I get where you guys are coming from, but doesn't the data in C substantially weaken the argument? The argument is that this legislation will curb the condition. If by means of some other activity, say cricket, adolescents are still able to get this wrist condition, how is the legislation curbing it? Still not 100% clear in my mind.
For every CR questions, conclusion is key. What is conclusion here?
The conclusion is: "prohibits the sale of video games to minors would help curb this painful wrist condition among adolescents
". KEY word is "SALE
How "prohibit the SALE
" can curb the painful wrist condition? There must be a link between "sale" and "painful wrist condition". Let see the flow: BUY video games ==> PLAY video games ==> HAVE wrist condition.
The assumption should be: STOP buying video games ==> STOP playing video games ==> CURB the painful wrist condition. Option D.
How to stop buying? Federal will stop all people (adolescents and even their parents) buying video games. Option D states the assumption by indicating the 'buying video games" will be stopped ==> adolescent cannot play video games anymore. D is correct.Option C.
The fact "Playing video games is the only way an adolescent can develop carpal tunnel syndrome" is true. It just shows the cause of the wrist condition, but does not link "sales
video games" to "wrist condition" . Thus, it's not the assumption of the conclusion: "prohibit SALES
videos games will curb wrist condition". That's why I said above "SALE" is key word. C will be an assumption
of the conclusion "prohibits PLAYING
video games to minors would help curb this painful wrist condition among adolescents".
In short, when attack CR questions, you should read a stimulus VERY carefully. CR differs from RC because CR stimulus is SHORT, but every word is important. Do not skim.
Hope it helps.
Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.
"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."
Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.