Q12 - Ampicillin and other modern antibiotics

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Strengthen. Be careful here - it's asking us to find an answer that supports the argument, so it's not a "most strongly supported" Inference question.

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: New antibiotics will likely lead to a drug-resistant bacteria outbreak.
Premises: The new antibiotics have a wider usage, a larger profit margin, and more power.
Intermediate: Companies will switch to making the new ones, we'll run out of penicillin, and doctors will have to prescribe the new stuff when the old stuff would work just as well.

Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion brings up an increase in drug-resistant bacteria outbreaks, but the argument never states that switching to the new stuff will have this impact. We should look for that connection in the answers.

Correct answer:
(A)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Terrifying, but correct. This answer connects something about the new drugs (they kill a wide variety of bacteria) with the new concept in the conclusion (drug-resistant bacteria). It seems the new drugs create the scenario where drug-resistant bacteria thrive, thus increasing the likelihood of an outbreak.

(B) Out of scope. The timeline of usage doesn't matter to this argument, especially as it relates to the old antibiotics.

(C) Too weak; Opposite, if anything. This is too weak (while it'll drive the profit up, we don't know it'll be enough to get them making it again). Even if we forget that, them making penicillin would weaken the argument, as there would be the option to use it instead of the new stuff.

(D) Out of scope. Expense doesn't matter, especially since the argument tells us doctors will be "forced" to use the new stuff.

(E) Opposite, if anything. If the new stuff kills bacteria that penicillin won't, it seems switching will decrease outbreaks.

Takeaway/Pattern: Always be on the lookout for the gap! New terms that only show up in the conclusion are almost always related to the correct answer.

#officialexplanation