Critical Reasoning

The only purpose for which a particular type of tape is needed is to hold certain surgical wounds closed for ten days—the maximum time such wounds need tape. Newtape is a new brand of this type of tape. Newtape’s salespeople claim that Newtape will improve healing because Newtape adheres twice as long as the currently used tape does.
Which of the following statements, if true, would most seriously call into question the claim made by Newtape’s salespeople?
(A) Most surgical wounds take about ten days to heal.
(B) Most surgical tape is purchased by hospitals and clinics rather than by individual surgeons.
(C) The currently used tape’s adhesiveness is more than sufficient to hold wounds closed for ten days.
(D) Neither Newtape nor the currently used tape adheres well to skin that has not been cleaned.
(E) Newtape’s adhesion to skin that has been coated with a special chemical preparation is only half as good as the currently used tape’s adhesion to such coated skin.

C?

since the tape is needed for only 10 days, and if the current tape is able to hold it together for 10 days, then possibly Newtape wont addd any value to the healing process by having an extended removal option.

imo":C

since the tape is needed for only 10 days, and if the current tape is able to hold it together for 10 days, then possibly Newtape wont addd any value to the healing process by having an extended removal option

@niraj_a

perfect...!!!

I agree with C. If the current used tape's adhesiveness is more than sufficient to hold wounds closed for ten days, then the claim that "Newtape will improve healing because Newtape adheres twice as long as the currently used tape does" will be weakened, since it wouldn't matter how much longer Newtape can hold the wound. The current tape holds it long enough.

thanks raunekk

I will Go with option C in this case.