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.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE AWARDS 2026

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

GMATLiveTeach Starts Oct 17
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Chris Peckover, 100th-Percentile GMAT Scorer

Oct 17 · Chris Peckover
Sat · 11:00 AM to 2:00 PM ET
Oct 20 · Chris Peckover
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Oct 25 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 1:00 to 4:00 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemand 5 seats left Start anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
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 Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget 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.

Treatment for hypertension forestalls certain medical expens

Expert replies
by RBBmba@2014 » Mon Sep 28, 2015 5:02 am
Treatment for hypertension forestalls certain medical expenses by preventing strokes and heart disease. Yet any money so saved amounts to only one-fourth of the expenditures required to treat the hypertensive population. Therefore, there is no economic justification for preventive treatment for hypertension.

Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the conclusion above?

A) The many fatal stroke and heart attacks resulting from untreated hypertension cause insignificant medical expenditures but large economic losses of other sorts.

B) The cost, per patient, of preventive treatment for hypertension would remain constant even if such treatment were instituted on a large scale.

C) In matters of health care, economic considerations should ideally not be dominant.

D) Effective prevention presupposes early diagnosis, and programs to ensure early diagnosis are costly.

E) The net savings in medical resources achieved by some preventive health measures are smaller than the net losses attributable to certain other measures of this kind.


OA : A
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by RBBmba@2014 » Mon Sep 28, 2015 5:10 am
Hi Verbal Experts,
It's a pretty straightforward WEAKEN Qs and I don't have any issues in getting this one right, but I'd like to know the EXACT reason for which option C is wrong ?

Is the following INTERPRETATION right ?

In a WEAKEN CR, we need to find a new information/FACT which would attack/contradict the ARGUMENT and thus refute the CONCLUSION. So, Option C -- economic considerations should ideally not be dominant -- is NOT really a FACT, mostly because of its construction (re USAGE of SHOULD).

Thoughts ?
Join the discussion

by RBBmba@2014 » Fri Jan 29, 2016 11:17 pm
@ Verbal Experts - Could you please provide a quick clarification on my above concern ?

Look forward to know your thoughts. Much thanks in advance!
Join the discussion

by MartyMurray » Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:41 am
The exact reason why C is not the correct answer is that it does not weaken the conclusion.

The conclusion is that there is no economic justification for preventive treatment of hypertension.

C, on the other hand, rather than supporting or weakening the conclusion that there is no justification, basically says that regardless of whether there is a justification, that justification should not be a dominant consideration.

So the argument is about one thing, whether there is any economic justification, and C is about another, whether economic justification should be a dominant consideration.

Therefore C has no bearing on the conclusion itself, and is a typical trap answer, one that seems relevant to what is going on and one that is likely similar to what's going through the mind of the test taker as he or she reads the argument, while actually it is not relevant to the particular question asked.

The use of the word should is a red flag warning that probably what C says is out of the scope of the argument. At the same time, probably you are best off going beyond noticing that red flag and more fully analyzing the logic of the situation in order to more exactly pin down what is wrong with the answer choice.
Last edited by MartyMurray on Fri Feb 05, 2016 4:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.
Join the discussion

by abhinavgupta0187 » Fri Feb 05, 2016 1:05 am
Why option b is incorrect? Please elaborate.
Join the discussion

by MartyMurray » Fri Feb 05, 2016 4:47 am
abhinavgupta0187 wrote:Why option b is incorrect? Please elaborate.
The question asks which is most damaging to the conclusion.

The conclusion is that there is no economic justification for preventative treatment.

The conclusion is based on the premise that preventative treatment costs more than treating the strokes and heart disease that occur when they are not prevented.

B says essentially the following. The cost per patient of preventative treatment would not go down even if more patients were to be treated.

Therefore, B, rather than damaging the conclusion, if anything actually provides support for the conclusion, in that what B says indicates that even if preventative care were more widely used the cost of such care would still be greater than the amount saved by preventing strokes and heart disease.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.
Join the discussion