Some commentators complain that a "litigation explosion" in the past decade has led to unreasonably high costs for U.S. businesses by encouraging more product liability suits against manufacturers. However, these complaints are based mainly on myth. Statistics show that the number of successful product liability suits has remained almost the same, and the average sum awarded in damages has grown no faster than the inflation rate.
Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument above?

(A) The number of unsuccessful suits has skyrocketed, imposing huge new legal expenses on businesses.
(B) Several of the largest awards ever made in product liability cases occurred within the last two years.
(C) The rise of the consumer movement has encouraged citizens to seek legal redress for product flaws.
(D) Lawyers often undertake product liability cases on a contingency basis, so their payment is based on the size of the damages awarded.
(E) Juries often award damages in product liability suits out of emotional sympathy for an injured consumer.

My analysis :
A) expenses of unsuccessful suits explains why costs have risen for businesses despite more/less same no of successful litigations.. my answer
B). Last stmt says that avg has not risen (taking into accnt the inflation). Does not weaken
C). out of scope
D). the proportion of lawyer fee has no expln why businesses have more costs due to litigations in the past decade
E). out of scope

OA is B

kindly analyze and explain why my answer is wrong.