扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / GMATAdvanced-CR-21
Researchers in City X recently discovered low levels of several pharmaceutical drugs in public drinking water supplies. However, the researchers argued that the drugs in the water were not a significant public health hazard. They pointed out that the drug levels were so low that they could only be detected with the most recent technology, which suggested that the drugs may have already been present in the drinking water for decades, even though they have never had any discernible health effects.
Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the researchers’ reasoning?
If a drug found in drinking water is not a significant public health hazard, then its presence in the water will not have any discernible health effects.
There is no need to remove low levels of pharmaceutical drugs from public drinking water unless they present a significant public health hazard.
Even if a substance in drinking water is a public health hazard, scientists may not have discerned which adverse health effects, if any, it has caused.
Researchers using older, less sensitive technology detected the same drugs several decades ago in the public drinking water of a neighboring town but could find no discernible health effects.
Samples of City X’s drinking water taken decades ago were tested with today’s most recent technology, and none of the pharmaceutical drugs were found.
Researchers several decades ago, using less sensitive technology, were able to detect the same drugs in another town's public drinking water. This implies that the drug levels in that town were higher than those recently detected in City X's drinking water. Given that there have been no discernible health effects in this previous case, this lends support to the researchers' reasoning regarding City X.
赞同
赞
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论