With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". harmful conditions must be more prevalent in the employment concerned than in everyday life or in other occupations.” McSpadden v. Big Ben Coal Co., 288 N.W.2d 181, 190 (Iowa 1980). If Burress suffers from an occupational disease, his claim is barred by the statute of repose. See Iowa Code § 85A.12 (“An employer shall not be liable for any compensation for an occupational disease ... unless disablement or death results ... within one year ... after the last injurious exposure to such disease in such employment. ...”) However, if his brucellosis is an injury, his claim is not barred by the statute of repose, but instead subject to the two-year statute of limitations set forth in section 85.26. See Iowa Code § 85.26(1); see also Swartzendruber v. Schimmel, 613 N.W.2d 646, 650 (Iowa 2000) (<HOLDING>). Thus, whether Burress’ brucellosis is an

A: holding the twoyear statute of limitations under iowa code section 8526 does not begin to run until the employee discovers or should discover in the exercise of diligence the nature seriousness and probable compensable character of the injury or disease
B: holding the discovery rule does not require an expert opinion of causation but instead limitations begin to run when the employee discovers the nature seriousness and probable compensable character of the injury or disease
C: holding that a notice of claim period did not begin to run until discovery of the injury
D: holding the time period for filling a claim does not begin to run until the claimant judged by the standard of a reasonable person recognizes the nature seriousness and probable compensable character of his injury
A.