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.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

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
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget 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