Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

by **ivanushk** Fri Apr 12, 2013 11:21 am

Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests conducted by the Federal Drug Administration on the grounds that the amounts of suspected carcinogens fed to animals far exceeds those that humans could consume.

A. far exceeds those that humans could consume
B. exceeds by far those humans can consume
C. far exceeds those humans are able to consume
D. exceed by far those able to be consumed by humans
E. far exceed those that humans could consume

After reviewing this GMAT PREP 2 Question I can clearly see why B is incorrect. I just wanted to clarify, if B stated "exceed" (i.e. plural) would it be correct? I was not sure about "could" vs. "can" split here, and hence completely misread the SV Agreement.

Also, is exceed by far = far exceed in this situation?

Thanks!

BTW, OA is E

by **messi10** Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:55 am

Don't think B will be correct even if exceeds is changed to exceed. B and C both remove "that". Without that, the sentence makes no sense

Here is a post on can vs could:
can-vs-could-t7000.html

Also, is exceed by far = far exceed in this situation?

Am not sure about this one, probably wait for an instructor to answer.

However, if I were you, the key takeaway would be the missed the SV agreement. Compared to other errros on the GMAT, It is one of the simpler ones to use and get rid of a number of answer choices.

by **jnelson0612** Sat Apr 13, 2013 10:31 pm

Nice job, messi10! Thanks for helping your fellow forum user. Yes, the "that" is important in this sentence for comparison purposes.

by **advanceX667** Wed Aug 13, 2014 10:54 pm

This sentence use ' the amounts of' to modify 'carcinogens', a plural noun. I used to use ' the amount of ' as a relable split to eliminate the answer choices that use the phrase to modify countable none. Is there any difference between ' the amount of'&' the amounts of'? If there is no, should I stop apply that rule? Thanks in advance

by **RonPurewal** Mon Aug 18, 2014 1:55 pm

This is one of those "mean what you write, and write what you mean" situations.
If you're talking about exactly one amount, then, "amount". If you're talking about two or more different amounts, then, "amounts".

This sentence is, presumably, talking about a set of individual measurements for individual chemicals. (Common sense dictates that you wouldn't just lump all of the suspected carcinogens together into a single measurement, since the amount required for toxicity is going to be different for every chemical.)

But this is a non-issue here, since "amounts" isn't underlined.

by **RonPurewal** Mon Aug 18, 2014 1:56 pm

advanceX667 Wrote:Is there any difference between ' the amount of'&' the amounts of'? If there is no, should I stop apply that rule? Thanks in advance

If this issue actually shows up as a difference between answer choices—i.e., "amount" appears in some choices, and "amounts" in others—then the context will almost certainly clarify which meaning is intended.

If both interpretations are sensible, then it's just a distraction. There are lots of distractions on SC, so that wouldn't be anything new.

by **advanceX667** Tue Aug 19, 2014 4:19 am

Thank u very much, Ron. I know that part is not underlined. But as u said, analysing the corret prep sentences is an efficient way to learn SC .
In addition, could u pls calrify whether it is also an exception to use the ' amounts' to modify the countable noun? If it is underlined, I would definitedly rule this answer out.

by **RonPurewal** Wed Aug 20, 2014 11:21 am

advanceX667 Wrote:Thank u very much, Ron. I know that part is not underlined. But as u said, analysing the corret prep sentences is an efficient way to learn SC .
In addition, could u pls calrify whether it is also an exception to use the ' amounts' to modify the countable noun? If it is underlined, I would definitedly rule this answer out.

I explained this in detail, 2 posts above your most recent post (= 3 posts above this one).
Maybe you didn't notice that I made two posts?

by **750plus** Wed Jul 15, 2015 9:40 am

Dear Team,

Please confirm

1. If can is problematic in choice B. I see that fed should be parallel to could (past)
2. ' able to ' and ' able to be ' looks awkward in the sense that they have added more words when we have a precise 'can/could'

Please enlighten us.

Warm Regards
Rajat Gugnani

by **RonPurewal** Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:47 am

RajatG730 Wrote:1. If can is problematic in choice B. I see that fed should be parallel to could (past)

those are not parallel constructions.

in fact, they're not the same kind of construction at all. could is a VERB, whereas fed to animals is a MODIFIER (describing "suspected carcinogens").

by **RonPurewal** Sun Jul 19, 2015 2:52 am

2. ' able to ' and ' able to be ' looks awkward in the sense that they have added more words when we have a precise 'can/could'

the problem is worse than that. it's actually WRONG to use 'able' here.

read:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... tml#p94106

let's ask ourselves: who is ABLE (or unable) to do something here?
the issue is that humans are able to consume only X amount of these substances (before they get cancer, presumably).
so it makes sense to say "humans are able...", but not "carcinogens are able...".

by **750plus** Wed Aug 05, 2015 9:45 am

RonPurewal Wrote:
2. ' able to ' and ' able to be ' looks awkward in the sense that they have added more words when we have a precise 'can/could'

the problem is worse than that. it's actually WRONG to use 'able' here.

read:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... tml#p94106

let's ask ourselves: who is ABLE (or unable) to do something here?
the issue is that humans are able to consume only X amount of these substances (before they get cancer, presumably).
so it makes sense to say "humans are able...", but not "carcinogens are able...".

Thanks. This helps.

I have taken a note of the same.

Warm Regards
Rajat Gugnani

by **RonPurewal** Sun Aug 09, 2015 6:15 am

you're welcome.

by **DiJ92** Fri Oct 16, 2015 11:44 am

Dear Ron,

Even though I have read these previous posts here, I still have two questions?

1: what is the difference between "far" and "by far", I understand that the use of "far" in choice A is to modify the verb "exceed", but how about the use of "by far" in choice B and D, it is right?

2: why do we need "that" before "those" in choice B and C? I think the ignorance of "that" is ok because "those" (=the amounts of suspected carcinogens) is the object of "consume" which is a verb.

Thanks in advance

by **RonPurewal** Sat Oct 17, 2015 5:51 am

DiJ92 Wrote:1: what is the difference between "far" and "by far", I understand that the use of "far" in choice A is to modify the verb "exceed", but how about the use of "by far" in choice B and D, it is right?

this is a non-issue.
'far exceed' is fine.
'exceed by far' is also fine.

2: why do we need "that" before "those" in choice B and C?

you don't.

Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests

Re: Some scientists have been critical of the laboratory tests