A recent taste test reveals that most people like low-fat chocolate

Narrowed between C and D... picked C

can any expert pitch in please???
TIA

A recent taste test reveals that most people like low-fat chocolate ice cream as much as its full-fat counterpart. Previous tests with vanilla ice cream found that people tended to dislike low-fat versions, complaining of a harsher taste. Chemists point out that chocolate is a very complex flavor, requiring around 500 distinct chemical compounds to produce it. Hence, this complexity probably masks any difference in taste due to the lack of fat.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) Most people prefer full-fat chocolate ice cream to full-fat vanilla ice cream.

(B) The subjects of the previous tests were not informed of the difference in fat content.

(C) The more distinct compounds required to produce a flavor, the better people like it.

(D) Vanilla is known to be a significantly less complex flavor than chocolate.

(E) Most people are aware of the chemical complexities of different flavors.


LSAT

Conclusion:
The complexity of chocolate probably masks any difference in taste between low-fat and full-fat chocolate ice cream.


Answer Anticipation:
The tests described in the premises involve different flavors of ice cream—chocolate vs. vanilla—but we should also notice that the chocolate test is recent, whereas the vanilla test occurred at some time in the past. Could that be why the results were different? We can strengthen the argument by stating that the different test results aren't somehow a result of them being conducted at different times.

Also, we have a premise that states chocolate is a complex flavor, but how complex is vanilla? Could it be equally complex? We don't know. Stating that chocolate is more complex than vanilla would strengthen the argument.

Correct Answer:
(D)

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This is irrelevant. If people like full-fat chocolate ice cream more than full-fat vanilla, it doesn't help explain how the complexity of chocolate might mask a difference in flavor between different types of chocolate ice cream.

(B) This is a premise booster. If subjects in the previous test—the vanilla test—weren't told about the difference in fat content, they might not have been expecting a difference in taste. This supports the idea that the different types of vanilla really did taste different. However, this doesn't help support a conclusion that the complexity of chocolate masks any difference in taste.

(C) This is also irrelevant. Since we don't know if vanilla does or doesn't require more compounds than chocolate, we don't know how this answer affects the argument.

(D) This is correct. If we know that vanilla is significantly less complex than chocolate, it strengthens the idea that this difference, and not some other, is responsible for the difference seen in the tests.

(E) This is irrelevant. This tells us that are aware of the complexity of flavors, but it doesn't tell us if they understand how complexity relates to taste, so it's hard to know if this would impact the tests in any way. Also, this still doesn't tell us how complex vanilla is.

Takeaway/Pattern: Many arguments in LR involve comparisons. Notice what the premises tell us about the comparison, and what details are left out. The conclusion often relies on important details that aren't explicitly stated in the premises.