Statement:\nA woman’s biological clock starts ticking in her late 20s, not her mid-30s, and male fertility also begins to wane by the late 30s (doctor’s report).\n\nConclusions:\nI. Older couples will not be able to conceive.\nII. Both men and women experience diminishing ability to procreate with age.

Introduction / Context:
The medical statement notes age-related decline in fertility for both sexes. The logical test is to avoid absolutist misreadings and stick to what the text warrants about age and procreative capacity.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Female fertility concerns begin in late 20s; male fertility wanes by late 30s.
• The statement speaks of decline, not impossibility.

Concept / Approach:
Conclusion I (“will not be able to conceive”) imposes an absolute impossibility, which is not stated; many older couples do conceive naturally or with assistance. Conclusion II restates the directional claim (diminishing ability with age for both sexes), which matches the report.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Identify the modality: “starts ticking/wane” = decline, not zero.2) Therefore II (diminishing ability) follows; I (impossibility) does not.

Verification / Alternative check:
An older couple’s successful conception does not contradict the statement about probabilities declining with age; hence only II is compelled.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Both/Either” accept the absolute claim; “Neither” ignores explicit age-related decline.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating “reduced probability” with “zero probability.”

Final Answer:
If only conclusion II follows.