Statement — Vitamins and minerals in vegetables and fruits are beneficial for the human body; medicines do not have the same effect.\n\nCourses of Action —\nI. Encourage people to take fresh fruits and vegetables to meet the body’s vitamin and mineral needs.\nII. Ban the sale of vitamin and mineral medicines.

Introduction / Context:
The statement favors whole-food sources of micronutrients over pills, implying diet-first guidance. A logical response promotes healthy consumption rather than prohibition of alternatives that some individuals medically need.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Premise: fruits/vegetables provide vitamins/minerals beneficially.
• COA I: encourage dietary intake.
• COA II: ban supplement medicines.

Concept / Approach:
COA I directly aligns with the statement: education, access, affordability, and food programs that increase produce consumption. COA II overreaches; supplements may be necessary for deficiencies or clinical needs. The premise does not justify an outright ban, only a preference for dietary sources.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
A policy can emphasize whole foods while regulating supplement claims and quality; banning is unnecessary and risky.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Turning comparative statements into absolute bans.

Final Answer:
Only I follows.