"immediate" through me off.

I was able to get rid of D for having a comparative claim in the conclusion. But you said if D had said the "right side", than it would have been correct. So, the conlcusion type isn't necc. a good way to eliminate? Does the flaw in the reasoning hold more weight than the structure of the argument?

Many Thanks!!

(A) per capita cheese consumption correlates with (B) the number of people who die by becoming entangled in their bedsheets

What if obesity is a (c) outside contributer to cheese consumption and being unable to untangle out of bed sheets thus leading to death?

This could happen all over the world, it could be tested, and direct evidence can be checked by looking at obesity rates. It might not be true, but isn't it a possibility?

#help A. how can we assume wild salmon eat small fish like farmed salmon do? I thought it was an assumption we couldn't make.

I thought E. would add another reason other than ecological for why farmed are more desireable- they taste better.

I other don't understand how "the best reason to prefer farmed salmon is ecological" isn't the conclusion.

#help . E) How are we to assume that "more difficult" means "way easier" for the other? What if the other options is "less difficult", but still extremely difficult?

It's a "most strengthen" question, so I guess it comes the closest, but I originally crossed it out due to that assumption.

"that's how you spell analogy" lol.