* Until now only injectable vaccines against influenza have

[pras1387]

Until now only injectable vaccines against influenza have been available. They have been primarily used by older adults who are at risk for complications from influenza. A new vaccine administered in a nasal spray form has proven effective in preventing influenza in children. Since children are significantly more likely than adults to contract and spread influenza, making the new vaccine widely available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza across the population.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?
A. If a person receives both the nasal spray and the injectable vaccine, they do not interfere with each other.
B. The new vaccine uses the same mechanism to ward off influenza as injectable vaccines do.
C. Government subsidies have kept the injectable vaccines affordable for adults.
D. Of the older adults who contract influenza, relatively few contract it from children with influenza.
E. Many parents would be more inclined to have their children vaccinated against influenza if it did not involve an injection.

OA:D

I am not able to figure out the correct option. Every option just looks so blur. RON please explain the approach you would take to reach the answer and also explain your views and reasoning for each option.

thanx..!!

[RonPurewal]

something is wrong here. choice (d), which works against the argument, is definitely not the correct answer to this problem.

1) is this problem from the GMAT PREP SOFTWARE? it doesn't seem to be from that software, according to a quick google search.
if it is indeed a gmat prep question, please post a screenshot (either here or with a link to postimage.org) as proof.

2) if the problem is not from the gmat prep software, then please (a) check that it is not from a banned source, and, if it's not, (b) post a new thread in the general verbal folder. if you do so, be sure to check your source again; perhaps you are looking at a different version of another problem.

[deepakcs2001]

Attaching image URL from GMAT Prep software
http://postimage.org/image/1rs821gh0/

OA is (D)

[saptadeepc]

Attaching image URL from GMAT Prep software
http://postimage.org/image/1rs821gh0/

OA is (D)

The questions are different in the image and in the first post.

The OA to the first post is 'E' and OA to the question in the image is 'D' and both the questions and the sentences in the separate posts are miles apart !

[tim]

Yeah, we’re just going to ignore this one until we have more information..

[akhpad]

Both are from official problems.

Please see screen short.

http://s4.postimage.org/ikjlu2tct/Screen_Shot.jpg
http://s10.postimage.org/omo599lc9/image.jpg


Why D is wrong in initial problem.
D. Of the older adults who contract influenza, relatively few contract it from children with influenza.

Is it because vaccine is already available for adult or just because few adult get infected from children?

I convinced that E is strengthener.

[tim]

Thanks for the screenshots. Hopefully people will see now where the confusion came from. And since the screenshots confirm that E is the answer for this problem, i assume that clears up any question about why D seemed so wrong..

[ivanushk]

Did you guys realize the issue with the correct answer?

[tim]

i'm not sure i understand your question. care to try again?

[onkipak]

Hi GMAT instructors,

I don't quite understand why E is the correct answer.
Can you please explain more on it?

thanks in advance!

[RonPurewal]

Hi GMAT instructors,

I don't quite understand why E is the correct answer.
Can you please explain more on it?

thanks in advance!

The argument stops at "making the new vaccine widely available". Basically, it just assumes that people will magically start using it once it is "widely available".

Choice E substantiates the idea that people will actually switch over to the new paradigm"”definitely not a given, especially in the area of public health.

[AsadA969]

something is wrong here. choice (d), which works against the argument, is definitely not the correct answer to this problem.

1) is this problem from the GMAT PREP SOFTWARE? it doesn't seem to be from that software, according to a quick google search.
if it is indeed a gmat prep question, please post a screenshot (either here or with a link to postimage.org) as proof.

2) if the problem is not from the gmat prep software, then please (a) check that it is not from a banned source, and, if it's not, (b) post a new thread in the general verbal folder. if you do so, be sure to check your source again; perhaps you are looking at a different version of another problem.

injectable vaccines is ONLY for adults who suffer from influenza.
nasal spray is ONLY for Children.
That means, Nasal spray can not be applied on adults.

Analogy:
Here,
affected influenza (adults) LESS THAN(<) affected influenza (children),
if I apply the nasal spray on child, then the spread of influenza will be reduced.
Now, I'll apply Nasal Spray on the patient,
Suppose, 49<50 (29 got cure)
-->49 (no Change because nasal spray can NOT be applied on adults) +21=70 in influenza right now,

again, 49 (no Change because nasal spray can NOT be applied on adults)<50 (now this time curable 28 because there is no indication about specific number of children and how many child are curable)
-->49+22=71 in influenza.
Weaken.........
Again, if I make the creativity on the number 50, it can also strengthen the argument.
Actually, I am not sure that is my explanation correct or not.
Thanks.....

[RonPurewal]

^^

• i can't tell which version of the question you are trying to answer. there are two different versions.

• i can't tell what answer choice(s) you are trying to address.

• i also have no idea what point you are trying to make.

context, please. thank you.

[RonPurewal]

...but, in general—

• you should NEVER, EVER, EVER have to 'plug in numbers' on CR problems.
this test has a 'quant section' for a reason.
if the problem actually required this sort of reasoning, it be in the quant section.

if a CR problem involves numerical metrics, then the meaning of those metrics (and of whatever changes might occur to them) should be clear WITHOUT specific values.

• if you insist on 'plugging in numbers'—which, again, you should NEVER EVER EVER have to do—then ALWAYS pick 'typical' values, and DO NOT consider 'extreme' or 'boundary' values.
hopefully the reason is obvious: this is the critical reasoning section, not the 'mathematical technicalities' section. (again, there's a separate quant section for a reason.)

e.g., if the problem says that some percentage is 'smaller than' some other percentage, then it's clearly inappropriate to pick values like %49 and %50.
even though those values are mathematically consistent with the statement, they clearly do not capture the point of the statement IN THE REAL WORLD (where we would almost always interpret figures of %49 and %50 as 'essentially the same').

[AsadA969]

^^

• i can't tell which version of the question you are trying to answer. there are two different versions.

• i can't tell what answer choice(s) you are trying to address.

• i also have no idea what point you are trying to make.

context, please. thank you.

I wanted to show (by using plug in number though it is not the correct way in CR) an analogy that choice D (D. Of the older adults who contract influenza, relatively few contract it from children with influenza.) not only strengthen the argument but also weaken the argument simultaneously.
Thanks.