With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". a credit on any amount previously paid the employee pursuant to G.S. § 97-61.5. Further, the remaining provisions of G.S. § 97-61.5 providing for loss of other benefits “if the employee thereafter engages in any occupation which exposes him to the hazards of asbestosis or silicosis without having obtained the written approval of the Industrial Commission as provided in G.S. 97-61.7” must still apply. Under any other interpretation, a plaintiff whose lung impairment is due to silicosis or asbestosis, rather than another occupational lung disease, would be denied access to potential compensation provided by G.S. § 97-31(24), a result which appears to us to be patently unfair and possibly constitutionally infirm. See, e.g., Walters v. Blair, 120 N.C. App. 398, 462 S.E.2d 232 (1995) (<HOLDING>). By a separate assignment of error, plaintiff

A: holding a workers compensation statute unconstitutional because it treats persons with asbestosis differently than persons with other occupational diseases and does so without any valid reason
B: holding that a plaintiffs lack of knowledge regarding the number of affected persons does not bar class certification when defendant has the means to identify those persons at will
C: holding that phrase old ways is not evidence of adea agebased animus as such terms apply more to a persons state of mind than to a persons age
D: holding that svp defendants are not similarly situated to other civil detainees because persons subject to illinois svpa possess characteristics which set them apart from the greater class of persons who fall within illinois civil commitment statutes and such persons present different societal problems
A.