I guess this is a very new question. Don’t see anything on the thread. That said, here are my quick 2-cents:
-Claim: The data of the last 50 years is proof that it is unlikely that the cost of treating any particular disease will reduce just because of med technological improvements
-Logic: Because… while med tech has improved tremendously, annual overall spending on disease treatment has not reduced, it has also risen sharply
-One flaw I can think of: The cost of treating any particular disease may really have come down. But because of more number of patients, the annual overall spend increased rather than decreased. There are more such.
-Question: Flaw EXCEPT. Find the one thing which, even if it possibly changes, does not make the argument vulnerable.
-Choice A: if the average age changes, say increases, more elders could mean more patients than before – as an example. Then, even if the technology is better, the overall spend on disease treatment could still
...
-Claim: The data of the last 50 years is proof that it is unlikely that the cost of treating any particular disease will reduce just because of med technological improvements
-Logic: Because… while med tech has improved tremendously, annual overall spending on disease treatment has not reduced, it has also risen sharply
-One flaw I can think of: The cost of treating any particular disease may really have come down. But because of more number of patients, the annual overall spend increased rather than decreased. There are more such.
-Question: Flaw EXCEPT. Find the one thing which, even if it possibly changes, does not make the argument vulnerable.
-Choice A: if the average age changes, say increases, more elders could mean more patients than before – as an example. Then, even if the technology is better, the overall spend on disease treatment could still
...
Statistics : Posted by HarshaR • on 21 Nov 2022, 19:20 • Replies 2896 • Views 100415







.jpg)



