Derek: We must exploit available resources in developing effective anticancer drugs such as the one made from mature ...

Mehran March 28, 2018

Hey Gina, that would be incorrect.

Lola's conclusion is, "we should wait for a synthetic drug rather than threaten the survival of both the yew and the owl . . . "

(C) states, "Environmental concerns should play a role in decisions concerning medical research only if human lives are not at stake."

We know "only if" introduces a necessary condition so "human lives are not at stake" is the necessary condition, and "environmental concerns should play a role in decisions concerning medical research" is the sufficient condition:

ECPR ==> not HLS
HLS ==> not ECPR

Notice here that human lives are at stake (i.e. anticancer treatment), which would invoke the sufficient condition of the contrapositive to conclude that environmental concerns should NOT play a role.

But Lola is saying they should play a role, i.e. "we should wait for a synthetic drug rather than threaten the survival of both the yew and the owl, which could have far reaching consequences for an entire ecosystem."

Compare this with (E), "Avoiding actions that threaten an entire ecosystem takes precedence over immediately providing advantage to a restricted group of people."

This is exactly what Lola's argument says:

Developing drugs from mature Pacific yew trees should be avoided even though doing so would provide an advantage to a restricted group of people, i.e. cancer patients.

Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

rileygina21 April 7, 2018

Thanks!

Gabby_teixeira April 18, 2020

The correct answer says "immediately providing advantage" BUT the stimulus implies that the advantage would not be immediate.. "since an effective synthetic version of the yew's anticancer chemical could take years to develop." please explain.