Injury Risk 500-600

[sumidi]

Improved technology and equipment often result in fewer injuries during high-risk activities such as rock climbing and scuba diving. But participant education also plays a large role in reducing the number of injuries sustained during these activities. People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment.

Which of the following can be properly inferred from the information above?

Training is a more important safety factor than equipment in high-risk activities.
People who are properly trained in their activities do not sustain injuries.
The safety benefits of the latest equipment can be offset by inadequate preparation.
Rock climbing and scuba diving are more risky than any other activities.
People with the latest equipment often neglect proper training.

This is an easy question but the OA solution does not look any better than my choice. [/list]

[Daisy]

IMO (C). Other choices are irrelevant.

What is OA and which choice did you pick and Why?

[sumidi]

Yup you got it!

I picked A.

My reasoning behind why I cancelled C was because the option mentioned about "inadequate preparation", there doesn't appear to be any mention of preparation. I know for a fact C would have been correct if it said:-

The safety benefits of the latest equipment can be offset by inadequate training.

However it didn't. I picked A because Training is a more important factor then equipment can be derived from the last sentence.


People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment.


Do you see what I see or am I gone loopy. (Maybe I just need a break!)

sumi

[esledge]

That last premise may sound like (A), but (A) uses the buzzwords while misrepresenting the meaning.

Premise: "People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment." Poor training --> higher injury risk despite best equipment.

(A) "Training is a more important safety factor than equipment in high-risk activities." This goes too far! The argument did not elevate the importance of training over equipment, just said that poor training could offset the safety benefit of best equipment.

[jp.jprasanna]

That last premise may sound like (A), but (A) uses the buzzwords while misrepresenting the meaning.

Premise: "People who are poorly trained in these activities run a much higher risk of injury even if provided with the latest and best equipment." Poor training --> higher injury risk despite best equipment.

(A) "Training is a more important safety factor than equipment in high-risk activities." This goes too far! The argument did not elevate the importance of training over equipment, just said that poor training could offset the safety benefit of best equipment.

Emily - Could you please explain why A is wrong in detail, I picked A as prompt read " participant education also plays a large role in reducing the number of injuries" so I decided that training is more important factor...

Reason I didn't choose C was because I thought offset means nullify so I concluded safety benefits DO NOT completely offset the inadequate prep. Could you please direct explain Ans choice A and C in detail please. Thanks in anticipation.

Cheers
JP

[tim]

Okay, the problem in your analysis was that you took the statement that X and Y are both important and somehow decided on the basis of this that X is MORE important. As Emily explained, this is not something you can do on a CR question if you hope to get the question correct.. :)

As for C, it is correct because it is basically restating what the argument already mentioned, namely that despite the safest equipment, you can still have a dangerous situation if the participant doesn't have proper training. Please keep in mind that "offset" doesn't mean "nullify"; if they had meant "nullify" they would have used that word or one that meant the same thing..