Statement: Many invitees at a marriage function suffered food poisoning and were rushed to nearby hospitals.\nCourses of Action:\nI. The Government should ban such marriage functions till further notice.\nII. The local hospitals should be advised to provide the best possible services to the affected people.

Difficulty: Easy

Correct Answer: Only II follows.

Explanation:


Introduction / Context:
Acute food poisoning is a public-health incident requiring prompt clinical response and investigation. Banning all marriage functions is disproportionate and impractical.


Given Data / Assumptions:

  • Incident is linked to one function/caterer.
  • Hospitals are within reach.
  • Authorities can inspect and penalise violators.


Concept / Approach:
II addresses immediate treatment needs; parallel actions (not in options) include sample testing, caterer inspection, and penalties. I imposes a blanket ban unrelated to specific culpability.


Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Alert hospitals for surge capacity (fluids, antibiotics if indicated).2) Collect food samples; trace caterer and kitchen hygiene lapses.3) Issue advisories to event organisers/vendors on compliance.


Verification / Alternative check:
Clinical support saves lives; bans are overreach and harm livelihoods.


Why Other Options Are Wrong:
I is excessive; “Either/Both” wrongly legitimise it.


Common Pitfalls:
Delayed sample collection; poor follow-up on offenders.


Final Answer:
Only II follows.

More Questions from Course of Action

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
Join Discussion