A patient accusing a doctor of malpractice will find it difficult to

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the words that follow "damage" in A ("if"), D ("should"), and E ("lacking"). For example, this sentence, based on choice A, might be okay:

"A patient accusing a doctor of malpractice will find it difficult to prove damage IF no other doctor will testify (against the accused doctor)."

Is this WRONG just because it uses an "if" instead of a "without"? I wouldn't say so.

The tendency on SC is to look at each incorrect answer choice in a bubble, come up with black and white reasons for why it's wrong ("there has to be a contrasting word" or "unless cannot be used with future tense"), and then try to apply those made-up reasons to other questions. This approach is satisfying because it's simple -- all you have to do is memorize enough of these so-called rules, right?

But unfortunately, GMAT SC isn't that simple. That approach might help to an extent, but it won't help you achieve elite SC results. That's because your job is to select the BEST answer choice out of the five available options -- that's much different than looking at a single sentence in a bubble and trying to determine whether it's "correct" or "incorrect" based on grammar rules.

And that's why our earlier explanation is so unsatisfying. I'd love to tell you that (A) is wrong because it doesn't have a contrasting word, but I don't think it's that simple.

So I'll stand by what we wrote earlier:


Besides, this question was retired quite a while ago -- perhaps for good reason.

I hope that helps a bit!