Heath insurance argument

[dv2020]

Dr. Schilling: Those who advocate replacing my country's private health insurance system with nationalized health insurance because of the rising costs of medical care fail to consider the high human costs that consumers pay in countries with nationalized insurance: access to high-technology medicine is restricted and kidney transplants and open-heart surgery is rationed. People are denied their right to treatments they want and need.
Dr. Laforte: Your country's reliance on private health insurance denies access even to basic, conventional medicine to the many people who cannot afford adequate health coverage. With nationalized insurance, rich and poor have equal access to life-saving medical procedures, and people's right to decent medical treatment regardless of income is not violated.
Dr. Schilling's and Dr. Laforte's statements provide the most support for holding that they would disagree about the truth of which one of the following?
(A) People's rights are violated less when they are denied an available medical treatment they need because they lack the means to pay for it than when they are denied such treatment on noneconomic grounds.
(B) Where health insurance is provided by private insurance companies, people who are wealthy generally receive better health care than do people who are unable to afford health insurance.
(C) In countries that rely primarily on private health insurance to pay for medical costs, most people who would benefit from a kidney transplant receive one.
(D) In countries with nationalized health insurance, no one who needs a familiar medical treatment in order to stay alive is denied that treatment.
(E) Anyone who wants a particular medical treatment has a right to receive that treatment.

OA is A

[itsmebharat]

IMO B

[galaxian]

I think A
Dr Laforte should agree with B IMO.

[gmatjeet]

Should be A

[baladon99]

it was quite tough for me. I choose A. Official answer please.