PrepTest 130

Incorrect. First, the argument goes into detail here, bringing up a few of the functions that are disrupted by the drug. Second, even if it didn't, that wouldn't necessarily be a flaw—it could be the case that messing with the usual functions of the human body is enough to argue against the use of the drug.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
This drug causes severe side effects, so it shouldn't be used to treat a certain disease.

Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion here makes a recommendation—don't use a new drug to treat a disease. Whenever an argument makes a recommendation, it needs to establish the criteria in making that recommendation.

Here, the argument doesn't establish the criteria for determining if a drug should be used to treat a disease. It establishes only that the drug has pretty serious side effects. As such, it's assuming that serious side effects are sufficient to justify the recommendation against using it.

Are serious side effects enough to conclude that a drug shouldn't be used? Nope—there are other considerations that may overcome those side effects! For instance, if the disease is deadly, or has even worse consequences, it might be worth braving the side effects in order to prevent those symptoms.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that the recommendation against using a medicine needs to take into account the effects of the disease. Even if the side effects of a medicine are particularly bad, it might be worth accepting them if the disease is worse. If these are the side effects of cancer chemotherapy, for instance, it's likely worth accepting them to fight the cancer.

Key Takeaway:
Recommendations require a premise establishing the criteria by which that recommendation will be made. Short of that, the argument is assuming that the premises meet the criteria, and so you can infer what the assumed criteria are and find an answer that raises an alternative set of criteria or speaks to whether the assumed criteria is the right or wrong one to use.

Incorrect. The argument concludes that the use of the drug should be discontinued, which only assumes that some people with the disease are receiving the drug as treatment, not that all of them are.

Incorrect. The argument considers the side effects as severe enough to recommend against using the drug. As such, when the drug takes effect doesn't matter—whether it's a week or a year, the side effects would stay the same.

Incorrect. What's relevant isn't how bad the side effects are between patients, but rather how they compare to the disease it's treating. Even if the side effects are much worse in some patients than others, they could still be much less severe than the effects of the disease being treated.