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

Redeem

Liver Disorder in rats

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

Liver Disorder in rats

by komal » Wed Feb 17, 2010 7:46 pm
A certain laboratory is studying the incidence of fatal liver damage in rats. Sixty-five percent of all rats whose environments exposed them to low levels of the toxin sulfur dioxide died of liver disorder. Ninety percent of all rats who died of liver disorder, however, were not exposed to any environmental toxins
Which of the following would provide a feasible explanation for the statistics above?
(A) Environmental and nonenvironmental causes of liver disease in rats are mutually exclusive.
(B) There is only one cause of fatal liver disease in rats.
(C) Environmental toxins are not particularly dangerous to the livers of rats.
(D) Only a small portion of the entire group of rats studied was exposed to environmental sulfur dioxide.
(E) Most rats will not suffer from exposure to low levels of sulfur dioxide

OA D
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2109
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:25 pm
Location: New Jersey
Thanked: 109 times
Followed by:79 members
GMAT Score:640

by money9111 » Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:24 pm
Ah I chose C... but D is definitely the obvious answer jumping out at me... because of the subset of rats... 60% were exposed... and since it was a subset it's smaller etc etc blah blah
My goal is to make MBA applicants take onus over their process.

My story from Pre-MBA to Cornell MBA - New Post in Pre-MBA blog

Me featured on Poets & Quants

Free Book for MBA Applicants

Top
User avatar
MBA Student
Posts: 403
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 7:32 pm
Thanked: 98 times
Followed by:22 members

by fibbonnaci » Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:45 am
say 100 rats dies due to liver damage.
so according to the stimulus- 90 rats were not exposed to envi toxins.
the 10 rats which were exposed to toxin constitute 65% of the rats exposed to envi toxins ie approx 15 rats were exposed.
so we know the total number of rats studied was greater than 100.

Now lets look at options.
(A) Environmental and nonenvironmental causes of liver disease in rats are mutually exclusive. [causes is wrong. we have checked for only one envi toxin. so we cannot generalize. Eliminated!]

(B) There is only one cause of fatal liver disease in rats. [we dont know. we are not given info about it. we have stimulus dealing with just one cause. that does not mean there is only one cause. Eliminated!]

(C) Environmental toxins are not particularly dangerous to the livers of rats. [if they are not dangerous then why will 65% of the rats exposed to them die? Eliminated!]

(D) Only a small portion of the entire group of rats studied was exposed to environmental sulfur dioxide. [Bingo. 15 out of a number greater than 100 is a small portion. Correct!]

(E) Most rats will not suffer from exposure to low levels of sulfur dioxide [how can we talk about most rats when we ourselves in the experiment subject only 15 rats out of more than 100 rats?? Eliminated!]

Hope this helps!
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1