BlueBook
IMO, answer is choice B.
Choice A talks about age which is an irrelevant piece of information as far as the argument is concerned.
Choice B can help to explain the discrepancy. Melanoma, a type of skin cancer, takes a while to develop until detection. We are told that after publication, the numbers of those that sunbathe decreased considerably but there was a dramatic increase in cases in 1982. One of the ways this is possible, logically, is that people sunbathed extensively before the publication and after the publication, melanoma continued to develop on their skin unknowingly even as people sunbathed less and less until it was finally detected in 1982.
Choice C should actually lead to fewer number of people in the sun. This choice ‘reinforces’ the discrepancy.
Choice D is plausible but weak when compared to choice B. The question asks us to resolve the discrepancy in the increase of the number of cases not the challenges of detection.
Choice E is similar to choice C. The use of sunblock should lead to fewer number of cases of melanoma. This choice ‘reinforces’ the discrepancy.
Why is the OA D?
Hi,
(B), literally, does NOT say that melanoma is latent for some years. We must not make additional assumptions. We know from the argument that since 1980, when health officials publicized the adverse effects of sunlight exposure, the number of people sunbathing has decreased, so (B) only adds a reason for explaining why people sunbathed that much before 1980. Ok, before 1980 people sunbathed a lot because they regarded sunbathing as healthy. But WHY did the number of cases of melanoma rise in 1982, a particular year? (B) does not help explain this discrepancy.
(D) is the correct answer. For example, before 1980, there are 100 cases of melanoma but the diagnostic technique then could only detect 50% of cases (it could only detect melanoma when the disease is at a later phase), hence 50 cases of melanoma were detected. In 1982, there were, say, only 80 cases of melanoma (thanks to less exposure to sunlight), but the perfected diagnostic technique helped detect melanoma MUCH EARLIER than before with the capacity of detecting, say, 80% of cases. Then, 64 cases of melanoma was detected and we see an increase of cases of melanoma in 1982. Hence, there may be FEWER TOTAL CASES of melanoma (thanks to less sunlight exposure) but MORE DETECTED CASES of melanoma (thanks to the perfected diagnostic technique.) This would explain the discrepancy in the argument.
Also, note that the question says "Which one of the following, if true, HELPS to resolve the apparent discrepancy in the information above?". So, (D) may not DEFINITELY resolve the discrepancy. It is possible that some unknown cause made the number of cases of melanoma increase suddenly in the particular year of 1982. But (D) HELPS to resolve the discrepancy.