The average life expectancy for the US population as a whole is 73.9 years, but children born in Hawaii will live an average age of 77 years, and those born in Louisiana, 71.7 years. If a newly wed couple from Louisiana were to begin their family in Hawaii, therefore, their children would be expected to live longer than would be the if the family remained in Louisiana.
Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the colclusion drawn in the passage?
A Insurance company statisticians do not belive that moving to Hawaii will significantly lengthen the average Louisianan's life
B The governor of Louisiana has falsely alleged that statistics for his state are inaccurate.
C The longivity ascribed to Hawwai's current popilation is attributable mostly to genetically determined factors
D Thirty percent of all Louisianans can expect to live longer than 77 years
E Most of the Hawwaiian Islands have levels of air population well below the national average for the US"
If you find the choices given convincing, then please explain why is the OA is correct.
Precicely, my doubt is that, as OA says, "Hawwai's current popilation", the genes affects longivity of the CURRENT poppulation, not necessarily the future population. So I would like to know,is the OA structurally correct?
Its one of OG question.