Q14 - Pamela: Physicians training for a medical

[yama_sekander]

im having a hard time understanding why B would be the most effective counter to quincy's argument. how does talking about medical reimbursement policies connect with fatigue and working too many hours? is it because, due to the fact that patients are more ill now than before, the traditional regimen may no longer be feasible? thus, physicians must be able to assimilate to the new medical reimbursement policies, which infers a change in the traditional regimen?


also, is the talk about fatigue, irrelevant to the argument core?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

also, is the talk about fatigue, irrelevant to the argument core?

fatigue is definitely relevant to the argument core. The issue is whether the fatigue endured by doctors in the final third of their shifts leads to poorer medical treatments.

The issue Quincy brings up is that the current system has worked in the past. The easiest way to counter Quincy is to say that what was true in the past no longer applies, because times have changed. Answer choice (B) provides this change through the means of current medical reimbursement policies. How the change is incurred is not important, but the fact that these folks are more seriously ill, is definitely important. This could mean that the fatigue suffered by the residents could now have serious impacts on the progress of the patient.

Let's look at the incorrect answers:

(A) is the exact opposite of what we're looking for. We want a change so that what wasn't important before, may be important now.
(C) supports rather than counters Quincy, since he is in support of the 36-hour model.
(D) is irrelevant to the issue, since it would apply both in the past and today.
(E) supports rather than counters Quincy, since he is in support of the 36-hour model.

What do you think?