Q17 - An antidote for chichen pox

[kimjy89]

I was confused between D and E but I eliminated E becasue I thought it didn't address the discrepancy but rather contradicted the fact that was given in the stimulus ( this drug has no serious side effects ).

Thanks

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

If in fact answer choice (E) contradicted the stimulus, you would be correct in eliminating it. However, the development of deadlier, drug resistant forms of chicken pox is not exactly a side effect of the drug, but a negative consequence of its widespread use.

Answer choice (D) is the most tempting of the incorrect answers but is incorrect because it does not relate a negative consequence of widespread use of the drug, but rather a negative consequence of isolated cases of misuse of the drug.

We are asked to reconcile an apparent discrepancy between two claims:

1. The drug is effective at limiting the effects of chicken pox and has no known side effects.
2. Researchers claim that widespread use (not misuse, and this part is critical) of this antidote could be dangerous.

(A) explains why it would be difficult to use on a large scale, but does not explain why it would be dangerous.
(B) fails to explain how widespread use could be dangerous. Even if compliance would be low, that merely suggests we won't get the positive effects of the antidote, but does not explain why there might be negative effects.
(C) describes one area that the antidote does not effectively address, but the overall effect of the antidote, according to this answer choice, could still be more good than bad.
(D) is close but should not have relied on the misuse of the drug. The researchers claim that widespread use (not misuse) of the drug could be dangerous.
(E) explains why widespread use of the antidote could be dangerous, even though it is effective at controlling chicken pox and has no known side effects.

Tough one though. Let me know if you still need some more help with this...

[geverett]

Alright Matt. You just warranted a thanks on that one. The distinction you drew between widespread use and misuse was about as good as it gets. Not trying to kiss ass at all. I'm pledging allegiance to this post in my living room right now.

[geverett]

Hey Matt,
One more thing. How is a "negative consequence" different from a "serious side effect"?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

I guess I see a "serious side effect" as something that a person who took the antidote would experience. Whereas a negative consequence of the antidote could be a outcome of widespread use of the antidote that exists external to the person who took the antidote.

So a side effect would be something like nausea. And a negative consequence would be a deadlier form of chicken pox coming into existence.

What do you think?

[geverett]

hmmm . . . .

Do you think a negative consequence could encompass serious side effects, but only in the case where those side effects are bad? After all there could be positive side effects right?

Here is also another way I just saw this. Tell me what you think.

In the stimulus it says: "reseachers warn that widespread use could be dangerous, even though the drug has no serious side effects . . ."

Answer choice E states that "use of the drug contributes to development of deadlier pox . . ."

So the researchers are warning that widespread use could be dangerous, but that still leaves open the possibility that it could not be dangerous.

Also the answer form says the drug contributes to deadlier form of pox which leaves it open to the possibility that the development of deadlier pox could be or could not be contingent upon other factors to actually bring about the development of the deadlier forms of chicken pox.

Maybe I'm thinking too much about this.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

hmmm . . . .

Do you think a negative consequence could encompass serious side effects, but only in the case where those side effects are bad? After all there could be positive side effects right?

I do think that there could be a negative consequence that could potentially represent a side effect - though not a serious one in this case, as the stimulus precludes that possibility. But in general and and for other situations, yes.

But the deadlier forms of chicken pox do not represent a serious side effect of the vaccine since they are not something that one experiences as a direct result of taking the vaccine but rather an indirect result of widespread use of the vaccine.

I think your concern is that answer choice (E) contradicts one of the claims we're trying to reconcile, correct? And this is something to be concerned with, though i'm very certain that it doesn't for the reason above.

Does that answer your question?

[LSAT-Chang]

Hey Matt,
I didn't like (E) because it's still talking about chicken pox, and the last sentence of the stimulus says that it is very effective at limiting the duration and SEVERITY of chicken pox.. If (E) had said something else, like it contributes to the development of other stuff, then I would have felt confident picking it, but I just thought (E) kind of contradicted what the stimulus said -- I counted "severity" of chicken pox to encompass "deadlier forms of chicken pox" -- do you see my point?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Hey So!

I do see your point, but answer choice (E) doesn't contradict the last sentence. They just blur things with the impreciseness of language. Answer choice (E) is careful to spell out that the deadlier forms of chicken pox would be new forms of chicken pox. The stimulus says that the antidote is very effective at limiting the duration and severity of chicken pox. But if there are multiple forms of chicken pox - as is implied by answer choice (E) - then which forms of chicken pox is the stimulus referring to? I think it's fair to say that it's referring to the currently known forms of chicken pox. Any knew form of chicken pox is probably yet to be assessed.

Make sense?

[LSAT-Chang]

Yes! Now it makes sense! Now that I read it again, I can see that the stimulus is referring to the "severity" of THE chicken pox that is mentioned in the stimulus -- not other deadlier forms of chicken pox as (E) brings in. Thanks for clearing this one up for me!!

[Dmitriy.Oziransky]

I just got rid of D because the stimulus said there are no serious side effects to the drug and death seems to be a pretty serious side effect, is this thought process wrong?

[sumukh09]

Hey Matt,

Wouldn't "misuse" of the drug be more likely if there was widespread usage of the drug? The stim says widespread use could be dangerous and if there's widespread use then misuse of the drug is more likely since the number of users is larger. If 1 out of every 5 people accidentally take larger than prescribed doses then more people would die if there were 100 users as opposed to only 10. The difference being that 100 represents widespread usage relative to only 10 people using the drug.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Wouldn't "misuse" of the drug be more likely if there was widespread usage of the drug?

I hate to respond to a question with a question, but isn't that an assumption? Do we need to assume that misuse would be greater if their was widespread use of the drug?

I do see your point, and it does make sense to me, but I'm tasked with reconciling the two given statements. Answer choice (E) reconciles the two without a further assumption, whereas answer choice (D) does require that additional assumption - seems like grounds for dismissing answer choice (D) to me.

[mjacob0511]

I think the problem with (D) isn't use vs. misuse.

Researchers warn that its WIDESPREAD use could be dangerous. This is meant to confuse people since widespread means a lot and overdosing means a lot. However, widespread means a lot in an across the globe sense. The researcher is saying if for example, people in all different countries are taking this antidote, then it can be dangerous. He's not talking about the quantity each individual consumes.

(E) addresses this. The use of the drug contributes to the development of deadlier forms that are resistant. So it's dangerous for everyone to take this because then a new strain of the virus will develop and there won't be anything to do about it. (E) allows for the fact that in isolated cases, where maybe other meds are not available, that one can take this antidote and as the paradox mentions, it is very effective.

[Aquamarine]

I still don't understand why D is wrong and E is the right answer.

I don't see why E is related to widespread use part. The reason why I chose D is "taking larger-than-prescribed doses" part.
Can "taking larger-than-prescribed doses" be "widespread use" which the stimulus says?

Can anyone enlighten me why D is wrong and E is right?

Thanks!

[tommywallach]

I don't see how widespread use would have any connection to the size of the dose.

-t