Hi J,
Thanks for your question!
Let's begin with the correct answer choice, (E).
This argument uses causal reasoning, essentially that:
Restoring enzyme cathepsin C to normal levels
eliminating periodontitis
This straightforward cause/effect reasoning links cathepsin C with eliminating periodontitis. So the correct answer choice will squarely address this relationship. Answer choice (E) fills in the gap between the cause and effect by assuring us that, once a person's cathepsin C levels reach a normal level, they will not have periodontitis. If restoring the cathepsin C levels did anything other than cure or prevent periodontitis, this researcher's argument wouldn't make any sense.
That's why (E) is an essential assumption underlying the researcher's argument, and why it is the correct answer.
Let's next consider why answer choice (A) is incorrect. The researcher in the stimulus argues that restoring cathepsin C levels to normal will eliminate periodontitis. Would his argument be incorrect if there were
another way to eliminate periodontitis? The answer is no. Even if there are two ways of eliminating periodontitis, and the researcher is pursuing one of two possible ways to eliminate this disease, his argument would still be sound. Once he succeeds in stabilizing enzyme levels, periodontitis will be cured. At that point it's irrelevant to his argument if there were an alternate way to cure the disease.
I hope this is helpful!
Athena Dalton