Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

GMAT Exam > GMAT Questions > Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually ...

Join the Discussion on the App

Corporate Officer: Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporation's profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporation's profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.

On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?

a)
The increase in the pharmaceutical division's contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.
b)
In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporation's profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.
c)
The percentage of the corporation's profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that division's performance had not improved.
d)
The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.
e)
The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Numbers and Percents

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical...

(A) The increase in the pharmaceutical division's contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of a single, important new product.

This critique suggests that the growth in the pharmaceutical division's profits may be attributed to a specific product rather than an overall improvement in the division's performance. It challenges the idea that the division is growing stronger as a whole.

(B) In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporation's profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.

This answer choice provides general information about other multidivisional corporations with pharmaceutical divisions, but it does not directly critique the evidence presented. It does not address the situation of the specific corporation being discussed.

(C) The percentage of the corporation's profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that division's performance had not improved.

This critique addresses the possibility that the increase in the pharmaceutical division's contribution to profits may not necessarily indicate an improvement in its performance. Other factors, such as a decrease in profits from other divisions, could have led to the increase in percentage without any actual improvement in the pharmaceutical division's performance.

(D) The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.

This critique highlights the lack of information regarding the previous year's profits. Without knowing the performance of the pharmaceutical division in the previous year, it is not possible to determine whether the increase from 20 percent to 45 percent is an improvement or not.

(E) The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in terms of the percent of total profits attributable to each.

This critique points out that the information provided does not allow for a direct comparison between the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions. It is not possible to determine whether the growth in the pharmaceutical division's profits is compensating for the decline in the chemical division's profits.

After analyzing the answer choices, it is evident that option (C) provides the best critique of the evidence presented. It raises doubts about whether the increase in the pharmaceutical division's contribution to profits reflects an actual improvement in its performance or if other factors influenced the change.

Answered by Talent Skill Learning · View profile

Attention GMAT Students!

To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed GMAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in GMAT.

GMAT Focus Edition Mock Test Series 2024

Quantitative for GMAT

Crash Course for GMAT

Data Insights for GMAT

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

In recent years, a class of drugs known as COX-2 inhibitors has gotten much publicity for the drugs’ power to relieve inflammation and pain. These drugs are relatively new to the pharmaceutical industry, their mechanisms of action having been discovered only in 1971. That year, John Vane discovered the relationship between nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, such as aspirin, and a group of molecules, called prostaglandins, responsible for producing the sensation of pain in the human body, among other functions.Prostaglandins were first discovered in the 1930s and are now known to be generated by most mammalian tissues in response to external stimuli. Unlike classical hormones that are synthesized in one tissue but act on a distant one, prostaglandins act on the cells that produce them or on cells located close to the prostaglandins’ cells of origin.Aspirin alleviates pain by inhibiting the function of an enzyme called cyclooxygenase or COX; this inhibition prevents the production of prostaglandins. The three forms of this enzyme, COX-1, COX-2, and COX-3, all stimulate the production of prostaglandins, but each serves a different purpose. COX-1 functions to protect the stomach from irritating gastric acids. COX-2 functions to induce inflammation in injured tissue and COX-3 functions to control the sensation of pain. Aspirin and other similar drugs, such as naproxen, inhibit both COX-1 and COX-2, sometimes producing or aggravating stomach ulcers in patients who take them.In order to eliminate the side effects of aspirin and related drugs, several pharmaceutical companies in the 1990s developed drugs that inhibited only COX-2. However, side effects almost always cropped up, even after clinical trials that seemed to indicate none. This often occurs because trials are conducted within very limited parameters; once the drug has been approved for mass distribution, however, the number of people taking it and the length of time that it is taken increase dramatically. Several COX-2 drugs that have been popular in recent years fit this pattern: initially successful in clinical trials, subsequent studies showed them to have serious, potentially lethal side effects.Though prostaglandin chemistry and enzymology have been studied for half a century, pinpointing the exact role of the molecules in physiological processes still remains a challenge for researchers. Hence it is not surprising that recent therapeutic attempts to interfere with the formation of certain prostaglandins have produced unexpected side effects. It now seems that the hype surrounding COX-2 drugs may have been premature.Q. The primary purpose of this passage is to

View answer

In recent years, a class of drugs known as COX-2 inhibitors has gotten much publicity for the drugs’ power to relieve inflammation and pain. These drugs are relatively new to the pharmaceutical industry, their mechanisms of action having been discovered only in 1971. That year, John Vane discovered the relationship between nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, such as aspirin, and a group of molecules, called prostaglandins, responsible for producing the sensation of pain in the human body, among other functions.Prostaglandins were first discovered in the 1930s and are now known to be generated by most mammalian tissues in response to external stimuli. Unlike classical hormones that are synthesized in one tissue but act on a distant one, prostaglandins act on the cells that produce them or on cells located close to the prostaglandins’ cells of origin.Aspirin alleviates pain by inhibiting the function of an enzyme called cyclooxygenase or COX; this inhibition prevents the production of prostaglandins. The three forms of this enzyme, COX-1, COX-2, and COX-3, all stimulate the production of prostaglandins, but each serves a different purpose. COX-1 functions to protect the stomach from irritating gastric acids. COX-2 functions to induce inflammation in injured tissue and COX-3 functions to control the sensation of pain. Aspirin and other similar drugs, such as naproxen, inhibit both COX-1 and COX-2, sometimes producing or aggravating stomach ulcers in patients who take them.In order to eliminate the side effects of aspirin and related drugs, several pharmaceutical companies in the 1990s developed drugs that inhibited only COX-2. However, side effects almost always cropped up, even after clinical trials that seemed to indicate none. This often occurs because trials are conducted within very limited parameters; once the drug has been approved for mass distribution, however, the number of people taking it and the length of time that it is taken increase dramatically. Several COX-2 drugs that have been popular in recent years fit this pattern: initially successful in clinical trials, subsequent studies showed them to have serious, potentially lethal side effects.Though prostaglandin chemistry and enzymology have been studied for half a century, pinpointing the exact role of the molecules in physiological processes still remains a challenge for researchers. Hence it is not surprising that recent therapeutic attempts to interfere with the formation of certain prostaglandins have produced unexpected side effects. It now seems that the hype surrounding COX-2 drugs may have been premature.Q. According to the passage, all of the following are true of prostaglandins EXCEPT

View answer

In recent years, a class of drugs known as COX-2 inhibitors has gotten much publicity for the drugs’ power to relieve inflammation and pain. These drugs are relatively new to the pharmaceutical industry, their mechanisms of action having been discovered only in 1971. That year, John Vane discovered the relationship between nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, such as aspirin, and a group of molecules, called prostaglandins, responsible for producing the sensation of pain in the human body, among other functions.Prostaglandins were first discovered in the 1930s and are now known to be generated by most mammalian tissues in response to external stimuli. Unlike classical hormones that are synthesized in one tissue but act on a distant one, prostaglandins act on the cells that produce them or on cells located close to the prostaglandins’ cells of origin.Aspirin alleviates pain by inhibiting the function of an enzyme called cyclooxygenase or COX; this inhibition prevents the production of prostaglandins. The three forms of this enzyme, COX-1, COX-2, and COX-3, all stimulate the production of prostaglandins, but each serves a different purpose. COX-1 functions to protect the stomach from irritating gastric acids. COX-2 functions to induce inflammation in injured tissue and COX-3 functions to control the sensation of pain. Aspirin and other similar drugs, such as naproxen, inhibit both COX-1 and COX-2, sometimes producing or aggravating stomach ulcers in patients who take them.In order to eliminate the side effects of aspirin and related drugs, several pharmaceutical companies in the 1990s developed drugs that inhibited only COX-2. However, side effects almost always cropped up, even after clinical trials that seemed to indicate none. This often occurs because trials are conducted within very limited parameters; once the drug has been approved for mass distribution, however, the number of people taking it and the length of time that it is taken increase dramatically. Several COX-2 drugs that have been popular in recent years fit this pattern: initially successful in clinical trials, subsequent studies showed them to have serious, potentially lethal side effects.Though prostaglandin chemistry and enzymology have been studied for half a century, pinpointing the exact role of the molecules in physiological processes still remains a challenge for researchers. Hence it is not surprising that recent therapeutic attempts to interfere with the formation of certain prostaglandins have produced unexpected side effects. It now seems that the hype surrounding COX-2 drugs may have been premature.Q. The author mentions that prostaglandins a re generated in response to external stimuli primarily in order to support the contention that

View answer

A pharmaceutical company developed a new diuretic reported to cause fewer side effects than their old diuretic, which was still being manufactured. Duringthe first year that both were sold, the earlier medication far outsold the new one; the manufacturer thus concluded that reducing side effects was not the customers primary consideration.Q. Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the manufacturer’s conclusion?

View answer

XYZ Corporation has two divisions, both of which performed consistently over the last five years. The Interment Services Division accounted for approximately 30% of the corporation’s transactions and 50% of the corporation’s profits; the Toxic Household Products Division accounts for the balance.The statements above support which of the following inferences about XYZ Corporation over the last five years?

View answer

Top Courses for GMATView all

GMAT Focus Edition Mock Test Series 2024

Quantitative for GMAT

Crash Course for GMAT

Data Insights for GMAT

100 RCs for GMAT

Top Courses for GMAT

View all

Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Corporate Officer:Last year was an unusually poor one for our chemical division, which has traditionally contributed about 60 percent of the corporations profits. It is therefore encouraging that there is the following evidence that the pharmaceutical division is growing stronger: it contributed 45 percent of the corporations profits, up from 20 percent the previous year.On the basis of the facts stated, which of the following is the best critique of the evidence presented above?a)The increase in the pharmaceutical divisions contribution to corporation profits could have resulted largely from the introduction of single, important new product.b)In multidivisional corporations that have pharmaceutical divisions, over half of the corporations profits usually come from the pharmaceuticals.c)The percentage of the corporations profits attributable to the pharmaceutical division could have increased even if that divisions performance had not improved.d)The information cited does not make it possible to determine whether the 20 percent share of profits cited was itself an improvement over the year before.e)The information cited does not make it possible to compare the performance of the chemical and pharmaceutical divisions in of the percent of total profits attributable to each.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.

Explore Courses for GMAT exam