Intelligent CR!!!

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 934
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:16 am
Location: AAMCHI MUMBAI LOCAL
Thanked: 63 times
Followed by:14 members

Intelligent CR!!!

by [email protected] » Sat Feb 04, 2012 2:39 am
Historically, the drug industry promoted its products to physicians by educating them in their offices or at industry conferences. In the last 10 years, it has become much more commonplace for drug companies to advertise prescription drugs directly to consumers, via television advertising and other media. Some public health advocates have become concerned that patients, encouraged by advertising, may pursue the use of prescription drugs that may be inappropriate for the individual patient or situation. However, since physicians must prescribe these medications, there is no reason for such concern.

Which of the following pieces of information would be most
helpful in addressing the concern articulated by the public health advocates?

A] Certain over-the-counter medications are as effective for many common medical conditions as more powerful nonprescription medications.

B] Prescription medication television advertisements directed at the general public only appear on certain programs and are not seen by many potential consumers.

C] Physicians are also subject to prescription drug advertisements that are directed toward consumers.

D] Physicians are not susceptible to pressure from patients in determining appropriate courses of treatment, including drug prescriptions.

E] Prescription medicines have been proven to be safe and effective treatments for many patient conditions.


Solve this question properly before going for the answer choice. Very imp sum, so go solve it propperly



OA is D.
IT IS TIME TO BEAT THE GMAT

LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!

Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:05 am
[email protected] wrote:Historically, the drug industry promoted its products to physicians by educating them in their offices or at industry conferences. In the last 10 years, it has become much more commonplace for drug companies to advertise prescription drugs directly to consumers, via television advertising and other media. Some public health advocates have become concerned that patients, encouraged by advertising, may pursue the use of prescription drugs that may be inappropriate for the individual patient or situation. However, since physicians must prescribe these medications, there is no reason for such concern.

Which of the following pieces of information would be most
helpful in addressing the concern articulated by the public health advocates?

A] Certain over-the-counter medications are as effective for many common medical conditions as more powerful nonprescription medications.

B] Prescription medication television advertisements directed at the general public only appear on certain programs and are not seen by many potential consumers.

C] Physicians are also subject to prescription drug advertisements that are directed toward consumers.

D] Physicians are not susceptible to pressure from patients in determining appropriate courses of treatment, including drug prescriptions.

E] Prescription medicines have been proven to be safe and effective treatments for many patient conditions.


Solve this question properly before going for the answer choice. Very imp sum, so go solve it propperly



OA is D.
I posted an explanation for a similar CR here:

https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-prep-2-t61776.html
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3

Legendary Member
Posts: 1084
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 2:33 pm
Thanked: 158 times
Followed by:21 members

by pemdas » Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:32 am
this question is "interesting" and to be honest I spent more time to understand it's stem (the question stem, than to find answer)

if you look at this question with GMAT eyes, then you consider it as an assumption question initially with either strengthen or weaken needs for the argument. I looked at this question with my current LSAT prep eyes (I'm not taking one, just prepping for the argument part).

What I saw was the question with counter-premise which makes concession on the side of an author to his final conclusion -"There is no reason for concern expressed" preceded with the ultimate premise - "Since physicians must prescribe the medications"

An author makes concession here, of course nobody wants to argue with himself, but the author intentionally weakens his argument by introducing impact of advertising on patients so that his final conclusion is unbeatable then.

By doing as I described above, the author and GMAT writer want us to do two things:
1) GMAT writers use counter-premises and concessions to bait us with wrong answer choices. Answer choices that refer to the counter-premises and concessions are very tempting because they refer directly to the argument and make us scrutinize its validity.
2) Spend additional time and fail the test, i.e. not to beat GMAT

- therefore, if you want to beat GMAT be careful.

we can immediately dissect answer choice B) as it relates to the concessions and counter-premises discussed, and it's wrong - don't even look at it, as it's a trap.

To be more powerful in answering this question we have to make the point of the argument based on its literal sayings, which is - Drugs are advertised on Media and potential users/patients may be impacted with such advertisements. The only reason this advertising impact on patients must be zeroed is when doctors prescribe the drugs (themselves) or drugs accessed by patients through doctors.

choice A) absolutely irrelevant as the new info is introduced here
choice B) expunged, otherwise apply negation test and spend several seconds to see this is wrong
choice C) we need to know how patients are subject to advertising of drugs, not doctors. If doctors are subject/impacted with advertising of drugs, then this is another claim and must be different argument made by GMAT, new argument, not this one
D) Doctors cannot be pressurized to subscribe drugs for the patients. This is the right choice as it invokes access of patients to drugs and makes it only possible through doctors.
E) again, absolutely irrelevant as it introduces new information.

Analyzing this question, I can state this is not GMAT question and of course not LSAT question as it contains almost not any "good wrong choice". All the wrong answers are evident and the true GMAT or LSAT question could contain at least two (and yes usually they offer two answer choices) options for us to decide. I would put something here in answers A-E, but I did not make it.

So answer is D and this is very easy question not requiring thorough analysis.

@Amit, try working through questions made by official GMAT creators. Otherwise you learn logic but do not have chance to apply and therefore waste time.
Success doesn't come overnight!