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.

In a certain rural area, people normally dispose of

Expert replies
by BTGmoderatorDC » Thu Oct 31, 2019 5:59 pm
In a certain rural area, people normally dispose of household garbage by burning it. Burning household garbage releases toxic chemicals known as dioxins. New conservation regulations will require a major reduction in packaging-specifically, paper and cardboard packaging-for products sold in the area. Since such packaging materials contain dioxins, one result of the implementation of the new regulations will surely be a reduction in dioxin pollution in the area.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

A. Garbage containing large quantities of paper and cardboard can easily burn hot enough for some portion of the dioxins that it contains to be destroyed.
B. Packaging materials typically make up only a small proportion of the weight of household garbage, but a relatively large proportion of its volume.
C. Per-capita sales of products sold in paper and cardboard packaging are lower in rural areas than in urban areas.
D. The new conservation regulations were motivated by a need to cut down on the consumption of paper products in order to bring the harvesting of timber into a healthier balance with its regrowth.
E. It is not known whether the dioxins released by the burning of household garbage have been the cause of any serious health problems.

OA A

Source: Official Guide
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by deloitte247 » Sat Nov 16, 2019 1:34 pm
Premise: In a certain rural area, people normally dispose of household garbage by burning it, and thus, this burning releases toxic chemicals known as dioxins.
Conclusion: Since the packaging materials for products sold in the area, specifically paper and cardboard packaging contain dioxin, one result of the implementation of the new regulations will be a reduction in dioxin pollution in the area.

Option A - Correct:
This option weakens the argument the most because burning household garbage releases dioxins and one of the results of reducing packaging materials (paper and cardboard packaging) will lead to the reduction of dioxin pollution as this is a way dioxin pollution can be subdued.

Option B - Incorrect:
Neither do we know about the weight of packaging materials of household garbage nor the proportion of its volume. This claim is, therefore, baseless.

Option C - Incorrect:
No information was given about the per-capital sales of products sold in paper and cardboard packaging. Hence, we can't know if the per-capital sales are lower in rural areas than in urban areas.

Option D - Incorrect:
The new conservation regulations require a major reduction in packaging, specifically paper and cardboard packaging for products sold in the area, and not the cut down on consumption of paper products.

Option E - Incorrect:
This option strengthens the argument rather than weakens it because no health problems caused by dioxins was stated in the passage.
Join the discussion