1.

Being medicated has become an American way of life. In 2003, worldwide drug sales amounted to $317 billion. Consumers in the United States were responsible for $163 billion of that total, or more than 50 percent. One pharmaceutical company, Johnson & Johnson, made $204 million in revenue in 1954. Today, its annual revenue is about $36 billion. Millions of people now routinely swallow medications in order to treat or prevent everything from heart disease to indigestion. As author James German has pointed out, "It is not unusual for someone to begin the day with a cocktail of antidepressants, statins [cholesterol-reducing drugs], and blood pressure medications." Many others are gulping down drugs that will enhance their appearance or improve sexual performance. Dr. Isaac Schiff of Boston's Massachusetts General Hospital says that many people in their 40s and 50s are even taking drugs to prevent diseases that might strike in their 70s. But it's not just the middle-aged or elderly who are pharmaceutical customers. In 2002, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 10 million children took prescription medications for three months or more. In short, so many people are on some medication that researchers such as Dr. Christian G. Daughton of the Environmental Protection Agency are becoming worried about the effects of all of these drugs on the environment. They wonder, for example, how all of the discarded and excreted pharmaceuticals in waste water will ultimately affect the fish in our lakes and streams. Pharmacracy, a book by psychiatrist Dr. Thomas Szasz, argues that drugs now define our lives. And a 2003 report from the President's Council on Bioethics expressed concern that everything in American life—including the pursuit of happiness and physical perfection—has become a medical problem that people now expect drugs to solve. (Source of information: James Gorman, "The Altered Human is Already Here," The New York Times, April 6, 2004, www.nytimes.com)

From this passage, a reader might logically draw which conclusion?

2.

If you are looking for a way to finance a new home or automobile, you should beware of predatory lenders. A "predatory lender" is one that uses aggressive sales tactics to talk consumers into borrowing money under unfair and even abusive terms. In fact, William Pride, Robert Hughes, and Jack Kapoor, the authors of a popular business textbook, warn their readers about the ruin predatory lenders can cause. They liken these lenders to old-fashioned loan sharks, the gangsters who loan money at exorbitant interest rates. The authors say that a predatory lender may not send someone to break your legs, as the loan sharks would, if you failed to send in your payment on time. However, predatory lenders often grant loans they know the borrower cannot repay so that they can repossess the property pledged as collateral for the loan. Indeed, predatory lenders tend to target the elderly, low-income groups, and people with no credit or bad credit. A predatory lender will take advantage of such people's circumstances or lack of knowledge to saddle them with high interest rates, huge fees, and harassing collection tactics. (Sources of information: William M. Pride et al., Business, 7th ed., Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2002, p. 555; Michael T. Killian, "Predatory Lenders Usually Push Their Services on Those Who Need Money," http://credit.about.com/cs/loansmortgage/a/021804_p.htm)

From this passage, a reader might logically draw which conclusion?

3.

America's highways are becoming choked with too many cars, and many of our nation's roads are crumbling under the strain of too much traffic. From 1980 to 2000, the number of miles traveled by American vehicles increased 45 percent while road space increased only 2 percent. According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDT), about 15 percent of our interstate highway system is rated "mediocre" or "poor." Of course, fixing these problems is going to require money—$375 billion, according to the USDT. But who should have to pay the bill? Some say that charging more tolls is the answer. However the fairest way to fund new roads and repair existing ones is by increasing the federal tax on gasoline. Paying a few extra pennies per gallon may allow us all to avoid spending our precious time sitting in gridlock. It might also encourage many motorists to explore mass transit options that will help conserve fuel. The last time the federal tax was raised was 1993, so it's high time that it be increased again to help get us out of the jam that we're in. (Source of information: "Gas Tax Can Ease Gridlock," no author credited, USA Today, June 14, 2004.)

From this passage, a reader might logically draw which conclusion?

4.

We live in an age of rapid technological advancement, and new scientific discoveries are made every day. Unfortunately, though, some scientific claims are actually questionable or even bogus. Even the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) wasted a million dollars funding the research of a Russian scientist who claimed to have invented an antigravity machine, which—had it worked—would have violated all of the laws of physics. If NASA can be so easily duped, how are average Americans to know if they should place any stock in claims of new scientific advances? Dr. Robert L. Park, physics professor and author of Voodoo Science: The Road From Foolishness to Fraud, says that every citizen can spot bogus claims by watching for several key warning signs. For one thing, if the discoverer pitches his or her claim directly to the media, that claim is probably suspect. Reputable scientists first submit their new ideas and findings to their colleagues in the rest of the scientific community, not to the general public. And if the announcement is made in a paid commercial advertisement, as when a health-food company unveiled the discovery of a new dietary supplement called "Vitamin O," it is even more dubious (Vitamin O turned out to be saltwater). Another quality of a bogus claim is often the discoverer's assertion that the scientific establishment has tried to suppress his or her work in order to avoid a loss of wealth or power. According to Dr. Park, "Claims that the oil companies are frustrating the invention of an automobile that runs on water, for instance, are a sure sign that the idea of such a car is baloney." Yet another characteristic of a questionable claim is the scientist's inability to provide clear proof. Anecdotal evidence—such as individual eyewitness accounts of telepathy or flying saucers—is not enough. Instead, reputable scientists can provide photographs, demonstrations, measurements, and other kinds of data to back up the validity of their discoveries. (Source of information: Robert L. Park, Ph.D., "Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science," Quackwatch, March 5, 2003, www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/signs.html. Originally published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, January 31, 2003.)

From this passage, a reader might logically draw which conclusion?

5.

The Jeanne Clery Act, which was signed into law by President George Bush as the Crime Awareness and Campus Security Act of 1990, requires all college and universities that receive federal aid to publish an annual report of crime statistics for their campuses and areas adjacent to their campuses. This law was passed after young college student Jeanne Clery was murdered in her dormitory room at Lehigh University in 1986. Her killer, a drug and alcohol abuser, gained access through three propped-open doors that should have been locked, and Clery's parents accused Lehigh University officials of failing to make students aware of crime so that they would take steps to protect themselves. Over a decade later, has the Jeanne Clery Act helped make college campuses safer? College professors Steven M. Janosik and Dennis E. Gregory studied questionnaires designed to measure the influence of the law. These questionnaires, which were distributed to campus security administrators, revealed that the Act has positively affected some campus law enforcement practices. According to Janosik and Gregory, 43 percent of the campus law enforcement officers who responded to the questionnaire reported that the Act had improved the quality of their law enforcement procedures, and 44 percent said that the Act has been "effective or very effective" in improving the quality of campus safety programs. Fifty-three percent of respondents believed that the campus programs created or improved by the Act had increased students' confidence in their campus police forces. However, 90 percent of respondents reported that the Clery Act had not changed students' behavior or had any effect on their campus crime rates. Indeed, other research indicates that many students are not even aware of the Act and don't pay attention to campus crime-related materials such as posters and flyers. Thus, the effectiveness of the Clery Act has been mixed. (Source of information: Steven M. Janosik and Dennis E. Gregory, "The Clery Act and Its Influence on Campus Law Enforcement Practices," NASPA Journal, Fall 2003.)

From this passage, a reader might logically draw which conclusion?