Consumer advocate: The toy-labeling law should require manufacturers to provide explicit safety labels on toys to indicate what hazards the toys pose. The only labels currently required by law are labels indicating the age range for which a toy is intended. For instance, a “three and up” label is required on toys that pose a choking hazard for children under three years of age. Although the current toy-labeling law has indeed reduced the incidence of injuries to children from toys, parents could prevent such injuries almost entirely if toy labels provided explicit safety information.
Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the consumer advocate’s argument?
One has to note that clearly it is stated that existing toy-labeling law is about age as its base. What is REQUIRED that that the law should have explicit safety labels i.e. it is not practiced right now. Hence there must be some faults in the existing labeling.
(A)
Certain types of toys have never been associated with injury to children. - WRONG. Irrelevant. Does nothing.
(B) Most parents believe that the current labels are recommendations regarding level of cognitive skill. - CORRECT. It's the perception of parents that is causing the injuries.
(C) The
majority of children injured by toys are
under three years of age. - WRONG. It is the 2nd best contender. It suggests that under 3 years of age children require safety labels on their toys. But it does not state what is the actual reason for those injuries.
(D) Many
parents do not pay attention to manufacturers’ labels when they select toys for their children. - WRONG. May be a trap. But it actually weakens since even after those safety labels injuries might continue to happen.
(E) Choking is the
most serious hazard presented to children by toys. - WRONG. Irrelevant.
Answer B.
_________________
Pain + Reflection = Progress | Ray Dalio
Good Books to read prior to MBA