Which of the following most logically completes the argument given?
Asthma, a chronic breathing disorder, is significantly more common today among adult competitive swimmers than it is among competitive athletes who specialize in other sports. Although chlorine is now known to be a lung irritant and swimming pool water is generally chlorinated, it would be rash to assume that frequent exposure to chlorine is the explanation of the high incidence of asthma among these swimmers, since __________.
A. young people who have asthma are no more likely to become competitive athletes than are young people who do not have asthma
B. competitive athletes who specialize in sports other than swimming are rarely exposed to chlorine
C. competitive athletes as a group have a significantly lower incidence of asthma than do people who do not participate in competitive athletics
D. until a few years ago, physicians routinely recommended competitive swimming to children with asthma, in the belief that this form of exercise could alleviate asthma symptoms
E. many people have asthma without knowing they have it and thus are not diagnosed with the condition until they begin engaging in very strenuous activities, such as competitive athletics
Dear
AbdurRakib,
I'm happy to respond.

This is a brilliant and difficult question--the official questions are always so good!
From the prompt, we get
(a) competitive swimmers have asthma more frequently than do other competitive athletes
(b) chlorine is a lung irritant
The naive conclusion is that all the time in the chlorinated pools is what causes the asthma. The author warns us that this naive conclusion is rash, and the blank should provide some kind of alternative explanation of why competitive swimmers have asthma more frequently than do other competitive athletes.
A.
young people who have asthma are no more likely to become competitive athletes than are young people who do not have asthmaHmm. This is about those with and without asthma going into sports, but it tells us nothing about who goes in competitive swimming rather than other sports. This is irrelevant.
B.
competitive athletes who specialize in sports other than swimming are rarely exposed to chlorineWe are looking for a new explanation, and this does the exact opposite: it strengthens the explanation that the author called "
rash." This is incorrect.
C.
competitive athletes as a group have a significantly lower incidence of asthma than do people who do not participate in competitive athleticsWhile this may be true, the argument is about comparing competitive swimmers vs. those who do other competitive athletes. Thus, this statement is irrelevant.
D.
until a few years ago, physicians routinely recommended competitive swimming to children with asthma, in the belief that this form of exercise could alleviate asthma symptomsInteresting. This would provide a completely different explanation of why so many people with asthma wound up in competitive swimming. It's not that being in the pool causes the asthma (the naive, rash conclusion); instead, the people who already had asthma were sent to the pool. This is promising.
E.
many people have asthma without knowing they have it and thus are not diagnosed with the condition until they begin engaging in very strenuous activities, such as competitive Again, the comparison in the prompt is between competitive swimmers vs. those who do other competitive athletes. If all the people with "latent asthma" develop full-blown asthma when they start doing strenuous athletic activity, why would it show up only for swimmers and not for all other kinds of athletes. It's not as if swimming is the only kind of strenuous activity out there. This is irrelevant.
The only possible answer is
(D), the OA.
Does this make sense?
Mike

Could I consider it as a weakener and thus a potential answer (not considering D)?