medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A pharmaceutical company developed a new drug that was shown in clinical trials to be significantly more effective at treating a specific condition than the existing standard medication. However, when the drug was released to the general public, the percentage of patients who saw improvement in their condition was lower than the percentage of patients who improved using the standard medication.
Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent paradox?
- The condition the drug treats is one that frequently clears up on its own over time even without any medical treatment.
- The standard medication has been sold for more than twenty years, so its side-effect profile is thoroughly documented.
- Because the new drug costs more than the standard one, some patients elect to stay on the older, cheaper treatment.
- The new drug demands a far more intricate dosing schedule that ordinary patients routinely fail to follow correctly, whereas trial participants were closely supervised to ensure compliance.
- The new drug proved so superior in trials that experts predicted it would render the standard medication completely obsolete.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?