magmat- natural compond 500-600

Expert replies

pradeepkaushal9518: Legendary Member; Posts: 1309; Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pmFollowed by: 5 members; Thanked: 33 times

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:11 pm

Consumer advocate: Ephedra is a naturally occurring compound that some people use as a weight-loss aid. Recently, the government prohibited the sale of dietary supplements containing ephedra on the grounds that ephedra has been shown to have grave side effects. This prohibition is unreasonable. Echinacea is another natural compound that has been shown to have side effects, yet echinacea is widely available at health food stores.

The consumer advocate's argument depends on which of the following assumptions?

A.Before the prohibition, ephedra had been available in health food stores.
B.All natural compounds are safe for human consumption.
C.The side effects of echinacea and ephedra are comparably serious.
D.The government should not hav the authority to prohibit natural compounds.
E.It is unreasonable to protect the health of the public.

plz explain yr answer

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Mon Jul 12, 2010 9:11 pm

raunakrajan: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 62; Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:27 am; Thanked: 1 times

by raunakrajan » Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:52 pm

pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:Consumer advocate: Ephedra is a naturally occurring compound that some people use as a weight-loss aid. Recently, the government prohibited the sale of dietary supplements containing ephedra on the grounds that ephedra has been shown to have grave side effects. This prohibition is unreasonable. Echinacea is another natural compound that has been shown to have side effects, yet echinacea is widely available at health food stores.

The consumer advocate's argument depends on which of the following assumptions?

A.Before the prohibition, ephedra had been available in health food stores.
B.All natural compounds are safe for human consumption.
C.The side effects of echinacea and ephedra are comparably serious.
D.The government should not hav the authority to prohibit natural compounds.
E.It is unreasonable to protect the health of the public.

plz explain yr answer

is the answer "D"?

i looked at it by using alternate models causation technique.
pls let me know whats the correct OA

Raunak!

selango: Legendary Member; Posts: 1460; Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 amFollowed by: 7 members; Thanked: 135 times

by selango » Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:54 pm

IMO C

Why the advocate comparing echinacea with ephedra?Because they seems to have the comparable side effects.
If they don't have any comparable side effects,the advocate need not bother about echinacea.

--Anand--

raunakrajan: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 62; Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:27 am; Thanked: 1 times

by raunakrajan » Mon Jul 12, 2010 10:58 pm

selango wrote:IMO C

Why the advocate comparing echinacea with ephedra?Because they seems to have the comparable side effects.
If they don't have any comparable side effects,the advocate need not bother about echinacea.

Anand! dai, the reason i din choose C is because its stated in the passage about Ephedra "the prohibition was unreasonable" which might imply that it may not have grave side effects, contrarily it could be something to do with the government. hence
IMO D
may be wrong though mate!

pradeepkaushal9518: Legendary Member; Posts: 1309; Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pmFollowed by: 5 members; Thanked: 33 times

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Mon Jul 12, 2010 11:36 pm

what about A or B . i was confused beteen A and B? oa later on

kvcpk: Legendary Member; Posts: 1893; Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pmFollowed by: 7 members; Thanked: 215 times

by kvcpk » Mon Jul 12, 2010 11:38 pm

IMO C.

Advocate is trying to compare the two products. Hence C sounds good.

Here is why others are wrong:
A: Passage links Echinacea and health food stores. But not Ephedra and health food stores.
"government prohibited the sale of dietary supplements containing ephedra" doesnot mean that it is banned in health food stores.
B. Exaggeration. Also, if this is true, it weakens the argument.
D. Advocate doesnt make any statements against the government. Negate this option:
The government should have the authority to prohibit natural compounds.
Will this affect the passage. NO. because, it only says Government has authority.. but not that it should ban.
E. Doesnt interfere with the advocate's words.

Hope this helps!!

adi_800: Legendary Member; Posts: 544; Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 9:14 amFollowed by: 2 members; Location: Pune, India; Thanked: 31 times

by adi_800 » Thu Jul 15, 2010 9:24 am

The conclusion of the argument is
This prohibition is unreasonable. Why it is unreasonable?
Because the two things that are being compared are same. If they are same, then why one is banned and one is not...
I think C should be the answer..

FightWithGMAT: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 364; Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:13 amFollowed by: 3 members; Thanked: 31 times

by FightWithGMAT » Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:12 pm

pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:Consumer advocate: Ephedra is a naturally occurring compound that some people use as a weight-loss aid. Recently, the government prohibited the sale of dietary supplements containing ephedra on the grounds that ephedra has been shown to have grave side effects. This prohibition is unreasonable. Echinacea is another natural compound that has been shown to have side effects, yet echinacea is widely available at health food stores.

The consumer advocate's argument depends on which of the following assumptions?

A.Before the prohibition, ephedra had been available in health food stores.
B.All natural compounds are safe for human consumption.
C.The side effects of echinacea and ephedra are comparably serious.
D.The government should not hav the authority to prohibit natural compounds.
E.It is unreasonable to protect the health of the public.

plz explain yr answer

I think the answer is C.

debmalya_dutta: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 385; Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:16 pmFollowed by: 2 members; Thanked: 29 times; GMAT Score:710

by debmalya_dutta » Fri Jul 16, 2010 8:17 pm

I too will go with C
The author presents the conclusion that "This prohibition is unreasonable" based on the premises
1. Ephedra is a naturally occurring compound which was prohibited from being sold .
Presents the counter argument that "Echinacea is another natural compound that has been shown to have side effects, yet echinacea is widely available at health food stores. "

But the basis of the counter argument is that Ephedra and echinacea have comparable side effects

GMAT Course Reviews

563 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (563 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review