We have no connection between the remote populations in the studies and the source of these “ancient medical texts.” But even if we did, the audiologist doesn’t claim that the remote populations have no hearing loss at all, just that they don’t have age-related hearing loss.

This strengthens the hypothesis that age-related hearing loss is caused by exposure to loud noise. The fact that people from remote populations had more hearing loss after living in cities suggests that the noise in cities, not another factor, likely caused the hearing loss.

The argument addresses long-term exposure to “loud noise,” not “low-level background noise.” Even so, whether or not someone is aware of noise exposure doesn't change its effect on that person’s hearing.

The audiologist only addresses the cause of age-related hearing loss. He doesn’t discuss any consequences of age-related hearing loss.

(E) tells us nothing about the amount of hearing loss experienced by people who are regularly exposed to loud noise and choose not to wear ear protection. Thus, it has not impact on the audiologist’s argument either way.