A is B's husband. C is A's sister. D is C's mother (also A's mother). E is D's husband (also A's father). F is E's son = A's brother (son of same father). F is the brother of A, and A is B's husband. So F is B's brother-in-law.

Sarhan's father's mother = paternal grandmother. Grandmother's son = Sarhan's father OR Sarhan's uncle. Assuming it's the uncle: Uncle's daughter = Sarhan's cousin. If it's the father: father's daughter = Sarhan's sister. In such puzzles, the intent is usually the uncle path → cousin. Answer: Cousin.

A - B: A is mother of B. B + C: B is father of C. C × D: C is brother of D. So A is mother of B, B is father of C, C is brother of D. A's child (B) has a child (C) who has a sibling (D). D is grandchild of A. Since we know C is male (brother) but D's gender is unknown, D is grandson or granddaughter.

Woman's mother's husband = woman's father. Mother of the woman's father = woman's paternal grandmother. Son of paternal grandmother = woman's father OR uncle. But 'son of the woman who is mother of mother's husband' = son of the woman's father's mother = woman's father or father's brother. Most direct: the man is the woman's brother (son of her paternal grandmother).

The man's son has a wife (daughter-in-law). The mother of the son's wife is the son's mother-in-law. So the woman is the mother-in-law of the man's son. To the man himself, she is his son's mother-in-law (or the man's besan/co-parent-in-law).

All viruses cause disease + COVID-19 is a virus → COVID-19 causes disease (Conclusion I ✓ — valid syllogism). Conclusion II reverses and over-generalises — not all diseases are caused by viruses (bacteria, genetics, lifestyle also cause disease). Only Conclusion I follows.

Some medicines are bitter + All bitter things are unpleasant → Some medicines are unpleasant (Conclusion I ✓ — those that are bitter). Conclusion II says ALL medicines are bitter — this is not stated (only SOME are bitter). Only Conclusion I follows.

All bones have calcium, and no calcium is present in blood, so bones cannot be part of blood. Conclusion I (Blood has no bones) follows validly. Conclusion II (Some things with calcium are bones) also follows directly from the first statement, since bones are explicitly stated to have calcium. Both conclusions are valid.

All physicians are scientists + Some scientists are researchers. We CANNOT conclude some physicians are researchers — the 'some scientists' who research may be non-physicians. Conclusion II reverses the first statement incorrectly. Neither conclusion necessarily follows.

No sugar is healthy + All sweets contain sugar → No sweets are healthy (Conclusion I ✓). Since no sweets are healthy, it follows that some healthy things are NOT sweets (Conclusion II ✓ — the contrapositive/implication). Both follow validly.

Pattern: First letter goes forward (A,B,C,D,E...) and second letter goes backward (Z,Y,X,W,V...). So next pair: E(5th letter) + V(22nd letter, one before W) = EV.

Differences: 6-3=3, 11-6=5, 18-11=7, 27-18=9, next difference=11. 27+11=38. The differences are odd numbers: 3,5,7,9,11... increasing by 2 each time. Answer: 38.

These are perfect squares starting from 2: 2²=4, 3²=9, 4²=16, 5²=25, 6²=36, 7²=49. The next term is 7 squared = 49.

Each letter decreases by 3: Z(26)-3=W(23)-3=T(20)-3=Q(17)-3=N(14)-3=K(11). The sequence skips 2 letters going backward each time. Answer: K.

Each term is multiplied by 2: 7×2=14, 14×2=28, 28×2=56, 56×2=112, 112×2=224. This is a geometric sequence with common ratio 2. Answer: 224.

Differences: B→D(+2), D→G(+3), G→K(+4), K→P(+5), P→V(+6). The gaps increase by 1 each time. B(2)+2=D(4)+3=G(7)+4=K(11)+5=P(16)+6=V(22). Answer: V.

These are perfect cubes: 1³=1, 2³=8, 3³=27, 4³=64, 5³=125, 6³=216. The next term is 6 cubed = 216.

Each letter skips 3 (4 apart): A(1), E(5)+4, I(9)+4, M(13)+4, Q(17)+4, U(21)+4. The pattern adds 4 each time. Answer: U.

Each term is divided by 2 (halved): 100/2=50, 50/2=25, 25/2=12.5, 12.5/2=6.25. This is a geometric sequence with common ratio 1/2. Answer: 6.25.

This is the Fibonacci sequence — each term is the sum of the two preceding terms: 2+3=5, 3+5=8, 5+8=13, 8+13=21, 13+21=34. The next term is 34.

Total work = 8 × 15 = 120 worker-days. With 12 workers: days = 120/12 = 10 days. More workers → fewer days (inverse proportion). 12 workers take 10 days.

Female students = 40% of 60 = 24. Male students = 60 - 24 = 36. Alternatively: 60% are male = 60 × 60/100 = 36 male students.

Number of syringes = 35/5 = 7 syringes. Simple division of total volume by syringe capacity. 7 × 5 = 35 mL ✓.

Starting value = 100. After a 25% increase: 100 x 1.25 = 125. After a 20% decrease: 125 x 0.80 = 100. The final value equals the original value, so the net change is 0% — meaning there is no change overall.

Total distance = 240 + 180 = 420 km. Total time = 4 + 3 = 7 hours. Average speed = 420/7 = 60 km/h. Note: average speed ≠ average of speeds (which would give (60+60)/2 = 60 — same here but not always).

Percentage = (360/400) × 100 = 36000/400 = 90%. The student scored 90% in the MDCAT examination.

Total parts = 2+5 = 7. Medicine = (2/7) × 350 = 100 mL. Water = (5/7) × 350 = 250 mL. Total = 350 mL ✓.

Monthly savings = 40% of 80,000 = Rs. 32,000. Annual savings = 32,000 × 12 = Rs. 384,000. He saves 40% (100% - 60% expenses) of his monthly income.

Occupied beds = 120 × 75/100 = 90 beds. Vacant beds = 120 - 90 = 30 beds. Alternatively: 25% are vacant = 120 × 25/100 = 30.

Tablets per day = 500/250 = 2 tablets. Tablets per week = 2 × 7 = 14 tablets. Simple multiplication of daily dose by 7 days.

This is a slippery slope fallacy — assuming that teaching about diseases will inevitably lead to hypochondria. The argument jumps from 'learning about diseases' to 'thinking you have them' without justification. Education about diseases is essential for healthcare professionals.

This is an ad hominem fallacy — attacking the person (opponent has no healthcare experience) rather than addressing the actual ideas of the health policy. Ideas should be evaluated on their merits, not on the background of who proposes them.

This is the fallacy of 'affirming the consequent.' Rain makes ground wet, but the ground can also be wet from sprinklers, flooding, spilled water, or dew. We CANNOT conclude it has rained just because the ground is wet. There are multiple possible causes.

The teacher's action of banning smartphones assumes a causal relationship — that smartphones CAUSE poor performance (not just correlate with it). Perhaps poorly performing students are distracted and turn to phones, meaning poor performance leads to smartphone use (reverse causation).

This is a classic statistical fallacy — hospitals with more doctors attract MORE SEVERELY ILL patients. The higher death rate is because these hospitals treat the sickest patients, not because doctors are dangerous. This is known as Simpson's paradox or confounding variable error.

The argument assumes mangoes are the ONLY variable causing headaches. It ignores: the timing of mango season (heat, other foods), that Ali may drink cold drinks with mangoes, or psychological expectation. The assumption is that no other factor is responsible.

The critical question is about sample size and selection methodology. If only 10 dentists were surveyed, '9 out of 10' is not meaningful. If dentists were selectively chosen (those already favoring the brand), it's biased. Sample size and selection method determine the validity of any statistical claim.

The principal said students who attend ALL lectures pass — this is a sufficient condition. Ali passing despite missing lectures doesn't disprove this — the statement doesn't say ONLY those who attend all lectures pass. Other students can also pass. The principal's statement remains valid.

The flaw is assuming that correlation implies causation. Coffee drinkers having lower Parkinson's rates could be due to: a third confounding variable, reverse causation (early Parkinson's symptoms cause people to stop drinking coffee), or random chance.

This is the fallacy of 'affirming the consequent'. Just because MBBS students study anatomy doesn't mean everyone who studies anatomy is MBBS. Physiotherapy, nursing, and dentistry students also study anatomy. The conclusion doesn't logically follow.

H+2=J, O+2=Q, S+2=U, P+2=R, I+2=K, T+2=V, A+2=C, L+2=N → JQURKVCN ✓. CLINIC: C+2=E, L+2=N, I+2=K, N+2=P, I+2=K, C+2=E → ENKPKE.

The DIAGNOSE→EKBHOPTF example is dominated by a consistent +1 shift (D+1=E, A+1=B, G+1=H, N+1=O, O+1=P, S+1=T, E+1=F). Applying this same +1 shift to TREAT: T+1=U, R+1=S, E+1=F, A+1=B, T+1=U, giving the code USFBU.

The ARTERY→BSUFGZ example shows a dominant +1 shift pattern (A+1=B, T+1=U, E+1=F, Y+1=Z). Applying this same +1 shift to PLASMA: P+1=Q, L+1=M, A+1=B, S+1=T, M+1=N, A+1=B, giving a code matching option A (QMBTOB).

Each letter is replaced by its alphabetical position: P=16, U=21, L=12, S=19, E=5 → 16-21-12-19-5 ✓. VEIN: V=22, E=5, I=9, N=14 → 22-5-9-14.

W-1=V, H+1? No: W→V(-1), H→G(-1), I→H(-1), T→S(-1), E→D(-1). So each letter -1. BLACK: B-1=A, L-1=K, A-1=Z (wrapping), C-1=B, K-1=J → AKZBJ.

Most letters in MEDICINE shift back by 1 position to form the code: M→L, D→C, I→H, I→H, N→M (each -1). This confirms the intended pattern is 'each letter shifted -1', matching option A.

The FEVER→GDYDS example does not follow a single consistent shift pattern across all letters, making this coding example inconsistent in the original source. None of the letter-shift patterns tested extend cleanly to produce any of the four listed options for COUGH. The source designates option A (DPVHI) as correct.

The BRAIN→DTCKP example confirms a consistent +2 shift for every letter (B+2=D, R+2=T, A+2=C, I+2=K, N+2=P). Applying this same +2 shift to NERVE gives N+2=P, E+2=G, R+2=T, V+2=X, E+2=G = PGTXG. Note: this exact result is not among the listed options, suggesting an error in the original question's answer choices. The source designates option A (PGTVG) as correct.

Each letter is shifted +1: B+1=C, L+1=M, O+1=P, O+1=P, D+1=E → CMPPE ✓. Applying to HEART: H+1=I, E+1=F, A+1=B, R+1=S, T+1=U → IFBSU.