Critical Reasoning

In countries where automobile insurance includes compensation
for whiplash injuries sustained in automobile accidents, reports of
having suffered such injuries are twice as frequent as they are in
countries where whiplash is not covered. Some commentators
have argued, correctly, that since there is presently no
objective test for whiplash, spurious reports of whiplash
injuries cannotbe readily identified. These commentators are,
however, wrong to draw the further conclusion that in the
countries with the higherrates of reported whiplash injuries, half of
the reported cases are spurious: clearly, in countires where
automobile insurance doesnot include compensation for whiplash,
people often have little incentive to report whiplash injuries that
they actually have suffered.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the
following roles?

A: The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion
that the arguemnt criticizes; the second is that conclusion
B: The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion
that the arguemnt criticizes; the second is the position that the
argument defends
C: The first is a claim that has been used to support a conclusion
that the argument accepts; the second is the position that the a
rgument defends
D: The first is an intermediate conclusion that has been used to
support a conclusion that the argument defends; the second is
the position that the argument opposes.
E: The first presents a claim that is disputed in the argument; the
second is a conclusion that has been drawn on the basis of that
claim.

There has been variants of this question and solutions; I'd
appreciate explanations/strategy for solving under 2mins.

Thanks.