Kprasoon29 wrote:
Can anyone explain why Option C is not a strengthener?
While i do believe option E to be a much better strengthener.
Here is my reasoning for Option C ( Please correct me if i am wrong) :
In the passage its given that Injection is primarily taken by Adults.
Now , nasal spay comes and its effective for children. So ,if new vaccine is widely available for children, Influenza spread will greatly reduce across POPULATION.
Option C: So, if the Injection is still affordable for Adults it means that there will be no decrease in the number of adults taking vaccines. And we know that nasal spray is now widely available so, number of children getting vaccinated is expected to Increase . So if there is NO DECREASE IN ADULTS GETTING VACCINATED and an INCREASE IN CHILDREN GETTING VACCINATED, Influenza spread will surely decrease across POPULATION ( adults + children) .
Notice that the conclusion is not that influenza spread will decrease.
The conclusion is that
making the new vaccine widely available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza across the population.
So, the conclusion is specifically about the effects of the making the new vaccine available.
Thus, the correct answer must support the conclusion that making the new vaccine available for children will have those effects.
(C) does not provide any support for the conclusion that making the new vaccine available for children will greatly reduce the spread of influenza.
(E) supports the conclusion of the argument presented.