evaluate the conclusion - need help with dis one..

This topic has expert replies
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:28 am
Location: Bangalore, India
Scientists have determined that an effective way to lower cholesterol is to eat three servings of whole grains every
day. Studies have shown that the cholesterol levels of people who did so were significantly lower after six months
than were those of people who did not, even though the cholesterol levels of the two groups were the same before
the studies began. Clearly, eating whole grains can have an appreciable effect on cholesterol levels. The answer
to which of the following questions, if true, would be most useful in evaluating the claim about whole
grains above?

a Is it realistic to expect people to eat three servings of whole grains per day?
b Were the two groups of people in the study involved in the same exercise program?
c Can the same drop in cholesterol be achieved through medication?
d Did the study continue to track the subjects beyond six months?
e Are most consumers aware of the different between whole grains and processed grains?

thanks in advance
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:28 am
Location: Bangalore, India

by gmatmarch2010 » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:31 am
confused b/w b and c...

GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1578
Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 8:02 am
Thanked: 128 times
Followed by:34 members
GMAT Score:760

by Osirus@VeritasPrep » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:33 am
I would choose B

A- This is irrelevant. There are a lot of things that are healthy for people that it may not be realistic for them to do.

B- Correct

C- This is irrelevant, regardless of if a pill can duplicate this, the fact would still stand that wholegrain can achieve this.

D- This is irrelevant because the participants could have stopped eating the food after 6 months

E- Consumer awareness is irrelevant because it doesn't evaluate whether the whole grains were responsible for the decrease. If the decrease is valid, then it is easy to advertise and make consumers aware of the differences.
https://www.beatthegmat.com/the-retake-o ... 51414.html

Brandon Dorsey
GMAT Instructor
Veritas Prep

Buy any Veritas Prep book(s) and receive access to 5 Practice Cats for free! Learn More.

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:36 am

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Wed Feb 10, 2010 7:43 am
gmatmarch2010 wrote:Scientists have determined that an effective way to lower cholesterol is to eat three servings of whole grains every
day. Studies have shown that the cholesterol levels of people who did so were significantly lower after six months
than were those of people who did not, even though the cholesterol levels of the two groups were the same before
the studies began. Clearly, eating whole grains can have an appreciable effect on cholesterol levels. The answer
to which of the following questions, if true, would be most useful in evaluating the claim about whole
grains above?

a Is it realistic to expect people to eat three servings of whole grains per day?
Incorrect : Issue is not about expecting ppl to eat three servings of whole grains per day. Hence Eliminated.

b Were the two groups of people in the study involved in the same exercise program?
Correct : If one group exercised vigorously and other group exercised moderately, then the results would differ even after eating same amount of whole grain servings per day.

c Can the same drop in cholesterol be achieved through medication?
Incorrect : Medication is irrelevant to the scope of the argument.

d Did the study continue to track the subjects beyond six months?
Incorrect : Issue is only about the study and its results.

e Are most consumers aware of the different between whole grains and processed grains?
Incorrect : Out of scope.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:19 am
a technique i usually follow for such question is for each option check the effect of a YES ans and NO ans on the conclusion
if the conclusion's validity is getting effected then that option is correct. Now lets implement this here

a Is it realistic to expect people to eat three servings of whole grains per day?
YES:people can eat 3 servings of whole grains / day so the desired effect is acheivable as concluded
NO:people can eat 5 or 10 per day then conlusion still holds
so validity is not effected
hence incorrect

b Were the two groups of people in the study involved in the same exercise program?
YES: groups were involved in same exercise program so the conclusion is true
NO: the group who eats servings goes through a rigorous program than other or vic-e-versa so the conclusion is false bcoz of diff in exercise
therefore validity gets aafected
hence correct

c Can the same drop in cholesterol be achieved through medication?
YES: doesn't effect conclusion
NO:doesn't effect conclusion

d Did the study continue to track the subjects beyond six months?
YES: no effect
NO: no effect

e Are most consumers aware of the different between whole grains and processed grains?
YES: no eefect
NO: no effect

hence B sud be the ans

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:32 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 67 times
Followed by:2 members

by sumanr84 » Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:20 am
IMO : B ( other than B only D is contender but that 6 month thing scraped it..)

My thought process goes inline with thephoenix :)

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:28 am
Location: Bangalore, India

by gmatmarch2010 » Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:28 am
@ phoenix

I also follow the same strategy for Evaluate type questions and I am confused with B and C.

Conclusion: Clearly, eating whole grains can have an appreciable effect on cholesterol levels.

In this case I will consider another alternative which can also help to reduce the cholesterol levels. B tells us about the difference in exercise program.

For C:

Can the same drop in cholesterol be achieved through medication?

Yes - This weakens the argument, because like an exercice program, medication can also help to reduce the cholesterol levels.

No - This strengthen the argument as it is not medication but the whole grains which has helped to reduce the cholesterol levels.

FYI - IMO - B

I know I am wrong but please help me to improve the way in which I am thinking.

Thanks Again Guys

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 758
Joined: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:32 pm
Location: Bangalore,India
Thanked: 67 times
Followed by:2 members

by sumanr84 » Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:36 am
gmatmarch2010 wrote:@ phoenix

I also follow the same strategy for Evaluate type questions and I am confused with B and C.

Conclusion: Clearly, eating whole grains can have an appreciable effect on cholesterol levels.

In this case I will consider another alternative which can also help to reduce the cholesterol levels. B tells us about the difference in exercise program.

For C:

Can the same drop in cholesterol be achieved through medication?

Yes - This weakens the argument, because like an exercice program, medication can also help to reduce the cholesterol levels.

No - This strengthen the argument as it is not medication but the whole grains which has helped to reduce the cholesterol levels.

FYI - IMO - B

I know I am wrong but please help me to improve the way in which I am thinking.

Thanks Again Guys
When evaluating an argument, don't go out of scope.

Medication has been brought into picture mainly as a trap !! There is no mention of medication in the argument.

You have to make sure that the all other condition remained same for the people under examination..i.e. they ate equally and did same exercise.
I am on a break !!

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:28 am
Location: Bangalore, India

by gmatmarch2010 » Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:47 am
the line - 'all other condition remained same for the people under examination' clears my doubt..

Thanks buddy.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:58 am
Thanked: 12 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:720

by jeffedwards » Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:31 pm
Definitely B

You are asked to evaluate the claim about whole grains. The claim is "Eating whole grains can have an appreciable effect on cholesterol levels".

B asks if all things were equal, or could there have been another reason for lowered cholesterol...exercise.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 6:24 pm
Thanked: 2 times

by mgmt_gmat » Thu Feb 11, 2010 10:41 am
Clearly (B).. all other are out of scope. (B) clearly states that two grpoups have passed through same experimental condition.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 12:29 pm
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:1 members

by sallespadua » Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:30 pm
send us the QA. I'm also confused between B and C.