@Nickgigs dont feel defeated. NA questions are hard and this is something completely new it takes time to see it. What i did was go through each question and i asked myself if this had to be true for it to work. I was stuck between e and b and i negated it. when i negated e i essentially understood that if they don't rely on quackery it does more harm than good and that doesn't make any sense at all. When I negated B the argument fell apart if people could rely on non-scientific info and still not harm themselves, the author’s prediction wouldn’t make sense. That showed B was the necessary assumption