GMAT - Critical Reasoning - Weaken the argument
Experts estimate that insurance companies' tardiness in paying doctors for legitimate medical claims adds approximately 10 percent in overhead costs for physicians. Insurance companies counter that the tardiness sometimes results from billing errors made by the doctors themselves. Since dealing with these billing errors costs the insurance companies time and money, it is clear that insurance companies do not have a significant economic incentive to delay claim payments to doctors.
Which of the following pieces of information, if true, weakens the conclusion above?
a) Some doctors who submit accurate bills to insurance companies still receive tardy payments.
b) The cost to the insurance companies to process incorrect bills from doctors' offices is roughly equivalent to the increased costs that physicians accrue as a result of tardy payments from insurance companies.
c) A rising proportion of medical claims submitted by doctors to insurance companies are deemed illegitimate by those insurance companies.
d) The billing errors made by doctors' offices are typically very minor, such as the submission of a claim with an outdated patient home address.
e) The overhead costs incurred by doctors as a result of delayed insurance payments result in an increase in the premiums paid by consumers to health insurance companies that far exceed any increase in the fees paid to doctors by insurance companies.
The conclusion of the passage is that the insurance companies' do not have an economic advantage in delaying doctors medical claims payments. As delaying the payments costs the insurance companies time and money, there is no incentive for the companies for being tardy. We need to choose an answer choice which contrasts this conclusion and shows that the insurance companies indeed have an advantage in delaying the claim payments to doctors.
a) This answer choice doesn't point to insurance companies making a profit, it just shows that the company is tardy even though the claim bills are being submitted on time.
b) This answer choice also does not tell us if the insurance companies are making any profits.
c) This answer choice is irrelevant with regards to the context of the question
d) This answer choice is also irrelevant
e) This is the correct answer choice as it clearly shows that overhead costs that the doctors incur due to delayed claims payments, far exceed the payments that the doctors ultimately get from the insurance company. This indicates that the insurance companies are making profits.
Which of the following, if true, would tend to weaken most seriously the prediction of scientific secrecy described above? (more)
With Emergence of Biotechnology Companies, it was feared that they would impose silence about proprietary results on their in-house researchers and their academic consultants. This Constraint, in turn, would slow the development of biological science and engineering.
Which of the following, if true, would tend to weaken most seriously the prediction of scientific secrecy described above?
A) Biotechnological research funded by industry has reached some conclusions that are of major scientific importance.
B) When the results of scientific research are kept secret, independent researchers are unable to build on those results.
C) Since the research priorities of biotechnology companies are not the same as those of academic institutions, the financial support of research by such companies distorts the research agenda.
D) To enhance the companies' standing in the scientific community, the biotechnology companies encourage employees to publish their results, especially results that are important.
E) Biotechnology companies devote some of their research resources to problems that are of fundamental scientific importance and that are not expected to produce immediate practical applications.
This question asks us to weaken the argument. The conclusion states that Biotechnology companies are imposing secrecy on their research studies, which in turn will slow down the development of biological science and engineering. Among the answer choices, answer choice D is the correct one. It is a direct contradiction to the conclusion stated in the passage. The answer choice states that companies are encouraging employees to publish their results. And the passage clearly states that the companies are preventing their research from going public.
In countries in which new-life sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices (more)
In countries in which new-life sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding company from competitors. These facts show that future access to new life sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents on newly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) In countries in which life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, their manufacturer is neverthless a profitable enterprise.
(B) Countries that do not currently grant patents on life-sustaining drugs are, for the most part, countries with large populations.
(C) In some countries specific processes for the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs can be patented even in cases in which the drugs themselves cannot be patented.
(D) Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that go into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits.
(E) Countries that grant patents on life-sustaining drugs almost always ban their importation from countries that do not grant such patents.
The conclusion states that if the practice of granting patents are abolished, then access to life-saving drugs will be improved. We need an answer choice that weakens this claim. Answer choice A and B seem out of context as they do not impact access to life-saving drugs. Patenting a process and not the drug will not have an impact on accessibility. Answer choice D is correct because if there is no new research taking place due to a shortage of funds, then the lives of people is at stake. So if the patenting is abolished it will lead to a stagnation in research which will then impact the future of people.
During the month of May, crabs arrive on Delaware's beaches to lay eggs. Certain shorebirds depend on these eggs for food during their annual spring migration to their northern breeding grounds. Delaware's crab population has declined recently. This decline, however, poses no serious threat to the migrating shorebird populations: by remaining longer in Delaware, the birds will be able to eat enough crab eggs to allow them to complete their migration.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. No other food available to the birds on Delaware's beaches is as nutritious and accessible as are crab eggs.
B. The decline in the number of crabs on Delaware's beaches is due to the harvesting of crabs by humans.
C. There are more crabs on Delaware's beaches than in any other area that the migrating birds pass through.
D. The crabs do not conceal their eggs.
E. The earlier in the season the shorebirds complete their migration, the more likely they are to breed successfully.
The conclusion of the passage is that the decline of the crabs poses no serious threat to the migrating shorebird populations. So we need to select an answer choice that weakens this conclusion. Answer choice A is irrelevant as it talks about their food and not the threat. Answer choice B and C state something that is not really impacting the birds' migration. Answer choice D is irrelevant to the conclusion. Answer choice E is correct. Because the decline in their food source will result in the birds staying longer to feed, which will then cut down on their breeding time.