Public health expert: Until recently people believed that
applications of biochemical research would
eventually achieve complete victory over the
microorganisms that cause human disease.
However, current medical research shows that
those microorganisms reproduce so rapidly that
medicines developed for killing one variety will
only spur the evolution of other varieties that are
immune to those medicines. The most rational
public health strategy, therefore, would place
much more emphasis than at present on fully
informing people about the transmission of
diseases caused by microorganisms, with a view
to minimizing the incidence of such diseases.
Of the following, which one most accurately expresses
the conclusion drawn by the public health expert?
(A) A medicine that kills one variety of disease causing
microorganism can cause the evolution
of a drug-resistant variety.
(B) A patient who contracts a disease caused by
microorganisms cannot be effectively cured by
present methods.
(C) There is good reason to make a particular
change to public health policy.
(D) No one who is fully informed about the diseases
caused by microorganisms will ever fall victim
to those diseases.
(E) Some previous approaches to public health
policy ignored the fact that disease-causing
microorganisms reproduce at a rapid rate



Can someone explain why option a is incorrect

Ppl belief: Biochem could achve vctry over micro until rec.
BUT, killing 1 -> other micro evolves
THEREFORE, MOST rational public health strat is spread INFO

(A) is an evidence Not the Point

(B) is not supported by argument; in fact, it says it can kill one micro (BUT cause others to evolve)

(C) is exactly the point (change public health policy/strategy)

(D) is extreme / not really supported by argument

(E) is not the point