mediocregenius
Sorry, but the posted answer is actually A.
I think there is some kind of misunderstanding here.
The answer is, in fact,
A.
Conclusion: Therefore, employees of Company O are less likely to have job-related accidents than are employees of Company P.
Now, what would strengthen this conclusion? Something that makes the conclusion more likely. If there were an answer choice that tells us that working conditions are worse at Company P than Company O, or that Company P's manufacturing process is more dangerous.
(A) Company P manufactures products that are more hazardous for workers to produce than does Company O. This answer choice does exactly what was explained previously. It says P's manufacturing process is more dangerous. Strengthener? Definitely yes. Keep.
(B) Company P holds more safety inspections than does Company O. If anything, this choice weakens the conclusion. It makes Company P likely to have fewer job-related accidents than Company O. Eliminate.
(C) Company P maintains a more modern infirmary than does Company O. Again, this choice weakens the conclusion. It makes Company P likely to have fewer job-related accidents than Company O. Also, this isn't relevant and does not have any effect on the occurrence of job-related accidents. Eliminate.
(D) Company O paid more for new job-related medical claims than did Company P. If anything, this choice weakens the conclusion. It makes Company P seem like it has fewer job-related accidents than Company O. Again, this isn't relevant and does not have any effect on the occurrence of job accidents. Eliminate.
(E) Company P provides more types of health-care benefits than does Company O. This clearly does not have any effect on the occurrence of job accidents. Eliminate.
Correct answer: A. Hope this makes sense.