strengthen

This topic has expert replies
Moderator
Posts: 772
Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 6:29 pm
Followed by:6 members

strengthen

by BTGmoderatorRO » Sun Oct 29, 2017 10:35 am
A society's infant mortality rate is an accepted indicator of that society's general health status. Even though in some localities in the United States the rate is higher than in many developing countries, in the United States overall the rate has been steadily declining. This decline does not necessarily indicate, however, that babies in the United States are now, on the average, healthier at birth than they were in the past.
Which one of the following reasons, if true, most strongly supports the claim made above about the implications of the decline?

(A) The figure for infant mortality is compiled as an overall rate and thus masks deficiencies in particular localities.
(B) Low birth weight is a contributing factor in more than half of the infant deaths in the United States.
(C) The United States has been developing and has achieved extremely sophisticated technology for saving premature and low-birth-weight babies, most of whom require extended hospital stays.
(D) In eleven states of the United States, the infant mortality rate declined last year.
(E) Babies who do not receive adequate attention from a caregiver fail to thrive and so they gain weight slowly.

OA is c

what is wrong with option B and C here? Can any expert explain the correct answer to this question> Thank you :mrgreen:

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:18 pm
Thanked: 180 times
Followed by:12 members

by EconomistGMATTutor » Fri Nov 03, 2017 8:18 am
The conclusion: The decline in the US infant mortality rate does not indicate that US babies are now healthier at birth.

The evidence: None is given explicitly. This means that there is unstated evidence, otherwise known as an assumption.

The assumption: More infants are surviving birth, but are still unhealthy. The conclusion is about the health of the infants. Choice C says that new technology saves the lives of babies who are, nonetheless, not healthy. 100,000 lives could be saved who would otherwise have not survived, but they're still not healthy at birth. This supports the conclusion.

You've asked about Choice B. This is irrelevant background info. It has no effect on the argument.

I'm available if you'd like any follow up.
GMAT Prep From The Economist
We offer 70+ point score improvement money back guarantee.
Our average student improves 98 points.

Image