Question

an ad for seat belts claimed that proper usage of seat belts
educes the chance of fatality in a car crash by 400 percent.\ what is wrong with this statement?

choose the correct answer below.

a. if fatalities fell by 100%, it would be cut in half. thus, a decrease of 200% means that it would be totally eliminated, and a decrease of more than 200% is impossible.

b. the statement does not mention the initial amount of fatalities.

c. the actual amount of the decrease in fatalities is less than 100%.

d. if seat belts eliminated all fatalities, it would result in a 100% reduction, so it is not possible to reduce fatalities by more than 100%.

Explanation:

To determine the error in the seat - belt ad's claim, we analyze the concept of percentage reduction. A 100% reduction means that the quantity (in this case, the chance of fatality) is reduced to 0 (i.e., all fatalities are eliminated). So, it is impossible to have a reduction of more than 100% because you can't have a negative number of fatalities (you can't reduce something by more than its entire original amount).

• Option A is incorrect. A 100% reduction means the quantity is reduced to 0, not cut in half. A 50% reduction would cut the quantity in half.
• Option B is incorrect. The issue is not about the initial amount of fatalities, but about the impossibility of a reduction greater than 100%.
• Option C is not a correct explanation of the error in the claim. The key is that a reduction greater than 100% is impossible, not about the actual amount being less than 100% in general.
• Option D correctly explains that since eliminating all fatalities (the maximum possible reduction) is a 100% reduction, a 400% reduction is impossible.

Answer:

D. If seat belts eliminated all fatalities, it would result in a 100% reduction, so it is not possible to reduce fatalities by more than 100%.