. GWD30-Q19:

Industrial accidents are more common when some of the people in safety-sensitive jobs have drinking problems than when none do.  Since, even after treatment, people who have had drinking problems are somewhat(稍微) more likely than other people to have drinking problems in the future, any employer trying to reduce the risk of accidents should bar anyone who has ever been treated for a drinking problem from holding a safety-sensitive job.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument above?

1. Some companies place employees who are being treated for drinking problems in residential programs（可在家工作的项目） and allow them several weeks of paid sick leave
                       . SUPPORT
2. Many accidents in the workplace are the result of errors by employees who do not hold safety-sensitive jobs.  无关

3. Workers who would permanently（永久） lose their jobs if they sought treatment for a drinking problem try instead to conceal（隐瞒） their problem and continue working for as long as possible.
4. People who hold safety-sensitive jobs are subject to stresses that can exacerbate（恶化） any personal problems they may have, including drinking problems.
5. Some industrial accidents are caused by equipment failure rather than by employee error.
                       无关

   Answer: C

答案是C，但想不通，我选D觉得有点因果倒置的味道

why D is not right?

D本末倒置了，不削弱么...vwhy  vwhy??help~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

个人觉得d无关，而且不是因果倒置，因为前面交代了这种人已经出过事而被送去治疗，那他的病因就不会被考虑在内。个人浅见，请指正

个人认为:

题目的结论是评价招工时某中措施的有效性，C选项即讨论该问题，

而D选项说的是病的原因，不够扣题，无关

D 无关

B反而是有关  直接从前提削弱了结论了啊  B才是正确答案