Secondhand clothing

[metallicafan]

In America, children who are given secondhand clothing tend to come from households with more children. This makes sense, but what is unusual is that children who wear secondhand clothing also tend to be injured accidentally more often than children who do not wear secondhand clothing.

Which of the following statements best explains the conclusion drawn above?
(A) Children who wear secondhand clothing tend to have parents who are more concerned about their safety and well-being.
(B) Children who wear clothing that doesn't fit well are more likely to get their sleeves and cuffs caught on playground equipment and have accidents.
(C) Younger children who come from larger families tend to get injured accidentally at high rates because they tend to engage in rough play with their older siblings.
(D) The youngest child, who gets the most secondhand clothing, is also the most likely to have an accidental injury.
(E) Secondhand clothing is nearly indistinguishable from clothing bought new.

I don't agree with the OA, which is C . There is nothing in the argument that suggests that younger children use secondhand clothing. According to CR theory, we cannot assume things that are not literally expressed in the argument.

[confuse mind]

Another problem I see with this question is : there is no explicit conclusion

[Bill@VeritasPrep]

A--This would appear to weaken; if the parents are more concerned about the safety of their children, it is likely that the number of accidental injuries would be lower.

B--There is nothing in the stimulus about how the clothing fits.

C--We're not really making an assumption here. The stimulus says that "children who are given secondhand clothing tend to come from households with more children". It also says that "this makes sense"...why does this make sense? Because clothing purchased for the older children can be given to the younger children. Once we make this connection, we can see that this is the best answer.

D--The stimulus implies a positive correlation between secondhand clothing and accidental injury, but it does not say that more secondhand clothing leads to more accidental injuries.

E--Irrelevant to the clothing/injury link.

[agarwalva]

I marked b ..

but later after reading Bill's post realized that option B is about Children who wear clothing that doesn't fit well and the argument is about children who get second hand clothes. So for option b we need to assumes that second hand clothes are over sized