Recently, many medical students have been enrolling in joint M.D./J.D. programs, in which they receive both medical and

Option A - Out of scope context!
The original statement made a comparison between students or earned a degree both in law and medicine, and their subsequent practice in each field. However, this option tells us about 'students that use to become lawyers in a field where they decide not to use their medical training', this is in contrast with the dangling statement of the question...we must still conclude that they are primarily doctors and not lawyers. This option is INCORRECT

Option B - Redundancy
The issue of being 'less diligent or not' was not the bone of contention! This option deviated so much from what the question requires. The use of 'certain recipients' and 'notable exceptions' are not in synergy with what the question emphasis.
They could be awesome, they could be awful, all that matters in this passage is what they do afterward. This option is INCORRECT

Option C - Conditional statement
This option focuses on the courses that students take, and not on the careers that they choose to pursue after obtaining their degrees. It can't be our assumption, as this statement (because of the use of if statement) concerns what happens before, not after graduation. This option is INCORRECT

Option D - Perfect match!
This option correctly supports the drawing conclusion from the question on the basis that you cannot be a lawyer by profession without necessarily practicing law!
Remember, from the question that Medical students primarily earn a law degree in order to protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits as Doctors! but they are primarily doctors by profession!. This option is CORRECT

Option E
This is not in any way helpful in identifying assumptions with the use of irrelevant words like 'doing extensive lab work'. This option focuses too much on the undergraduate times than the postgraduate times where they had to practice. This option is INCORRECT