Since the routine use of antibiotics can give rise to resistant bacter

Option C is not incorrect because it does a comparison between urban and rural setup. Option C means that even though meat is of comparable quality still people in urban areas have more resistant bacteria. It means it's not the meat but something else most evidently the env. i.e. urban that causes more resistant bacteria. So, actually option C weakens the argument instead of strengthening it, since as per the scientists it's the consumption of bacterially infected meat that causes resistant bacteria.

The scientists believe that most resistant bacteria in people come from human consumption of bacterially infected meat. To strengthen their hypothesis, we need to find a statement that provides support. Let's evaluate the options:

(A) Antibiotics are routinely included in livestock feed so that livestock producers can increase the rate of growth of their animals.
This statement suggests that antibiotics are commonly used in livestock feed, which increases the likelihood of resistant bacteria developing in animals. This supports the hypothesis that the consumption of bacterially infected meat could lead to the presence of resistant bacteria in people.

(B) Most people who develop food poisoning from bacterially infected meat are treated with prescription antibiotics.
This statement does not directly strengthen the hypothesis of the scientists. It discusses the treatment of food poisoning with antibiotics but does not provide evidence linking it to the presence of resistant bacteria in people.

(C) The incidence of resistant bacteria in people has tended to be much higher in urban areas than in rural areas where meat is of comparable quality.
This statement provides information about the incidence of resistant bacteria in urban and rural areas but does not directly strengthen the hypothesis of the scientists.

(D) People who have never taken prescription antibiotics are those least likely to develop resistant bacteria.
This statement suggests that individuals who have never taken prescription antibiotics are less likely to develop resistant bacteria. This weakens the hypothesis of the scientists since it implies that the consumption of bacterially infected meat may not be the primary source of resistant bacteria in people.

(E) Livestock producers claim that resistant bacteria in animals cannot be transmitted to people through infected meat.
This statement, if true, weakens the hypothesis of the scientists since it contradicts the idea that the consumption of bacterially infected meat contributes to the presence of resistant bacteria in people.

Based on the analysis, the statement that most significantly strengthens the hypothesis of the scientists is (A) Antibiotics are routinely included in livestock feed so that livestock producers can increase the rate of growth of their animals. It provides support for the idea that the consumption of bacterially infected meat could lead to the presence of resistant bacteria in people due to the routine use of antibiotics in livestock production.