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

Redeem

cr-hw-10

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

cr-hw-10

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Sat Mar 05, 2011 2:31 am
Of the 5,000 participants in a clinical trial, the 2,000 participants in the experimental group were administered a large dose of an experimental painkiller, while the 3,000 participants in the control group were administered the same dose of a placebo. Afterward, participants in the experimental group exhibited significantly compromised motor skills, while those in the control group were unaffected. The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

Which of the following, if true, would best help explain how the painkiller might produce the observed effect?

A
A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.
B
Because of the counter effects of other active ingredients in the painkiller, the detrimental effects on motor skills are rarely noticed by the consumer.
C
The compound in the painkiller is a product of the laboratory and cannot be found in nature.
D
Participants in the experiment were "blind"; that is, they did not know whether they were receiving the painkiller or the placebo.
E
An unaffiliated lab ran a chemical analysis of the painkiller and confirmed that the painkiller is free of other compounds that are known to cause detrimental effects on motor skills.

oa is A
Last edited by pradeepkaushal9518 on Mon Mar 07, 2011 6:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Sat Mar 05, 2011 2:37 am
IMO A:
CDE are clearly out. While B talks about consumer, note the argument is about the painkiller administered to controlled group.

A is indeed a correct option, as it explain an missing link between the substance in painkiller and the motor function.
pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:Of the 5,000 participants in a clinical trial, the 2,000 participants in the experimental group were administered a large dose of an experimental painkiller, while the 3,000 participants in the control group were administered the same dose of a placebo. Afterward, participants in the experimental group exhibited significantly compromised motor skills, while those in the control group were unaffected. The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

Which of the following, if true, would best help explain how the painkiller might produce the observed effect?

A
A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.
B
Because of the counter effects of other active ingredients in the painkiller, the detrimental effects on motor skills are rarely noticed by the consumer.
C
The compound in the painkiller is a product of the laboratory and cannot be found in nature.
D
Participants in the experiment were "blind"; that is, they did not know whether they were receiving the painkiller or the placebo.
E
An unaffiliated lab ran a chemical analysis of the painkiller and confirmed that the painkiller is free of other compounds that are known to cause detrimental effects on motor skills.
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Sat Mar 05, 2011 3:46 am
HI PRADEEP WHATs the source ?
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:29 pm
Thanked: 127 times
Followed by:10 members

by Night reader » Sat Mar 05, 2011 6:25 pm
IOM D
i think answer A) repeats the premise and enacts shell game - The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound ;
answer B) touches upon only painkiller and its detrimental effects - while we have to compare painkiller and placebo;
answer C) is out of scope, as we are discussing experiment within laboratory conditions;
answer D) is correct according to me, as it reveals the nature of placebo - psychological way of treating with inerts, and prompts about people in experiment being "blind" (not physically) and thus free of any inert feeling and assessing the reality - only organic changes occurred with them;
answer E) this choice doesn't leave any space for counterattacking the painkiller compound effects.

pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:Of the 5,000 participants in a clinical trial, the 2,000 participants in the experimental group were administered a large dose of an experimental painkiller, while the 3,000 participants in the control group were administered the same dose of a placebo. Afterward, participants in the experimental group exhibited significantly compromised motor skills, while those in the control group were unaffected. The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

Which of the following, if true, would best help explain how the painkiller might produce the observed effect?

A
A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.
B
Because of the counter effects of other active ingredients in the painkiller, the detrimental effects on motor skills are rarely noticed by the consumer.
C
The compound in the painkiller is a product of the laboratory and cannot be found in nature.
D
Participants in the experiment were "blind"; that is, they did not know whether they were receiving the painkiller or the placebo.
E
An unaffiliated lab ran a chemical analysis of the painkiller and confirmed that the painkiller is free of other compounds that are known to cause detrimental effects on motor skills.
My knowledge frontiers came to evolve the GMATPill's methods - the credited study means to boost the Verbal competence. I really like their videos, especially for RC, CR and SC. You do check their study methods at https://www.gmatpill.com
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 218
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2010 2:43 pm
Thanked: 5 times

by cyrwr1 » Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:39 pm
I'd say A too. WIth high level of that compound, motor skills = detrimental
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1578
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 1:49 am
Thanked: 82 times
Followed by:9 members
GMAT Score:720

by maihuna » Sun Mar 06, 2011 1:44 am
Participants were blind, bland or blondes, how does that affect the argument?
Night reader wrote:IOM D
i think answer A) repeats the premise and enacts shell game - The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound ;
answer B) touches upon only painkiller and its detrimental effects - while we have to compare painkiller and placebo;
answer C) is out of scope, as we are discussing experiment within laboratory conditions;
answer D) is correct according to me, as it reveals the nature of placebo - psychological way of treating with inerts, and prompts about people in experiment being "blind" (not physically) and thus free of any inert feeling and assessing the reality - only organic changes occurred with them;
answer E) this choice doesn't leave any space for counterattacking the painkiller compound effects.

pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:Of the 5,000 participants in a clinical trial, the 2,000 participants in the experimental group were administered a large dose of an experimental painkiller, while the 3,000 participants in the control group were administered the same dose of a placebo. Afterward, participants in the experimental group exhibited significantly compromised motor skills, while those in the control group were unaffected. The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

Which of the following, if true, would best help explain how the painkiller might produce the observed effect?

A
A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.
B
Because of the counter effects of other active ingredients in the painkiller, the detrimental effects on motor skills are rarely noticed by the consumer.
C
The compound in the painkiller is a product of the laboratory and cannot be found in nature.
D
Participants in the experiment were "blind"; that is, they did not know whether they were receiving the painkiller or the placebo.
E
An unaffiliated lab ran a chemical analysis of the painkiller and confirmed that the painkiller is free of other compounds that are known to cause detrimental effects on motor skills.
Charged up again to beat the beast :)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:36 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:15 members

by AIM GMAT » Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:00 am
Of the 5,000 participants in a clinical trial, the 2,000 participants in the experimental group were administered a large dose of an experimental painkiller, while the 3,000 participants in the control group were administered the same dose of a placebo. Afterward, participants in the experimental group exhibited significantly compromised motor skills, while those in the control group were unaffected. The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

Which of the following, if true, would best help explain how the painkiller might produce the observed effect?

A]A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.
------- It tell us the reason why the drug does not affect directly but it does indirectly.

B]Because of the counter effects of other active ingredients in the painkiller, the detrimental effects on motor skills are rarely noticed by the consumer.
------- Irrelevant

C]The compound in the painkiller is a product of the laboratory and cannot be found in nature.
------- Irrelevant

D]Participants in the experiment were "blind"; that is, they did not know whether they were receiving the painkiller or the placebo.
-------- Out of scope

E]An unaffiliated lab ran a chemical analysis of the painkiller and confirmed that the painkiller is free of other compounds that are known to cause detrimental effects on motor skills.
-------- Out of scope to discuss




IMO A
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:29 pm
Thanked: 127 times
Followed by:10 members

by Night reader » Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:15 am
thank you for explanations - in the selected part below, what did you mean by drug doesn't affect directly and affects indirectly...
AIM GMAT wrote:Of the 5,000 participants in a clinical trial, the 2,000 participants in the experimental group were administered a large dose of an experimental painkiller, while the 3,000 participants in the control group were administered the same dose of a placebo. Afterward, participants in the experimental group exhibited significantly compromised motor skills, while those in the control group were unaffected. The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

Which of the following, if true, would best help explain how the painkiller might produce the observed effect?

A]A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.
------- It tell us the reason why the drug does not affect directly but it does indirectly.

B]Because of the counter effects of other active ingredients in the painkiller, the detrimental effects on motor skills are rarely noticed by the consumer.
------- Irrelevant

C]The compound in the painkiller is a product of the laboratory and cannot be found in nature.
------- Irrelevant

D]Participants in the experiment were "blind"; that is, they did not know whether they were receiving the painkiller or the placebo.
-------- Out of scope

E]An unaffiliated lab ran a chemical analysis of the painkiller and confirmed that the painkiller is free of other compounds that are known to cause detrimental effects on motor skills.
-------- Out of scope to discuss




IMO A
My knowledge frontiers came to evolve the GMATPill's methods - the credited study means to boost the Verbal competence. I really like their videos, especially for RC, CR and SC. You do check their study methods at https://www.gmatpill.com
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 857
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 1:36 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:15 members

by AIM GMAT » Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:36 am
The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

We need to address the reason for the presence of compound that doesnt exist in placebo , A gives a alternate reason for the same . It says that placebo inhibits some proteins . So the drug is not directly affecting the patients but the reactions made and then some more reaction in turn are affecting the people indirectly.

A ---> B [A results in B] -- paradox how B when its absent in A ?

A ----> C -----> B [A results in C and C results in B ] solves the paradox .

Hope that helps , let me know if the explanations are not clear.
Thanks & Regards,
AIM GMAT
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:44 am
Thanked: 9 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:610

by singh181 » Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:42 am
participants in exp. group, who took exp. painkiller, showed compromised motor skills, whereas participants in control group, who took placebo, did not show such behavior. So, compound in the exp. painkiller caused that behavior.

A A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function. [then participants in control grp must experience drop in motor skills]IRRELEVANT

B
Because of the counter effects of other active ingredients in the painkiller, the detrimental effects on motor skills are rarely noticed by the consumer. Since, in painkiller usually this behavior is countered by other ingredientsCORRECT
C
The compound in the painkiller is a product of the laboratory and cannot be found in nature. IRRELEVANT
D
Participants in the experiment were “blind�; that is, they did not know whether they were receiving the painkiller or the placebo. Strengthens the validity of the experiment, but does not do anything to explain the effectsIRRELEVANT
E
An unaffiliated lab ran a chemical analysis of the painkiller and confirmed that the painkiller is free of other compounds that are known to cause detrimental effects on motor skills. does not explain. This actually puts more confusion.Weaken
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 121
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:44 am
Thanked: 9 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:610

by singh181 » Sun Mar 06, 2011 3:48 am
I am not clear on the meaning of A.

Does this statement means:
1) A high level of the compound [which came from exp. painkiller] in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.
OR
2) A high level of the compound in the body inhibits the synthesis of certain proteins necessary for proper motor function.

If 1) is the case, than A is correct in my opinion. Otherwise, B is best given the options.
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1337
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2008 6:29 pm
Thanked: 127 times
Followed by:10 members

by Night reader » Sun Mar 06, 2011 4:24 am
agree about answer A, thank you


[/i]
AIM GMAT wrote:The observed detrimental effects on motor skills were attributed to a compound in the painkiller that does not exist in the placebo.

We need to address the reason for the presence of compound that doesnt exist in placebo , A gives a alternate reason for the same . It says that placebo inhibits some proteins . So the drug is not directly affecting the patients but the reactions made and then some more reaction in turn are affecting the people indirectly.

A ---> B [A results in B] -- paradox how B when its absent in A ?

A ----> C -----> B [A results in C and C results in B ] solves the paradox .

Hope that helps , let me know if the explanations are not clear.
My knowledge frontiers came to evolve the GMATPill's methods - the credited study means to boost the Verbal competence. I really like their videos, especially for RC, CR and SC. You do check their study methods at https://www.gmatpill.com
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Sun Mar 06, 2011 11:07 pm
source is knewton classes
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 979
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:38 am
Location: Hyderabad, India
Thanked: 49 times
Followed by:12 members
GMAT Score:700

by bubbliiiiiiii » Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:28 am
One more for A
Regards,

Pranay
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Mon Mar 07, 2011 5:40 am
This shouldnt fit under any of the known CR Types . This cant be a strengthen question cos then E could be a valid answer because it confirms that the adverse effect on motor skills was caused by the compound in the painkiller and not any other ingredient.
I eliminated E in case of this question because E does not explain the process in which the painkiller affects the Motor Functions.
I Seek Explanations Not Answers
Top
Post new topic Post Reply