Critical Reasoning

Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate form this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms.

Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT:

(A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade.
(B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years.
(C) Evidence suggests that bronchial inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen.
(D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures.
(E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment.

OA A

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Urban pollution has not doubled in the past decade.
(B) Doctors and patients generally ignore the role of allergies in asthma.
(C) Bronchial inhalers are unsafe, even when used according to the recommended instructions.
(D) The use of bronchial inhalers aggravates other diseases that frequently occur among asthma sufferers and that often lead to fatal outcomes even when the asthma itself does not.
(E) Increased urban pollution, improved recording of asthma deaths, and the use of bronchial inhalers are the only possible explanations of the increased death rate due to asthma.

OA E

'manpreet singh wrote:Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate form this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms.

Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT:

(A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade.
(B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years.
(C) Evidence suggests that bronchial inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen.
(D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures.
(E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment.

OA A

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

(A) Urban pollution has not doubled in the past decade.
(B) Doctors and patients generally ignore the role of allergies in asthma.
(C) Bronchial inhalers are unsafe, even when used according to the recommended instructions.
(D) The use of bronchial inhalers aggravates other diseases that frequently occur among asthma sufferers and that often lead to fatal outcomes even when the asthma itself does not.
(E) Increased urban pollution, improved recording of asthma deaths, and the use of bronchial inhalers are the only possible explanations of the increased death rate due to asthma.

OA E

For the I one I would say that Option A is correct

II prompt asks about the underlying assumption for the cause of deaths.

So I am a bit dilemma"d" about the correct option E, which has been mentioned.

The prompt says

1. Record updation has improved
2. Pollution has increased

Then contradicting this the author provides info about them.

So my query is whom should we go with?Author or the prompt?

Hi Vinay, we should always go with the author for assumptions questions.

In the conclusion he nullifies the effect of records and pollution, and option E states that only 3 possible causes are there.Since two other causes are nullified in argument by author.

'manpreet singh wrote:Hi Vinay, we should always go with the author for assumptions questions.

In the conclusion he nullifies the effect of records and pollution, and option E states that only 3 possible causes are there.Since two other causes are nullified in argument by author.

But option E mentions all the 3 plausible reasons as the cause, so can E be correct?

Yes author fixes the reason to 3 causes, 2 of the causes are nullified by himself in the argument.Which leaves us with the third cause leading to increased deaths.

By doing this he has eliminated the source of attack on the argument.

Now no one can argue that there could be other causes which could lead to deaths.

I think you are confused with option D,this option though supports the conclusion that bronchial inhaler could cause increase in deaths,but there is a big gap.What if there are other causes too??? Think about it. This has been fixed in option E.

Hope you understand now.

---------------------------------------------------
"Good things come to those who wait... greater things come to those who get off their ass and do anything to make it happen."

I chose A and E too, other choices weren't that close to the OA.

Hi Manpreet,

Author concludes that Inhaler usage is the main cause for the deaths. He makes this conclusion assuming that if one used the inhaler and he/she died. It means irrespective of whether it is a recommended dosage or not, the user will die. so can't the answer be C for the 2nd question?

Br,
Vishnu.