Diarrhoeal deaths among Indian children are mostly due to food and water contamination. Use of contaminated groundwater and unsafe chemicals in agriculture, poor hygiene in storage and handling of food items to food cooked and distributed in unhygienic surroundings; there are myriad factors that need regulation and monitoring. People need to have awareness of adulteration and ways of complaining to the relevant authorities. Surveillance of food-borne diseases involves a number of government agencies and entails good training of inspection staff. Considering the proportion of the urban population that depends on street food for its daily meals, investing in training and education of street vendors is of great significance. On the basis of the above passage, the following assumptions have been made 1. Food safety is a complex issue that calls for a multipronged solution. 2. Great investments need to be made in developing the manpower for surveillance and training. 3. India needs to make sufficient legislation for governing food processing industry. Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?

The passage highlights various causes of diarrhoeal deaths, from contaminated water and agricultural chemicals to poor hygiene in storage, handling, and cooking, and the issue of adulteration. It then suggests multiple solutions: regulation, monitoring, public awareness, complaint mechanisms, surveillance by multiple agencies, training of inspection staff, and training of street vendors. Let's analyze each statement: 1. Food safety is a complex issue that calls for a multipronged solution. This is a valid assumption. The passage explicitly lists "myriad factors" contributing to the problem and suggests a wide range of interventions involving different stakeholders and approaches (regulation, awareness, training, surveillance). This clearly indicates a complex issue requiring a multipronged solution. 2. Great investments need to be made in developing the manpower for surveillance and training. This is not a valid assumption. The passage states that surveillance "entails good training of inspection staff" and that "investing in training and education of street vendors is of great significance." While it emphasizes the importance and significance of training and investment, it does not quantify this as "great investments." The passage focuses on the *need* for training and investment, not the *magnitude* of the financial outlay. 3. India needs to make sufficient legislation for governing food processing industry. This is not a valid assumption. The passage mentions "regulation and monitoring" generally and discusses issues across the entire food chain (agriculture, storage, cooking, street food, adulteration). It does not specifically focus on or assume a lack of legislation for the "food processing industry" as the primary or even a significant specific legislative gap. The scope of the passage is much broader than just the food processing industry. Therefore, only assumption 1 is valid. The final answer is A.