備考資料:GMAT優(yōu)秀作文范文
The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of a company that makes shampoo.
A widely publicized study claims that HR2, a chemical compound in our shampoo, can contribute to hair loss after prolonged use. This study, however, involved only 500 subjects. Furthermore, we have received no complaints from our customers during the past year, and some of our competitors actually use more HR2 per bottle of shampoo than we do. Therefore, we do not need to consider replacing the HR2 in our shampoo with a more expensive alternative.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
The president of the company that produces Glabrous Shampoo argues against removing the ingredient HR2 from the shampoo even though a scientific study claims that prolonged use of HR2 can contribute to hair loss. Three reasons are cited as the basis for this decision. First, it is argued that since the scientific study involved only 500 subjects, it can be disregarded. Second, none of Glabrous customers have complained of problems during the past year. And, finally, Glabrous competitors use more HR2 per bottle than Glabrous. The presidents decision is problematic in several respects.
To begin with, the fact that the scientific study on HR2 involved only 500 subjects is insufficient grounds to dismiss the results of that study. If the subjects for the study were randomly chosen and represent a diverse cross section of the population of shampoo users, the results will be reliable regardless of the number of participants.
【備考資料:GMAT優(yōu)秀作文范文】相關(guān)文章：
備考資料GMAT優(yōu)秀作文范文08-05
備考資料：GMAT優(yōu)秀作文范文01-28
備考資料GMAT優(yōu)秀作文01-29
GMAT優(yōu)秀作文備考資料07-26
GMAT作文優(yōu)秀備考資料07-26
備考資料:GMAT優(yōu)秀作文07-24
備考資料：GMAT優(yōu)秀作文07-19
備考資料：GMAT優(yōu)秀范文精選07-22