Passage Summary: A nutritionist argues that because our bodies haven't changed since the Stone Age, we are still meant to eat wild foods, and doing so will make us healthier.

Conclusion: Increasing the proportion of wild foods in our diet will lead to better health.

Reasoning: Humans have evolved very little since the dawn of agriculture, which implies we are still biologically adapted to a diet of wild foods, and straying from this diet causes illness.

Analysis: The claim in question—that humans are still biologically adapted to wild foods—is supported by the first clause of the sentence ('Because humans have evolved very little...'). This claim, in turn, is used to support the final conclusion about how to become healthier. In LSAT terms, a statement that is both supported by evidence and used as evidence for a further conclusion is an intermediate (or subsidiary) conclusion. Look for an answer that describes it as a conclusion drawn from one premise and used to support another.