mmrs151 Wrote:Why the ans D seems to me correct? If this is not correct then I want to tell you that that's how I always fall back i.e. run after lucrative wrong ans. I wan to kill them even they are of 700+ level pls give me the weaponry suggestion.
Tell me how did you kill them?
Two genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 are linked to hereditary breast cancer. Therefore in order to decrease the annual number of mammogram tests administered across a population and to more accurately assess a woman's individual risk of breast cancer, all women should be tested for these genes.
Premise 1: 2 genes B1 and B2 are linked to heriditary Breast Cancer.
Conclusion :To decrease mamogram tests and to accurately assess a woman's risk, women should be tested for these genes.
We have to find Premise 2 or the assumption. This has to be something that links with Premise 1 in order to arrive at the conclusion.Which of the following is the assumption?
A. Some women who are tested for the two genes will subsequently undergo mammograms on a less frequent basis than they used to.--
This definitley proves that these tests are surely beneficial to some people in that they can reduce the number of mamographies that they have to undergo.Let's try and negate this assumption. What if, the frequencies of undergoing mamographies do not reduce even after women are tested for these 2 genes.Then our conclusion falls flat. ie; If sombody performs these tests, they will not undergo a reduction in the number of mamographies, let alone the accurate assessment of cancer, that is never stated. Hence our conlcusion collpases.Use this negation test to prove that this must be an assumptionB. The majority of breast cancer patients have no family history of the disease--
So what if they had, what if they did not have; we need something that will connect the tests with more accurately assessing cancer and some information that helps us reduce mamogram tests.C. Researchers may have identified a third breast cancer gene that is linked with hereditary breast cancer.--
So how does this help in linking the new genes[B1 and B2] with the disease. If this assumption were to be true, then patients should also undergo a test for B3.This answer choice is mainly out of scope as it renders the Premise 1 ineffective.D. Women who have these genes have an 80 pc chance of getting breast cancer while women who don't have these genes have only a 10 pc chance of getting breast cancer.--
This might be what's called the trap answer. But let's look at our conclusion.Does this answer choice ever speak of how this would help in the reducing number of mamograms or does it ACCURATELY assess a woman's risk to breast cancer?The statistics merely provide a chance. What if these chances were to go against the odds. There is no way of definitely saying that it won't because it is a matter of probability and (P=1, we can be sure of some even to occur) there is no surety. Try the negation test here, and the conclusion will not fall apart, because the reduction in mamographies is never stated here and due to chance the patient might or might not have an accurate assessment in terms of treatment.E. The presence of BRCA1 and BRCA 2 can explain upto to 50% of hereditary cases.--
Let it explain 50, 60 or even 100% of hereditary cases. So what?Does it in anyway explain how this would reduce the number of mamograms?Or does it say, how this knowledge would accurately assess a woman's individual risk to breast cancer. No.Hence,
A is the best choice. --Hope this makes Sense!
