Question

Even though one book after another repeats this myth, the popularity of spices had nothing to do with disguising the taste of meat or fish that had gone bad. Any lord who could afford spices (which were expensive) could easily get fresh meat or fish (which were readily available); and when a cook happened to be stuck with rancid food, the spices he had available could not hide the awful smell or taste. Whenever they could, people used the spices that were so popular, they became an expensive necessity: pepper, ginger, sugar, sometimes saffron. Only the very rich could afford the luxuries—such as ambergris (which is coughed up by whales and offers a strange, perfumy taste of the sea).

–Sugar Changed the World,
Marc Aronson and Marina Budhos

Which sentence best states the authors’ claim?

Spices could not mask the smell and taste of rotten meat.
Only the very wealthy were able to buy most available spices.
Some spices were important enough that everyone used them.
The popularity of spices was not related to masking spoiled food.

Answer 1

The popularity of spices was not related to masking spoiled food.

Explanation: The passage directly refutes the myth that spices were used to disguise rotten meat, stating their popularity had nothing to do with that.