If a county of 500,000 school-aged children has an estimated FASD prevalence of 4%, which public-health argument best justifies allocating resources to early screening and intervention?

• A. Because 4% is a trivial fraction of the population, resources would be better spent on unrelated programs since early screening cannot influence developmental trajectories or educational needs.
• B. A 4% prevalence implies approximately 20,000 affected children, representing a substantial burden of preventable neurodevelopmental disability; early screening and intervention can reduce long-term special education costs and improve lifetime outcomes, making resource allocation cost-effective.
• C. Assume all identified cases will spontaneously resolve by adulthood so no screening or intervention is warranted; resource allocation would therefore only create unnecessary costs.
• D. Use of scarce public-health funds should be deferred until prevalence rises above 50% to justify any preventive measures because smaller prevalences indicate no public-health relevance.

Answer: (B)