A researcher claims that all patients with symptom X have disease Y. If a patient has disease Y but no symptom X, what does this indicate about the researcher's claim?
Q1. A researcher claims that all patients with symptom X have disease Y. If a patient has disease Y but no symptom X, what does this indicate about the researcher's claim?
Answer: The claim is invalid because the presence of Y without X contradicts it.
Explanation: A. The claim requires X to always imply Y. Presence of Y without X doesn't disprove it, but presence of X without Y would. B fails because Y without X doesn't support the claim.