CR: The exorbitant cost of our health insurance

[Khush]

Personnel officer: The exorbitant cost of our health insurance benefits reflects the high dollar amount of medical expenses incurred by our employees.Employees who are out of shape, as a group,have higher doctor bills and longer hospital stays than do their colleagues who are fit. Therefore, since we must reduce our health insurance costs, we should offer a rigorous fitness program of jogging and weight-lifting to all employees,and require employees who are out of shape to participate.

Which of the following, if true,provides the most support for the personnel officer's proposal?

A) The medical expenses incurred by fit people who participate in the program of jogging and weight lifting are less than those incurred by fit people who do not participate in such a program.

B) More otherwise fit people are injured by participating in rigorous jogging and weight-lifting program than are injured by participating in moderate jogging and weight-lifting programs.

C) The likelihood of incurring medical expenses is slightly greater for people who participate in fitness programs offered by their employers than it is for people who participate in programs offered commercially.

D) Moderate fitness programs increase the average person's fitness to the same extent that rigorous fitness programs do.

E) More health problems and injuries are the result of mandatory participation in a fitness program than are the result of voluntary participation.

OA: A

though i marked choice A after elimination (as almost all other choices are weakeners), i am not sure why is A the correct answer.
The argument is about the employees who are out of shape or those who are unfit. However, choice A compares fit people participating in fitness programs with fit people not participating in the program.
not able to figure out whether choice A is confirming any assumption of the author.

will appreciate any help..

[RonPurewal]

The program will be offered to all employees, not just to out-of-shape employees.
Employees deemed "fit" won't have to participate in the program"”but, according to choice A, a further diminution of health-care costs will ensue if they do participate.

In other words, for those in-shape employees who do choose to participate, choice A guarantees positive returns.
Perhaps more importantly, it rules out the idea that these individuals might incur extra health-care costs from the program (e.g., if they are injured while participating).

[Khush]

Perfect!

got it.
Thanks much Ron!

[jnelson0612]

Perfect!

got it.
Thanks much Ron!

:-)

Great!

[madhu1989]

The program will be offered to all employees, not just to out-of-shape employees.
Employees deemed "fit" won't have to participate in the program"”but, according to choice A, a further diminution of health-care costs will ensue if they do participate.

In other words, for those in-shape employees who do choose to participate, choice A guarantees positive returns.
Perhaps more importantly, it rules out the idea that these individuals might incur extra health-care costs from the program (e.g., if they are injured while participating).

Ron,

Your explanation makes total sense to me and I am in complete agreement with you. But just to clarify things, doesn't this argument rest upon the assumption that "Fitness plays a significant role towards health problems". What I am trying to say is that, there could have been cases of other serious illnesses which has nothing to do with one's fitness. Suppose had there been an answer choice that plugs the hole by addressing this assumption, would that be a better strengthener than A?

I know that we should pick the best answer choice from what's given to us and it makes no sense to question the answer choices, but just want to clarify things.

For pre thinking before looking at the answer choices, I followed your words about looking at these problems in a "real world" perspective, and that led to what I stated above. Thinking of these problems in real world perspective is indeed helpful, but in this problem, I was very unsure of A, as i felt it had no direct bearing on the conclusion until I read your explanation. So how do I deal with such a situation?

[RonPurewal]

Your explanation makes total sense to me and I am in complete agreement with you. But just to clarify things, doesn't this argument rest upon the assumption that "Fitness plays a significant role towards health problems". What I am trying to say is that, there could have been cases of other serious illnesses which has nothing to do with one's fitness.

Red thing "”> irrelevant.

The passage is concerned only with whether the company should institute an exercise program. Any health issues not affected by exercise are irrelevant to this decision.

[RonPurewal]

For pre thinking before looking at the answer choices, I followed your words about looking at these problems in a "real world" perspective, and that led to what I stated above. Thinking of these problems in real world perspective is indeed helpful, but in this problem, I was very unsure of A, as i felt it had no direct bearing on the conclusion until I read your explanation. So how do I deal with such a situation?

From what you wrote above, it seems likely that you misunderstood the point of the whole argument. I.e., the argument is, essentially, "Fitness program or no fitness program?", but you seem to have interpreted it as "Fitness program vs. other health initiative".

If you don't understand what the argument is fundamentally about, then it's going to be impossible to process the choices correctly.
You may just want to slow down and read the central argument more carefully. Try to imagine that someone is literally saying these things to you; if the context is an actual conversation, such misunderstandings will be less likely.

[madhu1989]

Your explanation makes total sense to me and I am in complete agreement with you. But just to clarify things, doesn't this argument rest upon the assumption that "Fitness plays a significant role towards health problems". What I am trying to say is that, there could have been cases of other serious illnesses which has nothing to do with one's fitness.

Red thing "”> irrelevant.

The passage is concerned only with whether the company should institute an exercise program. Any health issues not affected by exercise are irrelevant to this decision.

Can you please elaborate on how it is irrelevant ? As per my understanding,

Isn't the argument trying to imply

X------>Z ??

X - Lack of fitness
Z - High medical costs incurred

Suppose if

Y------> Z,

Y - illness caused due to reasons other than fitness

Then implementing the plan isn't going to help reduce the medical costs incurred.

Is my understanding correct?

[RonPurewal]

As soon as variables are introduced into a CR discussion, that's a pretty good indicator that the discussion is on unacceptably vague terms.
(:

Please write the actual answer choice that you're hypothesizing here, so that we can just discuss it directly.
Thanks.