Statement (a) draws an analogy between subsidies and steroids used as prescriptions. This comparison suggests that subsidies, like steroids, can be beneficial when applied appropriately for a specific issue (like a prescription) but can also have negative side effects, lead to dependency, or mask underlying problems if misused or overused. This is a common critique and perspective on the use of subsidies in economics. Statement (b) claims that steroids promise an enduring cure. This is generally not true in a medical context; steroids are often used to manage symptoms, reduce inflammation, or suppress the immune system, but they typically do not provide a permanent cure for the underlying condition. Therefore, statement (b) is incorrect.