Someone who gets sick from eating a meal will often develop a strong

Irrespective of which food caused the sickness, someone doesn't like the food which had a distinctive flavor. The argument applies the rule to explain the reason for children to develop aversion towards some foods.

A. Children are more likely than adults to be given meals composed of foods lacking especially distinctive flavors. - Incorrect - Out of scope.

B. Children are less likely than adults to see a connection between their health and the foods they eat - Incorrect - Out of scope

C. Children tend to have more acute taste and to become sick more often than adults do - Correct - The argument talks about sickness and taste. This option strengthens the argument by stating that children have the ability to perceive taste and children fall sick.

D. Children typically recover more slowly than adults do from sickness caused by food - Incorrect - Out of scope

E. Children are more likely than are adults to refuse to eat unfamiliar foods. - Incorrect - Children may refuse to eat unfamiliar foods. But it does not strengthen the reason for taste aversion mentioned in the argument.

Answer: C

since the question does not have a specific and reliable source, this question is unlikely to appear in the actual Gmat.
The question does not have a common pattern either.
A and D weakens.
B and E are out of scope.

I disagree with you on "common pattern". The common pattern on this argument is:

A general case -> A specific case applies to that case.



Ppl get sick -> Develop distaste
Children develop distaste (Strong aversions mean the same thing)

This is similar to supporter assumption. The author is assuming that the children represent the people who get sick. Therefore, children must get sick in order to develop distaste. Only C mentions whether the children get sick.
_________________