The advanced technology of ski boots and bindings has brought a dramatic drop in the incidence of injuries that occur...

I can understand why E is correct (and I rationalized that slope injuries would decrease from 90% to 75%) but I don't understand why C is wrong. I was between the two answers and ended up choosing C as a "safe answer" because I saw that the stimulus states, "The advanced technology of ski boots and bindings brought a dramatic drop in incidence of injuries on the slopes of ski resorts...As a result, the remainder of ski related injuries rose from 10% to 25% of all ski related injuries." To me, this meant that since the technology caused the slope injuries to decrease, that it affected all ski related injuries because the remainder of ski related injuries was also changed. Since all the slope injuries and all of the remaining ski related injuries changed in percentage, wouldn't it be safe to say that the technology had an affect on them? Is the fact that the technology changed the slope injuries percentage and the slope injuries percentage changed the remaining ski related injuries percentage enough to say the technology caused a chain reaction and had an affect on all of the ski related injuries? Or is the stimulus saying the technology decreased the percent of slope injuries but something else could have caused the increased percentage of other ski related injuries? Also, is the remainder of ski related injuries limited to all injuries on premises of ski resorts? Or could that just be a part of the remainder of ski related injuries and maybe injuries while training or learning elsewhere could be included in the "remainder of ski related injuries" as long as it is not on the slopes?