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

Redeem

Grockit CR

Expert replies
by RumpelThickSkin » Fri Jul 09, 2010 12:31 am
The State of New Boledo currently restricts the kinds of advertisements that plastic surgeons may use to publicize their businesses. Typically, however, plastic surgeons who advertise a service have lower rates for that service than do plastic surgeons who do not advertise. Therefore, one way for the state to help lower the costs of elective medical procedures is to lift the restrictions, such as those prohibiting advertisements that discuss financing, that currently apply to plastic surgery advertising.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the author's conclusion about the costs of elective medical procedures?


A. The State of New Boledo has already eliminated some laws that prohibited certain kinds of plastic surgery advertisements.

B. Officials from New Boledo have made it clear that they will never completely deregulate plastic surgery advertising.

C. Plastic surgeons who advertise are generally as skillful as plastic surgeons who do not advertise.

D. Some plastic surgeons would choose not to advertise their financing rates even if permitted to do so.

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

[spoiler]OA : after initial discussion [/spoiler]
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by apex231 » Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:32 am
E looks good -> plastic surgeons will charge the same even if they were allowed to advertise financing rates, so no impact on price.

D comes close but its applicable to only some plastic surgeons.
Join the discussion

by dream700 » Fri Jul 09, 2010 4:59 am
IMO E...

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

If majority of the plastic surgeon are not to reduce their rates, lifting of restriction is not going to help....

this question has striking resemblence with one of the OG 12 question...

No offence meant :)

"56. The fewer restrictions there are on the advertising
of legal services, the more lawyers there are who
advertise their services,..."
Join the discussion

by prepgmat09 » Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:56 am
IMO E.

E weakens the conclusion by proposing that the costs may not necessarily come down even if the restrictions on advertising are removed.
Join the discussion

by pnk » Fri Jul 09, 2010 7:47 am
RumpelThickSkin wrote:The State of New Boledo currently restricts the kinds of advertisements that plastic surgeons may use to publicize their businesses. Typically, however, plastic surgeons who advertise a service have lower rates for that service than do plastic surgeons who do not advertise. Therefore, one way for the state to help lower the costs of elective medical procedures is to lift the restrictions, such as those prohibiting advertisements that discuss financing, that currently apply to plastic surgery advertising.

D. Some plastic surgeons would choose not to advertise their financing rates even if permitted to do so.

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

[/spoiler]
Conclusion: Removing fee related restriction on advertisement will reduce medical costs
Evidence: (1) Restriction on fee related advertisement by Plastic Surgeons (2) Plastic surgeons who advertise charge lower fee than who does not advertise

Assumtion: Removing fee related restriction will lead to - surgeons start putting fee in their advertisement. Additionally they will lower their fee than what charge now.

E - if surgeons who presently advertise continue keeping the same fee thn overall medical cost will remain at the same level - weakens. This choice cud strengthen if we show that more people start visiting surgeons who advertise bcoz of lower fee...but neither this choice nor argument says anything abt tht.

D - Some plastic surgeons continue not to advertise ..It has not impact on argument conclusion bcoz we are not sure whether these 'some' are the well known surgeons or not. If they are well known, thn people may go to him even if he charges heavily - weakening. But if they are 'not so well-known', people may not go to him...No impact on conclusion. More then these argument is focussed on 'surgeons' who advertise...not on 'who does not advertise'...so we can fairly keep this option as out of scope.
Join the discussion

by outreach » Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:04 am
Conclusion : one way for the state to help lower the costs of elective medical procedures is to lift the restrictions

E says that contradicts the conclusion
-------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
General blog
https://amarnaik.wordpress.com
MBA blog
https://amarrnaik.blocked/
Join the discussion

by diebeatsthegmat » Fri Jul 09, 2010 10:44 am
RumpelThickSkin wrote:The State of New Boledo currently restricts the kinds of advertisements that plastic surgeons may use to publicize their businesses. Typically, however, plastic surgeons who advertise a service have lower rates for that service than do plastic surgeons who do not advertise. Therefore, one way for the state to help lower the costs of elective medical procedures is to lift the restrictions, such as those prohibiting advertisements that discuss financing, that currently apply to plastic surgery advertising.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the author's conclusion about the costs of elective medical procedures?


A. The State of New Boledo has already eliminated some laws that prohibited certain kinds of plastic surgery advertisements.

B. Officials from New Boledo have made it clear that they will never completely deregulate plastic surgery advertising.

C. Plastic surgeons who advertise are generally as skillful as plastic surgeons who do not advertise.

D. Some plastic surgeons would choose not to advertise their financing rates even if permitted to do so.

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

[spoiler]OA : after initial discussion [/spoiler]
E looks good
Join the discussion

by grockit_andrea » Sat Jul 24, 2010 8:28 am
dream700 wrote:IMO E...

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

If majority of the plastic surgeon are not to reduce their rates, lifting of restriction is not going to help....

this question has striking resemblence with one of the OG 12 question...

No offence meant :)

"56. The fewer restrictions there are on the advertising
of legal services, the more lawyers there are who
advertise their services,..."
No offense taken at all! Grockit questions are specifically designed to test issues as close to those on the actual GMAT as possible, so if this reminds you of a real GMAT question, then our content writer did his or her job correctly. :) This question is dissimilar to the one you've cited in subject matter and phrasing, which ensures that the question is an original piece of work, and does not infringe on any GMAC copyrights. However, the similarities to actual GMAT questions' academic content mean that students using Grockit questions are developing the kinds of skills that the GMAC wants you to have.
Andrea A.
Grockit Tutor
https://www.grockit.com
Join the discussion

by abhigang » Thu Aug 12, 2010 5:57 am
Bringing an old post to life ...

Can anybody please post the OA?

IMO D as it states that few may choose NOT to advertise even after the restrictions are lifted. From the premise, we know those who do not advertise charge more. Hence, the cost of elective procedures will not be lowered.

I was thingking about E also..but taking a close look actually revealed that it is talking about surgeons who are CURRENTLY advertising. Hence it has no effect on the argument.
Join the discussion

by arora007 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:02 am
RumpelThickSkin wrote:The State of New Boledo currently restricts the kinds of advertisements that plastic surgeons may use to publicize their businesses. Typically, however, plastic surgeons who advertise a service have lower rates for that service than do plastic surgeons who do not advertise. Therefore, one way for the state to help lower the costs of elective medical procedures is to lift the restrictions, such as those prohibiting advertisements that discuss financing, that currently apply to plastic surgery advertising.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the author's conclusion about the costs of elective medical procedures?


A. The State of New Boledo has already eliminated some laws that prohibited certain kinds of plastic surgery advertisements.

B. Officials from New Boledo have made it clear that they will never completely deregulate plastic surgery advertising.

C. Plastic surgeons who advertise are generally as skillful as plastic surgeons who do not advertise.

D. Some plastic surgeons would choose not to advertise their financing rates even if permitted to do so.

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

[spoiler]OA : after initial discussion [/spoiler]
I have fallen into traps earlier... so saw thru this whole problem which was so so OG like....
E seems quite obvious...
https://www.skiponemeal.org/
https://twitter.com/skiponemeal
Few things are impossible to diligence & skill.Great works are performed not by strength,but by perseverance

pm me if you find junk/spam/abusive language, Lets keep our community clean!!
Join the discussion

by arora007 » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:05 am
abhigang wrote:Bringing an old post to life ...

Can anybody please post the OA?

IMO D as it states that few may choose NOT to advertise even after the restrictions are lifted. From the premise, we know those who do not advertise charge more. Hence, the cost of elective procedures will not be lowered.

I was thingking about E also..but taking a close look actually revealed that it is talking about surgeons who are CURRENTLY advertising. Hence it has no effect on the argument.
try and negate E, and see how the costing/pricing falls apart...

Cost is the thing which is mentioned in the question stem which needs to be targetted...rite?
https://www.skiponemeal.org/
https://twitter.com/skiponemeal
Few things are impossible to diligence & skill.Great works are performed not by strength,but by perseverance

pm me if you find junk/spam/abusive language, Lets keep our community clean!!
Join the discussion

by debmalya_dutta » Thu Aug 12, 2010 1:40 pm
My pick is E

author's conclusion - remove restrictions and the prices will fall
E shows that the prices are not really dependant on restrictions i.e in this case advertising restriction. They remained the same before and after
RumpelThickSkin wrote:The State of New Boledo currently restricts the kinds of advertisements that plastic surgeons may use to publicize their businesses. Typically, however, plastic surgeons who advertise a service have lower rates for that service than do plastic surgeons who do not advertise. Therefore, one way for the state to help lower the costs of elective medical procedures is to lift the restrictions, such as those prohibiting advertisements that discuss financing, that currently apply to plastic surgery advertising.

Which of the following, if true, casts the most doubt on the author's conclusion about the costs of elective medical procedures?


A. The State of New Boledo has already eliminated some laws that prohibited certain kinds of plastic surgery advertisements. -

B. Officials from New Boledo have made it clear that they will never completely deregulate plastic surgery advertising.

C. Plastic surgeons who advertise are generally as skillful as plastic surgeons who do not advertise.

D. Some plastic surgeons would choose not to advertise their financing rates even if permitted to do so.

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

[spoiler]OA : after initial discussion [/spoiler]
@Deb
Join the discussion

by abhigang » Thu Aug 12, 2010 10:56 pm
Arora, thanks for clarifying.
Actually I misunderstood the option E.
Join the discussion

by adi_800 » Fri Aug 13, 2010 10:17 am
grockit_andrea wrote:
dream700 wrote:IMO E...

E. The majority of plastic surgeons who advertise their services have the same prices before advertising as they do after advertising.

If majority of the plastic surgeon are not to reduce their rates, lifting of restriction is not going to help....

this question has striking resemblence with one of the OG 12 question...

No offence meant :)

"56. The fewer restrictions there are on the advertising
of legal services, the more lawyers there are who
advertise their services,..."
No offense taken at all! Grockit questions are specifically designed to test issues as close to those on the actual GMAT as possible, so if this reminds you of a real GMAT question, then our content writer did his or her job correctly. :) This question is dissimilar to the one you've cited in subject matter and phrasing, which ensures that the question is an original piece of work, and does not infringe on any GMAC copyrights. However, the similarities to actual GMAT questions' academic content mean that students using Grockit questions are developing the kinds of skills that the GMAC wants you to have.

Sorry to say..but i dont think this is what many people/market/customers want...
changing the subject n verb of d argument does not change d reasoning underlying d argument...
n once u know d reasoning...der is no point in solving d problem!!

Same applies to SC questions...
No offense meant..
Join the discussion