is it C?
Despite the fact that the health-inspection procedures for catering establishment are more stringent than those for ordinary restaurants, more of the cases of food poisoning reported to the city health department were brought on by banquets served by catering services than were brought on my restaurant meals.
Which of the following, if true, helps explain the apparent paradox in the statement above?
a. A significantly larger number of people eat in restaurants than attend catered banquets in any given time period.
b. Catering establishments know how many people they expect to serve, and therefore are less likely than restaurants to have, and serve, leftover food, a major source of food poisoning.
c. Many restaurants provide catering services for banquets in addition to serving individual meals.
d. The number of reported food-poisioning cases at catered baquets is unrelated to whether the meal is served on the catererís or the clientís premises.
e. People are unlikely to make a connection between a meal they have eaten and a subsequent illness unless the illness strikes a group who are in communication with one another.
Please provide a suitable explanation for your answer and rate the problem on scale of 1-5.
Same like me...
The answer althoug is "E".
C seems to be close but the weight seems to be more on the "E" side, as the paradox gets the point of 2 groups (one eating at reastaurant and the other eating at banquet getting in touch with each other and therefore result in passing illness or vice versa.)
A little more thought...
All of evensflow postings are very good CR's. Prbably becoz I am getting all of them wrong or my reasoning is gone for a toss.
Please explain to me in this case why E is answer cause it says a group of people eating food. This group even though connected can be eating at a restuarant than at Caterers ??e. People are unlikely to make a connection between a meal they have eaten and a subsequent illness unless the illness strikes a group who are in communication with one another.
R we not supposed to be specific in getting the answers in CR.
Pls help, my reasoning is
I would answer E.
People at catered events are more likely to be in contact with one another afterwards (friends, friends of friends, family, etc) and thus are more likely to be able to say "Ah, ha! My illness came from that catered event."
However, in restaurants, people are rarely, if ever, in contact with one another except for those on the same table. I mean, you're not gonna call the people that ate at the next table and say, "Man, do you have stomach aches too???"
GMAT168 always answers before I get a chance to do so :-)
THat's why I end up giving just "another vote for E"
Just to add to GMAT168's explanation - E resolves the paradox by calling into question the method of arriving at the statistic that MORE BANQUET EATERS become ill despite stringent standards. E says that we don't have many complaints for restaurants simply because the people who eat in restaurants do not often do so in groups.
i think (E) is NOT the answer and that (C) is the one.
Here's why: (E) introduces a subtle scope shift.
The argument proclaims that the Health Dept. gets more reported cases of food-poisoning from sources attributed to catering restaurants. (E) only talks about people's "group"-behavior attributed trends on the perceived causes. This need not be related to reporting stats. ie. even ppl. in isolation can well report.
(C) on the other hand gives a convincing expln. - that banquet food is served in large numbers by restaurants. Hence, the increase in cases could be attibuted to mass-scale excesses of restaurants.
You probably won't get a response from evensflow - based on the date of the posts, he/she is probably well on the way to an MBA by nowOriginally Posted by vingmat
I am quite certain that E is the answer, for the reasons stated by various posters. The sequence of events is something like this:
People eat bad food -> people get sick -> people make the connection between bad food and their illness -> people report a case of food poisoing
If people don't make the connection that bad food caused their illness, they'll never report a case of food poisoning. Answer E offers an explanation why people at banquets (who are more likely to know each other than random strangers in a restaurant) are more likely to make the connection that is necessary to report food poisoning as the source of their illness.
Ursula, you have a point there. But, how would you refute (C)...?
By the way, my G-day is 27 September. As I told you before, I got excellent results on the Powerprep. The issue that really perplexes me is how come I got 630, 640 on PR tests 3 and 4, (ya, took PR 4 after that 630 I told you and came up with a 640) after a 750 and 770 on the Powerprep.
Well, I think PR 3 and 4 have questions of far poorer quality, many with vague explanations unlike those in the Powerprep tests.
Anyway, now in the final lap of preparation and solely working with the OG, the only book I had not touched until now....On the OG again, I have a strike rate of 100/100 for Quant, 28-29/30 for CR, 8-9/10 for SC.
Hope I can pull it off...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)