Answer D

@LSATChris, The argument explicitly tells us that the common procedure for deciding whether a food additive should be banned involves weighing its health-related benefits against potential risks. The argument concludes that Yellow Dye No. 5 should not be banned because its benefits greatly outweigh the risk, but the only benefit cited in support of this conclusion is people's enjoyment of lemon soda, which is clearly not a health-related benefit. Since the procedure requires weighing HEALTH-RELATED benefits against the risk, the argument is flawed. Let me know if this makes sense and if you have any further questions.

@Irina I see what you mean now.. I feel like these question are making me dumb.. do people often feel that way?

@LSATChris, I think the questions are often designed to test your ability to read closely and pay attention to detail, which is an important skill in legal practice, especially for contracts. It is quite common to miss an obvious answer though, especially when you are doing a timed practice set. The good news is that the more you practice, the easier and more intuitive these questions will get.