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.

OG10

Expert replies
by venmic » Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:38 am
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members
of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was
not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay
at home as a civilian.
Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?
A. Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths
among members of the armed forces serving overseas
B. Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed
forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths
C. Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat
injuries
D. Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths
E. Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed
forces


My question is should the assumption not actaully be that
the comparison is incorrect here should we not compare the reason of death
1) Death caused by accidents
2) Death caused by combat

so should E not be the answer why is ths D
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by cans » Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:56 am
I think D is obvious.
We are looking at number of deaths in US and overseas and concluding that as numbers don't differ much, it isn't much dangerous to be overseas.
D) per thousand numbers is same as %. if we see % of deaths in US compared to % of deaths overseas, its pretty clear that it will be less.
E) it doesn;t matter how deaths were caused.
If my post helped you- let me know by pushing the thanks button ;)

Contact me about long distance tutoring!
[email protected]

Cans!!
Join the discussion

by gunjan1208 » Fri Sep 16, 2011 9:48 pm
It will be outrightly D. Explanation: We really dont care that how did the death happen and how much.

We want to know the ratio in case to understand that out of the sommiliar proportion, how much death happened in each area. (Apple to apple)

Imiagine that US army has 100,000 Armymen and 101 dies and other place had 150 but 90 died.Thus we can not really compare it without bringing population on the same platform.

hope this explains.
Join the discussion

by GmatKiss » Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:06 pm
Why not B friends?
Join the discussion

by nimish » Tue Sep 20, 2011 7:12 pm
D is obvious.

B doesn't make any sense. It says, difference between death of civilians and armed forces as a percentage of total deaths. Difference of deaths wont give us anything.
Join the discussion