Occupational safety advocate: Logging is one of the most dangerous

I think it's B.
(A) Other causes of death from chainsaw are irrelevant
(B) Correct. Kickback is only the most common cause of injuries, not the most common cause of death, as the most common cause of death is injuries from falling trees. However, the argument is about preventing logging related death. Because the new chainsaw doesn't address the problems resulting from falling from trees, this answer choice weakens the argument.
(C) This is irrelevant to the effectiveness of the new chainsaw
(D) The fact that there are other equally safe chainsaws available doesn't necessarily weaken the argument.
(E) Government's support strengthens the argument, not weakens it.

Occupational safety advocate: Logging is one of the most dangerous occupations in the United States. A company has developed a chainsaw that will instantly shut off if there is kickback of the chain, which studies have shown to be the most common cause of chainsaw injuries. The logging industry should adopt this new chainsaw as standard equipment in order to prevent most of the logging-related deaths that occur each year.

It claims that the chainsaw that the company developed will prevent most logging-related deaths that occur every year but we don't really get to know if the injuries caused by the chainsaw are actually fatal.

Option (B) says Injuries from falling trees cause the vast majority of deaths in the logging industry which directly leads us to believe that chainsaw injuries are not the factor behind most logging deaths and hence we have a reason not to listen to the safety advocate

KAPLAN OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

STEP 1: IDENTIFY THE QUESTION TYPE
The word “weakens” in the question stem tells you this is a Weaken question.

STEP 2: UNTANGLE THE STIMULUS
The argument you’re asked to weaken claims that the logging industry should adopt a new chainsaw to prevent most of the logging-related deaths each year. The author’s evidence is that this chainsaw shuts off if there is a kickback, thus preventing injuries. The author assumes that chainsaw injuries cause the majority of logging-related deaths.

STEP 3: PREDICT THE ANSWER
The word “should” means this conclusion is a proposal, so think about common problems with proposals on the GMAT. The author must assume that the proposed solution to the problem will work. However, if at least half of deaths in the logging industry are caused by something other than chainsaws, then greater chainsaw safety won’t eliminate most logging industry deaths. Look in the choices for evidence that most deaths are not chainsaw related.

STEP 4: EVALUATE THE CHOICES
(B) is a match for the prediction and is correct. If most deaths are caused by falling trees, not chainsaws, then safer chainsaws won’t prevent the majority of deaths. Just the fact that fatal injuries are sometimes caused by something other than kickbacks isn’t enough to say that the new chainsaw will not prevent most deaths. It might be that 99% of logging fatalities are the result of chainsaw kickbacks, in which case the argument is still valid. If anything, (C) might strengthen the argument. If the new chainsaw is cheap and easy to use, the industry might be more willing to embrace it, and then chainsaw injuries would decrease. Even
so, this statement fails to connect chainsaw injuries to logging deaths. (D) is irrelevant, as the argument is not about any chainsaw other than the new one. And finally, (E) is similar to (C) in that it potentially strengthens the argument for adopting the chainsaw but still does not show that chainsaws cause deaths among loggers.
_________________