GMAT Full Mock Test- 4 - GMAT MCQ

Because both parents worked full-time, they had a nanny who not only watchedthe children and also cleaned the house should it be messy.

Surprisingly obedient, the Smiths have a cat that follows simple instructions like“come” or “sit”, words to which usually only dogs respond.

Actors on Broadway have the difficult task of being singers who must also performas dancers.

Regardless of the amount of dairy food they consume in adulthood, people whoconsumed little dairy food in childhood seem to be prone to bone fractures, adisadvantage that suggests a need for higher calcium consumption in childhood.

The defending attorney weakened the prosecution’s arguments so much that, atthe end of the trial, the jury doubted that the victim had even existed.

If the draft is not re-instated, less people will join the army in the coming 10 years than did in any other 10-year period in our nation’s history.

Germany’s most infamous leader, Hitler’s policies were responsible for the slaughterof 6 million Jews.

No school policies forbid a teacher from scolding a student or to call the student’sparents based only on another child’s accusations.

The miners were reluctant to embrace the company’s new unionization policybecause they thought it was merely meant to be a publicity stunt with no commitment to contract negotiation and eventually salary increases.

The fall of the Berlin Wall represented a political victory of the free market against a centrally planned economy.
Though highly interventionist and dependent on international defense and industrial subsidy, West Germany was a model of economic expansion in the post-war era.
East Germany, while relatively successful in comparison with other Eastern Bloc nations, was far behind West Germany with regard to the buying power of its people. It was hard to avoid obvious comparisons such as the fact that 1 in 4 East Germans did not even have an indoor toilet. Western German authorities were therefore committed to rapid integration of the two Germanys without resorting to massive controls on internal migration, external capital controls, or continuation of a large state-owned industrial sector.
Other nations were already wary of a united Germany.
France, a perpetual competitor, saw Germany’s size advantage increase overnight. In Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) alone, an historical size advantage of 23% jumped to nearly 30%, with stronger growth promised when East Germany was fully integrated.
Within Germany, there should have been no doubt that integration would be costly. The question was whether the government was up to the task. In Italy, for example, the central government has invested tremendous resources in promoting the economy of its underperforming Southern region. In contrast, in the United States, the local population bears the burden of varying economic performance. For example, the American South is allowed to exist with much higher rates of poverty and lower education than the rest of the nation.
Rather than allow East Germany to fall into total disrepair, with millions fleeing to the West and a long-term negative impact on national GDP growth, West German authorities decided to try to spend their way out of the crisis, creating almost overnight an infrastructure in East Germany to provide a standard of living comparable to that in West Germany. The goal was to take an under-performing country and raise it to “first world” standards in only a few years. This goal would have been preposterous had not West Germany possessed the resources to accomplish the task.

Q.The author mentions the United States most probably in order to

The fall of the Berlin Wall represented a political victory of the free market against a centrally planned economy.
Though highly interventionist and dependent on international defense and industrial subsidy, West Germany was a model of economic expansion in the post-war era.
East Germany, while relatively successful in comparison with other Eastern Bloc nations, was far behind West Germany with regard to the buying power of its people. It was hard to avoid obvious comparisons such as the fact that 1 in 4 East Germans did not even have an indoor toilet. Western German authorities were therefore committed to rapid integration of the two Germanys without resorting to massive controls on internal migration, external capital controls, or continuation of a large state-owned industrial sector.
Other nations were already wary of a united Germany.
France, a perpetual competitor, saw Germany’s size advantage increase overnight. In Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) alone, an historical size advantage of 23% jumped to nearly 30%, with stronger growth promised when East Germany was fully integrated.
Within Germany, there should have been no doubt that integration would be costly. The question was whether the government was up to the task. In Italy, for example, the central government has invested tremendous resources in promoting the economy of its underperforming Southern region. In contrast, in the United States, the local population bears the burden of varying economic performance. For example, the American South is allowed to exist with much higher rates of poverty and lower education than the rest of the nation.
Rather than allow East Germany to fall into total disrepair, with millions fleeing to the West and a long-term negative impact on national GDP growth, West German authorities decided to try to spend their way out of the crisis, creating almost overnight an infrastructure in East Germany to provide a standard of living comparable to that in West Germany. The goal was to take an under-performing country and raise it to “first world” standards in only a few years. This goal would have been preposterous had not West Germany possessed the resources to accomplish the task.

Q.Which of the following best describes the way the first paragraph functions in the context of the passage?

The fall of the Berlin Wall represented a political victory of the free market against a centrally planned economy.
Though highly interventionist and dependent on international defense and industrial subsidy, West Germany was a model of economic expansion in the post-war era.
East Germany, while relatively successful in comparison with other Eastern Bloc nations, was far behind West Germany with regard to the buying power of its people. It was hard to avoid obvious comparisons such as the fact that 1 in 4 East Germans did not even have an indoor toilet. Western German authorities were therefore committed to rapid integration of the two Germanys without resorting to massive controls on internal migration, external capital controls, or continuation of a large state-owned industrial sector.
Other nations were already wary of a united Germany.
France, a perpetual competitor, saw Germany’s size advantage increase overnight. In Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) alone, an historical size advantage of 23% jumped to nearly 30%, with stronger growth promised when East Germany was fully integrated.
Within Germany, there should have been no doubt that integration would be costly. The question was whether the government was up to the task. In Italy, for example, the central government has invested tremendous resources in promoting the economy of its underperforming Southern region. In contrast, in the United States, the local population bears the burden of varying economic performance. For example, the American South is allowed to exist with much higher rates of poverty and lower education than the rest of the nation.
Rather than allow East Germany to fall into total disrepair, with millions fleeing to the West and a long-term negative impact on national GDP growth, West German authorities decided to try to spend their way out of the crisis, creating almost overnight an infrastructure in East Germany to provide a standard of living comparable to that in West Germany. The goal was to take an under-performing country and raise it to “first world” standards in only a few years. This goal would have been preposterous had not West Germany possessed the resources to accomplish the task.

Q.The passage suggests which of the following about the relationship between West Germany and France?

In April 1841, medical missionary Reverend Peter Parker, M.D., addressed an enthusiastic audience gathered at a special meeting of the Boston Medical Association. His subject was “the condition and prospects of the hospitals of China.” He described his own work at the hospital he had established in the foreign factory district outside the city walls of Canton where he offered free treatment for both rich and poor. At P’u Ai I Yuan (Hospital of Universal Love, as it was known in Chinese) Parker and his colleagues used western surgical techniques as a means to facilitate religious conversion. Medicine, Parker believed, could be the “handmaid of religious truth,” and he held regular religious services for his patients.
While he had, at best, modest success attracting converts to Christianity, the hospital had fostered tremendous goodwill among the Chinese. It was a bright spot amid the gloomy period of Western-Chinese tension that led to the outbreak of the Opium Wars between Great Britain and China. Forced to flee Canton because of these rising hostilities, Parker returned to the United States to raise money and interest in his operations. In the spring of 1841, he spoke to many religious societies, a few medical bodies, and even the United States Congress, where he preached to members of the House and Senate and lobbied legislators on the need for diplomatic relations with China.
In his talks, Parker described the state of medical and surgical knowledge—or, rather, scientific ignorance—in China. Despite the surgical feats of legendary ancient doctors such as Hua T’o of the third century A.D., surgery did not develop to any great extent in China. Some accounts attribute this to Confucian precepts about the integrity of the body and proscriptions against any form of mutilation or dismemberment; others emphasize the pharmacological tendencies within traditional Chinese medicine and a preference for moxas and other caustic plasters.
Whatever the cause, it was undoubtedly the case that Parker’s surgical practice tapped into a huge unmet need.
Almost as soon as he opened his Ophthalmic Hospital in Canton, as it was known in English, he acquired a reputation as a surgeon of such skill that the hospital quickly became a general hospital. Parker and his small staff handled thousands of cases each year, treating more than fifty thousand cases by the 1850s. His hospital became the model for other medical missions, and Parker and his British colleagues formed the Medical Missionary Society of China to coordinate the efforts of all the western hospitals springing up in the trading ports of Asia. Parker earned his reputation performing operations to remove tumors and cataracts—forms of surgery with relatively good odds of success and ones that could be accomplished quickly, important in an era without anesthetics. Because of the absence of surgery in China, a large number of patients were afflicted with mature tumors (typically five to thirty-five years old) of a size seldom seen in Europe or the United States. Parker was able to help these patients in ways previously thought impossible in China. He has thus been credited with bringing Western medicine to the most populous country on Earth.

Q. The author mentions Hua T’o in the third paragraph most probably in order to

In April 1841, medical missionary Reverend Peter Parker, M.D., addressed an enthusiastic audience gathered at a special meeting of the Boston Medical Association. His subject was “the condition and prospects of the hospitals of China.” He described his own work at the hospital he had established in the foreign factory district outside the city walls of Canton where he offered free treatment for both rich and poor. At P’u Ai I Yuan (Hospital of Universal Love, as it was known in Chinese) Parker and his colleagues used western surgical techniques as a means to facilitate religious conversion. Medicine, Parker believed, could be the “handmaid of religious truth,” and he held regular religious services for his patients.
While he had, at best, modest success attracting converts to Christianity, the hospital had fostered tremendous goodwill among the Chinese. It was a bright spot amid the gloomy period of Western-Chinese tension that led to the outbreak of the Opium Wars between Great Britain and China. Forced to flee Canton because of these rising hostilities, Parker returned to the United States to raise money and interest in his operations. In the spring of 1841, he spoke to many religious societies, a few medical bodies, and even the United States Congress, where he preached to members of the House and Senate and lobbied legislators on the need for diplomatic relations with China.
In his talks, Parker described the state of medical and surgical knowledge—or, rather, scientific ignorance—in China. Despite the surgical feats of legendary ancient doctors such as Hua T’o of the third century A.D., surgery did not develop to any great extent in China. Some accounts attribute this to Confucian precepts about the integrity of the body and proscriptions against any form of mutilation or dismemberment; others emphasize the pharmacological tendencies within traditional Chinese medicine and a preference for moxas and other caustic plasters.
Whatever the cause, it was undoubtedly the case that Parker’s surgical practice tapped into a huge unmet need.
Almost as soon as he opened his Ophthalmic Hospital in Canton, as it was known in English, he acquired a reputation as a surgeon of such skill that the hospital quickly became a general hospital. Parker and his small staff handled thousands of cases each year, treating more than fifty thousand cases by the 1850s. His hospital became the model for other medical missions, and Parker and his British colleagues formed the Medical Missionary Society of China to coordinate the efforts of all the western hospitals springing up in the trading ports of Asia. Parker earned his reputation performing operations to remove tumors and cataracts—forms of surgery with relatively good odds of success and ones that could be accomplished quickly, important in an era without anesthetics. Because of the absence of surgery in China, a large number of patients were afflicted with mature tumors (typically five to thirty-five years old) of a size seldom seen in Europe or the United States. Parker was able to help these patients in ways previously thought impossible in China. He has thus been credited with bringing Western medicine to the most populous country on Earth.

Q. According to the passage, all of the following are true of Peter Parker EXCEPT

In April 1841, medical missionary Reverend Peter Parker, M.D., addressed an enthusiastic audience gathered at a special meeting of the Boston Medical Association. His subject was “the condition and prospects of the hospitals of China.” He described his own work at the hospital he had established in the foreign factory district outside the city walls of Canton where he offered free treatment for both rich and poor. At P’u Ai I Yuan (Hospital of Universal Love, as it was known in Chinese) Parker and his colleagues used western surgical techniques as a means to facilitate religious conversion. Medicine, Parker believed, could be the “handmaid of religious truth,” and he held regular religious services for his patients.
While he had, at best, modest success attracting converts to Christianity, the hospital had fostered tremendous goodwill among the Chinese. It was a bright spot amid the gloomy period of Western-Chinese tension that led to the outbreak of the Opium Wars between Great Britain and China. Forced to flee Canton because of these rising hostilities, Parker returned to the United States to raise money and interest in his operations. In the spring of 1841, he spoke to many religious societies, a few medical bodies, and even the United States Congress, where he preached to members of the House and Senate and lobbied legislators on the need for diplomatic relations with China.
In his talks, Parker described the state of medical and surgical knowledge—or, rather, scientific ignorance—in China. Despite the surgical feats of legendary ancient doctors such as Hua T’o of the third century A.D., surgery did not develop to any great extent in China. Some accounts attribute this to Confucian precepts about the integrity of the body and proscriptions against any form of mutilation or dismemberment; others emphasize the pharmacological tendencies within traditional Chinese medicine and a preference for moxas and other caustic plasters.
Whatever the cause, it was undoubtedly the case that Parker’s surgical practice tapped into a huge unmet need.
Almost as soon as he opened his Ophthalmic Hospital in Canton, as it was known in English, he acquired a reputation as a surgeon of such skill that the hospital quickly became a general hospital. Parker and his small staff handled thousands of cases each year, treating more than fifty thousand cases by the 1850s. His hospital became the model for other medical missions, and Parker and his British colleagues formed the Medical Missionary Society of China to coordinate the efforts of all the western hospitals springing up in the trading ports of Asia. Parker earned his reputation performing operations to remove tumors and cataracts—forms of surgery with relatively good odds of success and ones that could be accomplished quickly, important in an era without anesthetics. Because of the absence of surgery in China, a large number of patients were afflicted with mature tumors (typically five to thirty-five years old) of a size seldom seen in Europe or the United States. Parker was able to help these patients in ways previously thought impossible in China. He has thus been credited with bringing Western medicine to the most populous country on Earth.

Q. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A clone is a genetically identical copy of a living organism.
Human clones are nothing new; they occur naturally in the recognizable form of identical twins. Not until the successful cloning of a sheep called Dolly, however, has the possibility of intentionally producing an identical copy of a human been considered seriously.
Production of a human clone would most likely utilize the same basic methodology that resulted in Dolly. A human egg would be retrieved from an individual, and its genetic material (DNA) would be removed and replaced with DNA derived from any adult human cell type. This would bypass the need for fertilization of the egg by the sperm in order to obtain a full complement of DNA. In a laboratory dish, the egg would then undergo several cell divisions. Placed into a uterus, the resulting embryo would grow and, with luck, develop until birth.
Although this cloning technique is conceptually and procedurally simple, its success rate has been extremely low. The birth of one Dolly, for instance, required the preparation of 277 re-nucleated eggs, followed by the implantation of 29 resulting best embryos. The low success rate can be attributed to the difference between the young DNA of a normally fertilized egg and the genetic material of the re-nucleated egg, which is mature and of defined destiny – it has already committed itself to a particular physiological role. In order for proper fetal development to occur, mature DNA must be coaxed into reverting to its youthful state, a complex process that will be difficult to achieve for the human species.
Beyond the practical difficulties of intentional human cloning, scientists, politicians, and others have raised serious ethical concerns about this practice. For example, there is a chance that the cloning procedure would adversely affect the developing embryo. There also might be deleterious effects on the long-term health of the clone.
Proponents of human cloning counter that human sexual reproduction is not a risk-free affair either. Even if human cloning could be made safe, the motivations behind producing human clones do not fall clearly on one side of the ethical divide. While proponents stress potentially appealing motivations – a man and a woman who are both carriers of a genetic disease can use cloning to assure that their child will not be afflicted with the disorder – critics argue that the practice could and likely would be used for unethical ends, such as to select for certain traits, such as hair/eye color or sexual orientation, for example.

Q. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A clone is a genetically identical copy of a living organism.
Human clones are nothing new; they occur naturally in the recognizable form of identical twins. Not until the successful cloning of a sheep called Dolly, however, has the possibility of intentionally producing an identical copy of a human been considered seriously.
Production of a human clone would most likely utilize the same basic methodology that resulted in Dolly. A human egg would be retrieved from an individual, and its genetic material (DNA) would be removed and replaced with DNA derived from any adult human cell type. This would bypass the need for fertilization of the egg by the sperm in order to obtain a full complement of DNA. In a laboratory dish, the egg would then undergo several cell divisions. Placed into a uterus, the resulting embryo would grow and, with luck, develop until birth.
Although this cloning technique is conceptually and procedurally simple, its success rate has been extremely low. The birth of one Dolly, for instance, required the preparation of 277 re-nucleated eggs, followed by the implantation of 29 resulting best embryos. The low success rate can be attributed to the difference between the young DNA of a normally fertilized egg and the genetic material of the re-nucleated egg, which is mature and of defined destiny – it has already committed itself to a particular physiological role. In order for proper fetal development to occur, mature DNA must be coaxed into reverting to its youthful state, a complex process that will be difficult to achieve for the human species.
Beyond the practical difficulties of intentional human cloning, scientists, politicians, and others have raised serious ethical concerns about this practice. For example, there is a chance that the cloning procedure would adversely affect the developing embryo. There also might be deleterious effects on the long-term health of the clone.
Proponents of human cloning counter that human sexual reproduction is not a risk-free affair either. Even if human cloning could be made safe, the motivations behind producing human clones do not fall clearly on one side of the ethical divide. While proponents stress potentially appealing motivations – a man and a woman who are both carriers of a genetic disease can use cloning to assure that their child will not be afflicted with the disorder – critics argue that the practice could and likely would be used for unethical ends, such as to select for certain traits, such as hair/eye color or sexual orientation, for example.

Q. The author of the passage mentions Dolly most probably in order to

A clone is a genetically identical copy of a living organism.
Human clones are nothing new; they occur naturally in the recognizable form of identical twins. Not until the successful cloning of a sheep called Dolly, however, has the possibility of intentionally producing an identical copy of a human been considered seriously.
Production of a human clone would most likely utilize the same basic methodology that resulted in Dolly. A human egg would be retrieved from an individual, and its genetic material (DNA) would be removed and replaced with DNA derived from any adult human cell type. This would bypass the need for fertilization of the egg by the sperm in order to obtain a full complement of DNA. In a laboratory dish, the egg would then undergo several cell divisions. Placed into a uterus, the resulting embryo would grow and, with luck, develop until birth.
Although this cloning technique is conceptually and procedurally simple, its success rate has been extremely low. The birth of one Dolly, for instance, required the preparation of 277 re-nucleated eggs, followed by the implantation of 29 resulting best embryos. The low success rate can be attributed to the difference between the young DNA of a normally fertilized egg and the genetic material of the re-nucleated egg, which is mature and of defined destiny – it has already committed itself to a particular physiological role. In order for proper fetal development to occur, mature DNA must be coaxed into reverting to its youthful state, a complex process that will be difficult to achieve for the human species.
Beyond the practical difficulties of intentional human cloning, scientists, politicians, and others have raised serious ethical concerns about this practice. For example, there is a chance that the cloning procedure would adversely affect the developing embryo. There also might be deleterious effects on the long-term health of the clone.
Proponents of human cloning counter that human sexual reproduction is not a risk-free affair either. Even if human cloning could be made safe, the motivations behind producing human clones do not fall clearly on one side of the ethical divide. While proponents stress potentially appealing motivations – a man and a woman who are both carriers of a genetic disease can use cloning to assure that their child will not be afflicted with the disorder – critics argue that the practice could and likely would be used for unethical ends, such as to select for certain traits, such as hair/eye color or sexual orientation, for example.

Q. According to the passage, which of the following is a potential obstacle to human cloning?

A clone is a genetically identical copy of a living organism.
Human clones are nothing new; they occur naturally in the recognizable form of identical twins. Not until the successful cloning of a sheep called Dolly, however, has the possibility of intentionally producing an identical copy of a human been considered seriously.
Production of a human clone would most likely utilize the same basic methodology that resulted in Dolly. A human egg would be retrieved from an individual, and its genetic material (DNA) would be removed and replaced with DNA derived from any adult human cell type. This would bypass the need for fertilization of the egg by the sperm in order to obtain a full complement of DNA. In a laboratory dish, the egg would then undergo several cell divisions. Placed into a uterus, the resulting embryo would grow and, with luck, develop until birth.
Although this cloning technique is conceptually and procedurally simple, its success rate has been extremely low. The birth of one Dolly, for instance, required the preparation of 277 re-nucleated eggs, followed by the implantation of 29 resulting best embryos. The low success rate can be attributed to the difference between the young DNA of a normally fertilized egg and the genetic material of the re-nucleated egg, which is mature and of defined destiny – it has already committed itself to a particular physiological role. In order for proper fetal development to occur, mature DNA must be coaxed into reverting to its youthful state, a complex process that will be difficult to achieve for the human species.
Beyond the practical difficulties of intentional human cloning, scientists, politicians, and others have raised serious ethical concerns about this practice. For example, there is a chance that the cloning procedure would adversely affect the developing embryo. There also might be deleterious effects on the long-term health of the clone.
Proponents of human cloning counter that human sexual reproduction is not a risk-free affair either. Even if human cloning could be made safe, the motivations behind producing human clones do not fall clearly on one side of the ethical divide. While proponents stress potentially appealing motivations – a man and a woman who are both carriers of a genetic disease can use cloning to assure that their child will not be afflicted with the disorder – critics argue that the practice could and likely would be used for unethical ends, such as to select for certain traits, such as hair/eye color or sexual orientation, for example.

Q. The passage suggests which of the following?

A clone is a genetically identical copy of a living organism.
Human clones are nothing new; they occur naturally in the recognizable form of identical twins. Not until the successful cloning of a sheep called Dolly, however, has the possibility of intentionally producing an identical copy of a human been considered seriously.
Production of a human clone would most likely utilize the same basic methodology that resulted in Dolly. A human egg would be retrieved from an individual, and its genetic material (DNA) would be removed and replaced with DNA derived from any adult human cell type. This would bypass the need for fertilization of the egg by the sperm in order to obtain a full complement of DNA. In a laboratory dish, the egg would then undergo several cell divisions. Placed into a uterus, the resulting embryo would grow and, with luck, develop until birth.
Although this cloning technique is conceptually and procedurally simple, its success rate has been extremely low. The birth of one Dolly, for instance, required the preparation of 277 re-nucleated eggs, followed by the implantation of 29 resulting best embryos. The low success rate can be attributed to the difference between the young DNA of a normally fertilized egg and the genetic material of the re-nucleated egg, which is mature and of defined destiny – it has already committed itself to a particular physiological role. In order for proper fetal development to occur, mature DNA must be coaxed into reverting to its youthful state, a complex process that will be difficult to achieve for the human species.
Beyond the practical difficulties of intentional human cloning, scientists, politicians, and others have raised serious ethical concerns about this practice. For example, there is a chance that the cloning procedure would adversely affect the developing embryo. There also might be deleterious effects on the long-term health of the clone.
Proponents of human cloning counter that human sexual reproduction is not a risk-free affair either. Even if human cloning could be made safe, the motivations behind producing human clones do not fall clearly on one side of the ethical divide. While proponents stress potentially appealing motivations – a man and a woman who are both carriers of a genetic disease can use cloning to assure that their child will not be afflicted with the disorder – critics argue that the practice could and likely would be used for unethical ends, such as to select for certain traits, such as hair/eye color or sexual orientation, for example.

Q. Which of the following is NOT given in the passage as a reason not to pursue human cloning?

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 passage suggest which the following about COX2 inhibitors?

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:

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

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

Ciara distrusts modern medicine. She says that the drugs prescribed by doctors are just synthetic poisons that they dispense to make money. She uses only herbs and essential oils to treat her health problems, declaring that they are much safer than prescription drugs because they come directly from nature.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens Ciara's argument?

Recent DNA analysis shows that the majority of modern humans alive today have at least some genetic material in common with Neanderthal humans. Archaeologists believe that the first evidence of religious behavior has been found in excavations of Neanderthal dwellings in France. The presence of Neanderthal DNA in modern Europeans has led some scholars to assert that Europeans are genetically programmed for religious behavior in ways that people from other areas of the world are not.

Which of the following, if true, more seriously weakens this argument?

It has long been supposed that Neanderthal humans were replaced by modern humans. Most anthropologists thought that the two groups did not have contact or interbreed. However, a recent archaeological dig found Neanderthal artifacts and modern human artifacts mixed together, indicating that there was some contact between the two. The archaeologists leading this dig have published a new article asserting that, in fact, Neanderthals and modern humans did live side by side and interbreed.

Which of the following evidence would provide the strongest support for the archaeologists' claim?