Suppose someone reasons this way: "There are three popular reasons in favor of not reporting newly diagnosed HIV/AIDS ca

[answerhappygod]

Suppose someone reasons this way: "There are three popular reasons in favor of not reporting
newly diagnosed HIV/AIDS cases. One is that HIV/AIDS is not highly communicable in the first
place. Second, new treatments control the virus and make people far less likely to infect others.
The third is that personal privacy is more important than community health. But we should report newly diagnosed cases. For one, HIV/AIDS infection is a major public health problem and the
virus is communicable in very much the same way as hepatitis, which is reportable. Second,
personal privacy is not more important than community health; if privacy were more important
we would not have mandatory reporting for tuberculosis, plague, or other dangerous diseases.
There are no downsides to mandatory reporting for this horrific disease."
The strength of this argument to convince policy makers who are opposed to mandatoryreporting is best @valuated as:
The strength of this argument to convince policy makers who are opposed to mandatory
reporting is best @valuated as:
A) Weak, but there must be some problem with reporting the speaker has not thought of.
B) Weak, because the speaker ignored advances in the treatment of HIVIAIDS
C) Convincing, because it demolishes all the arguments against reporting.
D) Weak. because the family of an infected person has the right of privacy too.
E) Convincing, however it trivializes the suffering of the people with HIVIAIDS.