Columnist: It is impossible for there to be real evidence

Columnist: It is impossible for there to be real evidence that lax radiation standards that were once in effect at nuclear reactors actually contributed to the increase in cancer rates near such sites. The point is a familiar one: who can say if a particular case of cancer is due to radiation, smoking or poor diet.

The argument's reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?

(a) argument fails to recognise that there may be convincing statistical evidence even if individual causes cannot be known
(b) argument inappropriately presupposes that what follows a certain phenomenon was caused by that phenomenon
(c) argument inappropriately draws conclusion about causes of cancer in general from evidence drawn from a particular case of cancer
(d) argument ignores other possible causes of increase in cancer rates near nuclear reactor complexes
(e) argument concludes that a claim about causal connection is false on basis of a lack of evidence for the claim.