The question is asking us to choose an answer choice that strengthens Leona's claim while also addressing the point that Thomas has made.
Leona states that if the average consumption of eggs in the U.S. were cut in half, an estimated 5,000 lives might be saved each year.
Thomas is skeptical that Leona is right, explaining that if she was correct, then that means in the span of ten years, the population would be greater by 50,000 people.
Let's look at answer choice (A): Well, answer choice (A) does explain how Leona can be right--that it is possible for the population to grow by 5,000 people every year as long as the chosen base year is unusually low in population growth. But, our correct answer choice must both strengthen Leona's statement and assuage Thomas's fears about a population growth of 50,000. However, answer choice (A) does not touch upon this second portion.
Let's look at answer choice (B): Answer choice (B) helps strengthen Leona's statement by qualifying that when 5,000 people would have died in a given year as a result of not changing their diet, then it is accurate to say that changing one's diet--by cutting consumption of eggs in half--would save an estimated 5,000 lives even if those people died for some non-dietary reason later.
Thus, we are also addressing Thomas's concerns that if we save an estimated 5,000 lives a year through diet change, that does not necessarily mean that in the next ten years there would be a population increase of 50,000 since those who were saved from dying a diet-related death, could still die for a different reason--which would keep the population growth relatively stable.
Therefore, answer choice (B) is the correct answer.
Hope that was helpful! Please let us know if you have any other questions.
RichardJuly 10, 2015
Thank you for clarification.
KevinRonOctober 19, 2018
Can you explain why D is incorrect, please?
MehranOctober 20, 2018
Hi @KevinRon, thanks for your post. Remember that here, the question stem is asking you to identify the choice that would clarify (support) Leona's claim (that an estimated 5,000 lives might be saved if the average consumption of eggs in the U.S. were cut in half) and that would also address Thomas's concern that the population 10 years from now would be 50,000 people greater.
Answer choice (D) is incorrect because the "actual rate of population growth" does not, in any way, clarify or support Leona's claim. She's not talking about additional people (population growth). She's talking about saving existing lives (via changes in diet). Because (D) does not address the criteria set forth in the question stem, it can be eliminated.
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
