很困惑啊 LAST-2-2-22

Questions 22-23

Despite improvements in treatment for asthma, the death rate form this disease has doubled during the past decade from its previous rate. Two possible explanations for this increase have been offered. First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously. Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution. However, since the rate of deaths due to asthma has increased dramatically even in cities with long-standing, comprehensive medical records and with little or no urban pollution, one must instead conclude that the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms.

22. Each of the following, if true, provides support to the argument EXCEPT:

(A) Urban populations have doubled in the past decade.

(B) Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years.

(C) Evidence suggests that bronchial inhalers make the lungs more sensitive to irritation by airborne pollen.

(D) By temporarily relieving the symptoms of asthma, inhalers encourage sufferers to avoid more beneficial measures.(A)（A）

(E) Ten years ago bronchial inhalers were not available as an asthma treatment.

Q:为什么是A呢？我选的是B

我的想法：在原文中也说到了First, the recording of deaths due to asthma has become more widespread and accurate in the past decade than it had been previously.所以由此看来如果像B中所说的，并没有发生records has become more accurate,又如何能support呢？

反而A，如果populations have doubled 话，很有可能death rate 会上升啊？退一步说，虽然在原文中未提到人口增加的原因，所以也可以说A项无关，所以排除的话，但是我也想不明白为什么B就可以支持原文呢？

是不是哪里理解错了，或是漏掉了什么关键信息呢？很困惑啊，找了半天也没发现以前关于这题讨论的帖子，希望有人指点啊

The argument's conclusion is "the cause of increased deaths is the use of bronchial inhalers by asthma sufferers to relieve their symptoms".

"First, the recording of deaths ...." and "Second, there has been an increase in urban pollution" are two explanations the arugment does not agree with.

B, "Records of asthma deaths are as accurate for the past twenty years as for the past ten years" weakens the first explanation that the argument disagrees with, therefore strengthenes the argument.

A, strengthenes the second explanation that the argument disagrees with, therefore weakens the argument.

Got it

THANKS