I Chose C here but the official answer is different. Can anyone help me here?
Which of the following most logically completes the argument?
The irradiation of food kills bacteria and thus retards spoilage. However, it also lowers the nutritional value
of many foods. For example, irradiation destroys a signifi cant percentage of whatever vitamin B1 a food
may contain. Proponents of irradiation point out that irradiation is no worse in this respect than cooking.
However, this fact is either beside the point, since much irradiated food is eaten raw, or else misleading since -----------------
(A) many of the proponents of irradiation are food distributors who gain from foods’ having a
longer shelf life
(B) it is clear that killing bacteria that may be present on food is not the only effect that
(C) cooking is usually the final step in preparing food for consumption, whereas irradiation serves to
ensure a longer shelf life for perishable foods
(D)certain kinds of cooking are, in fact, even more destructive of vitamin B1 than carefully
controlled irradiation is
(E) for food that is both irradiated and cooked, the reduction of vitamin B1 associated with either
process individually is compounded