I guess this is a very new question. Don’t see anything on the thread. That said, here are my quick 2-cents:
-Claim: The data of the last 50 years is proof that it is unlikely that the cost of treating any particular disease will reduce just because of med technological improvements
-Logic: Because… while med tech has improved tremendously, annual overall spending on disease treatment has not reduced, it has also risen sharply
-One flaw I can think of: The cost of treating any particular disease may really have come down. But because of more number of patients, the annual overall spend increased rather than decreased. There are more such.
-Question: Flaw EXCEPT. Find the one thing which, even if it possibly changes, does not make the argument vulnerable.
-Choice A: if the average age changes, say increases, more elders could mean more patients than before – as an example. Then, even if the technology is better, the overall spend on disease treatment could still increase. Average age could tangibly matter here.
-Choice B: Due to inflation, the same treatment costs more. A treatment that cost 1L Rs may now cost 3L Rs. Thus, despite the technology getting better, the overall spend on disease treatment could still increase.
-Choice C: Greater size of population could straight-up mean more patients. Thus, despite the technology getting better, the overall spend on disease treatment could still increase.
-Choice D: Irrespective of number of medical researchers, we already know that med tech has improved tremendously. What difference does it make whether this improvement came from an unchanged number of medical researchers, or whether this number presumably increased? This choice seems to be the best candidate.
-Choice E: A change in type of disease can clearly impact the overall spend on disease treatment. For instance, despite med tech improvement, a huge chunk of expenses are getting incurred now due to a greater contribution of expensive diseases in the population (say, lot more dialysis or cancer cases). Then, even if the technology is better, the overall spend on disease treatment could still increase
-Choice D looks like the best candidate.
Hope this helps!
1