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.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
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 Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget 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.

health-inspection procedures

Expert replies
by outreach » Tue Jul 13, 2010 10:41 am
Despite the fact that the health-inspection procedures for catering establishment are more stringent than those for ordinary restaurants, more of the cases of food poisoning reported to the city health department were brought on by banquets served by catering services than were brought on my restaurant meals.

Which of the following, if true, helps explain the apparent paradox in the statement above?

a. A significantly larger number of people eat in restaurants than attend catered banquets in any given time period.
b. Catering establishments know how many people they expect to serve, and therefore are less likely than restaurants to have, and serve, leftover food, a major source of food poisoning.
c. Many restaurants provide catering services for banquets in addition to serving individual meals.
d. The number of reported food-poisioning cases at catered baquets is unrelated to whether the meal is served on the catererт�Щs or the clientт�Щs premises.
e. People are unlikely to make a connection between a meal they have eaten and a subsequent illness unless the illness strikes a group who are in communication with one another.
-------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
General blog
https://amarnaik.wordpress.com
MBA blog
https://amarrnaik.blocked/
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by barcebal » Tue Jul 13, 2010 12:04 pm
Answer E.

A. If more people eat in restaurants, then you'd think more restaurant cases would be reported.
B. This would explain why catering would have less food poisoning than restaurants, but it's more; doesn't explain the paradox.
C. Irrelevant.
D. Doesn't draw a connect between the paradox between restaurant and banquet.
E. This makes the most sense. At a banquet, if a bunch of people get sick, they probably new each other and can pinpoint that the catering made them sick. Restaurant diners are all strangers so if person A gets sick they can't talk to person B who may have also gotten sick to confirm it was at the restaurant. Person A can't narrow down where they got sick which would explain why the restaurant food poisoning never was reported.
Join the discussion

by reply2spg » Tue Jul 13, 2010 7:45 pm
E is correct IMO
outreach wrote:Despite the fact that the health-inspection procedures for catering establishment are more stringent than those for ordinary restaurants, more of the cases of food poisoning reported to the city health department were brought on by banquets served by catering services than were brought on my restaurant meals.

Which of the following, if true, helps explain the apparent paradox in the statement above?

a. A significantly larger number of people eat in restaurants than attend catered banquets in any given time period.
b. Catering establishments know how many people they expect to serve, and therefore are less likely than restaurants to have, and serve, leftover food, a major source of food poisoning.
c. Many restaurants provide catering services for banquets in addition to serving individual meals.
d. The number of reported food-poisioning cases at catered baquets is unrelated to whether the meal is served on the catererт�Щs or the clientт�Щs premises.
e. People are unlikely to make a connection between a meal they have eaten and a subsequent illness unless the illness strikes a group who are in communication with one another.
Sudhanshu
(have lot of things to learn from all of you)
Join the discussion

by omraan » Mon Apr 08, 2013 4:37 am
reply2spg wrote:E is correct IMO
outreach wrote:Despite the fact that the health-inspection procedures for catering establishment are more stringent than those for ordinary restaurants, more of the cases of food poisoning reported to the city health department were brought on by banquets served by catering services than were brought on my restaurant meals.

Which of the following, if true, helps explain the apparent paradox in the statement above?

a. A significantly larger number of people eat in restaurants than attend catered banquets in any given time period.
b. Catering establishments know how many people they expect to serve, and therefore are less likely than restaurants to have, and serve, leftover food, a major source of food poisoning.
c. Many restaurants provide catering services for banquets in addition to serving individual meals.
d. The number of reported food-poisioning cases at catered baquets is unrelated to whether the meal is served on the catererт�Щs or the clientт�Щs premises.
e. People are unlikely to make a connection between a meal they have eaten and a subsequent illness unless the illness strikes a group who are in communication with one another.
hello there,
is there any OE for that?
Is it really an official GMAT question? if yes, what year?
I know E is correct, but why C is not? dont tell me that otherwise the number of food poisoning for restaurants would be great too.
cuz what if the food restaurants serve for their indoor customers and the food they serve in banquets differ in their quality?
then the food poisoning cases are in direct relation with the restaurants, while caterings may be considered responsible for them (since it happened in a banquet).
how can we be sure that C is incorrect plz????
Join the discussion