Bleached, enriched flour, almost like sugar's nutritional value, and

Let us not bother whatever this convoluted passage means. Let’s just stick to parallelism and we can see that these weird passages succumb in a moment.

(a) Bleached, enriched flour, almost like sugar's nutritional value, and much more likely to appear in foods labeled "sugar-free."

(b) Bleached, enriched flour is almost more devoid of nutritional value than sugar, [size=150]and much more than likely to appear in foods labeled "sugar-free."[/size]

(c) Bleached, enriched flour's nutritional value is nearly as low as that of sugar, and this type of flour is much more likely to appear in foods labeled "sugar-free."

(d) Bleached, enriched flour is almost as equivalently low in nutritional value as sugar, and much more likely than appearing in foods labeled "sugar-free."

(e) Sugar's nutritional value is even lower than that of bleached, enriched flour, and much more likely to appear in foods labeled "sugar-free."

This is a compound sentence and the two connected sentences should be ICs. The first is a verbed sentence while In Choice A, B, D and E, the second part is just a phrase and not a clause at all lacking a verb. So throw them out being unparallel. C survives with verbed clauses on both sides of ‘and’