Complete Question Explanation
Flaw in the reasoning. The correct answer choice is (B)
The key to this question is careful reading (though careful reading should be done for all questions). The stimulus argues that Yellow 5 should not be banned. It supports this by citing common procedure for determining whether a food additive should be banned—comparing health-related benefits with potential risks. The stimulus then points to the risk of allergic reaction that Yellow 5 can cause, comparing it with the enhancement in consumers' enjoyment of the lemon soda containing the dye. This benefit, so argues the stimulus, outweighs the risk of allergy accompanying the use of the dye. However, the common procedure earlier cited, on which the stimulus relies, says to look at benefits that are related to health. Enhancing one's enjoyment of a food is not a health-related benefit. Thus, the argument confuses a benefit related to the enjoyment of a product with a health-related benefit.
Answer choice (A) The author does no such thing. In fact, the author very explicitly states that the use of Yellow 5 carries with it the risk of allergic reactions in some people—a health-related risk for those people.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. As explained above, the argument improperly treats a benefit relating to consumers' enjoyment of a product with a health benefit.
Answer choice (C) This may be true, but this is not the flaw that the argument makes. Even if the stimulus took this possibility into account, it does not remedy the problem with the argument—that it mistakenly equates an unrelated benefit with a health benefit.
Answer choice (D) This attacks a premise on which the stimulus relies. Be wary of these types of answers, as usually flaws on the LSAT are errors in reasoning, rather than errors in the underlying facts of an argument. On the LSAT, we are given a starting point—those premises assumed to be true—and are criticizing the conclusions inferred from those premises.
Answer choice (E) There is no indication that the argument makes this presumption. In fact, there is no mention of warning labels at all in the stimulus.