Critical Reasoning: Paradox Questions

The percentage of cases of chemical poisoning in which workers in the AB adhesive factory are involved, such cases being characterized by symptoms including vomiting, blurry vision, and constricted respiration, is not nearly as high as the percentage constructed by correctly consolidating the figures from reports conducted by similar chemical production industries and forming an accurate average. However, despite complaints about their inherent capability to cause discomfort to the face and neck area and to reduce the vision field by up to 40%, gas masks equipped with twin filters are a mandatory item for all employees working in the operational sectors of the AB adhesive factory.

Which of the following, if true, best reconciles the seeming discrepancy described above?

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

While this answer choice explain why AB would like to reduce the rates of chemical poisoning, we know that (a) these rate are already relatively low, and (b) using masks which limit field of vision could potentially cause other accidents. The paradox therefore remains unresolved.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This answer choice only gives us further details about gas masks and their efficiency. This efficiency, however, is not in question. If the gas masks are being used in the factory, and the rate of poisonings is way below the average, then they probably are effective anyway.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This answer choice makes perfect sense but has nothing to do with the paradox. It would be illogical to compare the number of poisonings in a factory that makes chemicals with the number of poisonings in a factory that makes yoghurt. However, the phrase similar chemical production industries mean the comparison in premise A is valid.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This statement cannot help us resolve the paradox. Since this question deals with percentages, actual numbers are quite useless to us. Also, there could be several other reasons for the change in the number of AB employees.

Excellent!

[[snippet]]

This answer choice tells us that before the AB employees were made to wear masks, they would quite often get poisoned. Therefore, the paradox that AB makes its employees wear masks even though it doesn't suffer from poisonings is resolved - the masks are the reason for the low poisoning rates.

The percentage of chemical poisoning cases, or, in the case of companies that produce consumer products, the percentage of physical injuries, is often an indication of a manufacturer's professionalism.

Whether of the single or twin filter type, gas masks, despite being extremely effective for protection from the inhalation of toxic substances, are completely redundant in cases of exposure to gases that enter through skin pores.

Since all adhesives contain ethanol and exylene, when comparing the frequencies of toxicity cases in factories, the inclusion of manufacturing industries that do not produce such chemicals in any step of their processes would only lead to misinformation.

Before the policy of the obligatory wearing of twin-filter gas masks had been employed, it was not at all rare that the AB adhesive factory's frequency of chemical poisoning cases would match the industry average.

The AB adhesive factory, prior to the implementation of the rule concerning the wearing of twin-filter gas masks, employed a higher number of people, both in the operational and administrative sectors, than it does today.