Quartzbrook Farms wanted to test all of its cattle for a rare disease in order to export beef to a country that requires such testing. However, Quartzbrook’s government prohibited the farm from testing its cattle. The government claims there is no scientific evidence the risk posed by the disease justifies such testing, and the public could be misled into thinking the testing was scientifically warranted if the farm performed the tests.

For a Must Be False question, the four wrong answers will be statements that could be true. The correct answer will be something that cannot be true based on the stimulus. Here, we're looking for a principle that the government's prohibition of testing violates. Let's first understand the principle the government actually used -- if testing is scientifically unjustified and the public might be misled about the need for testing, then testing may be prohibited. Now, let's think about the principle that the government's prohibition contradicts -- if testing is scientifically unjustified and the public might be misled about the need for testing, the government still should not prohibit testing.