerned with relative severity of heart attacks

B) is out of scope . We wre not concerned with the nature of the different medical treatments

C) how many of the 2,500 people studied suffered a second heart attack is also out of scope

D)the earliest age at which a person who smoked two packs a day had his or her first heart attack
Correct

E) data on people who did not survive a first heart attack is also out of scope . We are never concerned whether they survive the first heart attack or not .

I agree with enniguy, the evidence is presented only for people who survived, but conclusion is drawn for all the people, so the only valid answer is E.

who did not smoke had theirfirst heart attack at a median age of 62
people who smoked two packs of cigarettes a day had their first heart attack at a median age of 51

From the above I feel D

gauravgundal wrote:Of 2,500 people who survived a first heart attack, those who did not smoke had their first heart attack at a median age of 62. However, of those 2,500, people who smoked two packs of cigarettes a day had their first heart attack at a median age of 51. On the basis of this information, it can be concluded that nonsmokers tend to have a first heart attack eleven years later than do people who smoke two packs of cigarettes a day.

The conclusion is incorrectly drawn from the information given because this information does not include
(A) the relative severity of heart attacks suffered by smokers and nonsmokers
(B) the nature of the different medical treatments that smokers and nonsmokers received after they had survived their first heart attack
(C) how many of the 2,500 people studied suffered a second heart attack
(D) the earliest age at which a person who smoked two packs a day had his or her first heart attack
(E) data on people who did not survive a first heart attack


Explain with Reason.

IMO , the best choice is E. The passage provides you some statistical information which is flawed in some way, and you're supposed to find out what that flaw is. The passage gives you the median age of 2500 people who survived their first heart attack (divided between smokers and nonsmokers). It concludes (in bold) that as a whole, those who didn't smoke got their heart attacks later in life.

But what about the people who didn't survive their first heart attack (i.e. they died during their first attack). What if there were 20,000 people who died from their first heart attack? Of these, the median age for smokers could have been 70, and the median age for nonsmokers could have been 40 (exaggerating on purpose).

Without knowing the data from the people who didn't survive their first heart attack, it would be imprudent to make a general claim as the passage makes. Therefore I'd pick E as my answer

OA E