我实在是搜索不到这道题，就自己发问，请各位帮帮忙

Treatment for hypertention forestalls certain medical expenses by preventing strokes and heart disease. Yet any money so saved amounts to only one-fourth of the expenditures required to treat the hypertensive population. Therefore, there is no economic justification for preventive treatment for hypertension.

Which of the following, if true, is most damaging to the conclusion above?

a, The many fatal strokes and heart attacks resulting from untreated hypertension cause insignficant medical expenditures but large economic losses of other sorts.

b, The cost, per patient, of preventive treatment for hypertension would remain constant even if such treatment were instituted on a large scale.

c, In matters fo health care, economic considerations should ideally not be dominant.

d, Effective prevention presupposes early diagnosis, and programs to ensure early diagnosis are costly.

e, The net saving in medical resources achieved by some preventive health measures are smaller than the net losses attributable to certain other measures of this kind.

答案是a     实在不明白  因为题目都没看懂

结论是 there is no economic justification for preventive treatment for hypertension.

所以要damage the conclusion，只要说明preventive treatment for hypertension 会有economic benefit

再看A、 The many fatal strokes and heart attacks resulting from untreated hypertension cause insignficant medical expenditures but large economic losses of other sorts.说如果不采取preventive treatment ,会有很大的经济损失，即preventive treatment 有economic benefit,也就是提供了economic justification for preventive treatment for hypertension.

...............我的理解。