DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:

lheiannie07 wrote:Safety consultant: Judged by the number of injuries per licensed vehicle, minivans are the safest vehicles on the road. However, in carefully designed crash tests, minivans show no greater ability to protect their occupants than other vehicles of similar size do. Thus, the reason minivans have such a good safety record is probably not that they are inherently safer than other vehicles, but rather that they are driven primarily by low-risk drivers.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the safety consultant's argument?


(A) When choosing what kind of vehicle to drive, low-risk drivers often select a kind that they know to perform particularly well in crash tests.

(B) Judged by the number of accidents per licensed vehicle, minivans are no safer than most other kinds of vehicles are.

(C) Minivans tend to carry more passengers at any given time than do most other vehicles.

(D) In general, the larger a vehicle is, the greater its ability to protect its occupants.

(E) Minivans generally have worse braking and emergency handling capabilities than other vehicles of similar size.

Hi experts, can some explain to me why The best Option makes it best?

OA E

We know that minivans have the fewest injuries per vehicle. Two explanations are offered. First, there's the possibility that the vehicles are inherently safer, an argument the consultant rejects. Second, there's the possibility that the drivers of minivans are just better. This is an argument that the consultant supports.

If we want to strengthen the consultant's stance, we want to show either that minivans are not inherently safer or that minivan drivers really are just better. E gives us the first scenario - more evidence that minivans are not safer than other vehicles, lending credence to the idea that it's the drivers responsible for the superior safety record, not the vehicles.