Statement: A number of school children in local schools fell ill after consuming their subsidized tiffin provided by the school authority. Courses of Action: I. The tiffin facility of all schools should be discontinued with immediate effect. II. The Government should implement a system to certify the quality of tiffin provided by schools. Which course(s) of action logically follow(s)?
-
AOnly I follows
-
BOnly II follows
-
CEither I or II follows
-
DNeither I nor II follows
-
EBoth I and II follow
Answer
Correct Answer: Only II follows
Explanation
Introduction / Context:Food-borne illness in school meals demands stronger safety and oversight, not blanket discontinuation of nutrition programs that benefit many children, especially from low-income families.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Incident: Illness after consuming subsidized tiffin.
- Risk: Contamination due to procurement, preparation, storage, or hygiene lapses.
- Need: Assurance of food safety with continued nutrition support.
Concept / Approach:Logical action strengthens quality controls: certification, audits, hygiene protocols, vendor vetting, and corrective action against violators. A universal shutdown harms beneficiaries and is disproportionate.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) I (discontinue all): Overreaction; penalizes compliant schools and deprives children of nutrition.2) II (certification system): Establishes standards (kitchen hygiene, temperature logs, water quality), audits, and penalties—directly relevant and proportionate.3) Only II follows.Verification / Alternative check:Best practice: HACCP-style protocols, surprise inspections, capacity building for kitchen staff, supplier controls.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
• I / Either / Both: I is not justified.• Neither: Ignores need for safety assurance.Common Pitfalls:Eliminating essential programs instead of fixing their weaknesses.
Final Answer:Only II follows.