For years, Americans have been told to stay away from fat. Feeding the

For years, Americans have been told to stay away from fat. Feeding the market of those anxiously watching their waistlines, food manufacturers have filled grocery store shelves with low-fat and fat-free foods. Now, however, some researchers are blaming the fat-free craze for the American crisis of obesity. Foods without fat, they argue, leave us feeling unsatisfied and craving even more food. As a result, we end up eating a whole bag of low-fat potato chips when we would have only eaten half a bag of regular (fat-laden) potato chips.

Which of the following is the most logical conclusion that can be drawn from the passage?

Let's jot down the points:
Premise: American grocery stores filled with low fat food.
Premise: researchers-fat free cause cravings so people eat more quantity of fat free food than the quantity they used to eat fat foods.
Conclusion? (could be something that fat-foods must be brought back so that people go for it and consume very less quantity.)

A. Avoid a no-fat diet, but eat low-fat foods.
INCORRECT. This might be true in real life but nothing about it can be drawn as conclusion.

B. You will likely eat less if you eat foods with fat.
CORRECT. The passage is all about cravings and the quantity people eat. This is the best conclusion we can draw.

C. Potato chips of any sort are unhealthy.
INCORRECT. Potato chips is used as an example and not as a main part of the passage.

D. The key to weight management is to avoid cravings.
INCORRECT. This conclusion can't be drawn. It can be true but not in the context on the passage because the passage focuses on the quantity that people eat in the name of cravings.

E. Fat-free foods should be banned from stores
INCORRECT. This is no relevance in the passage. Weird one!