Sentence correction q3

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 16
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2016 4:38 am

Sentence correction q3

by krithika1993 » Sat Oct 08, 2016 1:32 pm

I'm having some difficulty understanding why my response was not the best choice in this question.

The new drug Prozac and the old one Elavil are about equally effective in treating various forms of depression, although patients on the newer drug may have slightly fewer side effects. Thus, revenue from the sale of the new drug is going to far exceed the revenue from the sale of the old drug.

All of the following statements weaken the conclusion of the argument above, EXCEPT:

a) Elavil is also used as a powerful anti-emetic medicine.
b) The Drug Control Authorities in six states have refused to allow the sale of Prozac until more tests are carried out.
c) Some side effects of Elavil are common to Prozac as well.
d) Prozac is not recommended as an anti-depressant for diabetics and heart patients.
e) The unit sale price of Elavil is higher than that of Prozac.

My answer: E
Actual answer: C

Please let me know what you think. After looking at it again, I'm still leaning towards my answer being the best choice for this question.

Thank you

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 157
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 7:30 pm
Location: India
Thanked: 65 times
Followed by:3 members

by crackverbal » Mon Oct 10, 2016 10:26 pm
When the stem says weaken EXCEPT all the four incorrect options must weaken the conclusion. the correct answer must either strengthen or not have any effect at all on the conclusion.

What does the argument state ?
Prozac has fewer side effects --> Revenues from selling prozac will far exceed those from selling Elavil.
Note the word "far exceed".

A - Weakens the argument. Elavil is used as an anti-emetic in addition to its use as an anti-depressant. It has an additional source of revenue that prozac does not have. hence, it is unlikely that revenues from prozac will far exceed revenues from elavil.
B - Weakens the argument. If prozac cannot be sold in six states, then it is unlikely that revenues from prozac will far exceed revenues from elavil.
C- Correct answer. The number of side effects they have in common does not affect my argument as long as prozac has fewer side effects than elavil has. Also, note the word "some". Some can mean just 2 side-effects or 100 side-effects (a lot of side effects in common). If it is just 2 in common, this option does not weaken the argument. Even if the number is high, what if the few additional side effects that elazil has are far more serious? Then certainly, my argument would not be weakened.
D- weakens the argument. It cannot be targeted to diabetics and heart patients.
E - If price of prozac is lower, then the demand for the product will be higher. However, note that revenues = price * demand. So, the revenues might not be so high after all. Look at the argument again. It says - "revenues will far exceed". This does not seem likely since the price of prozac is lower. Hence, weakens.
Join Free 4 part MBA Through GMAT Video Training Series here - ... video-2018

Enroll for our GMAT Trial Course here -

For more info on GMAT and MBA, follow us on @AskCrackVerbal