Answer: BPremises: Lower prices + faster approval in exchange; lower revenue impedes drug development
Conclusion: Regulation hurts manufacturers long term
Gap: Need to show faster approval benefit > lower price loss
A ❌ Consumer buying behaviour is irrelevant to manufacturer's revenue or timeline
B ✅ Approval delay = 2+ years of unrecovered costs, so faster approval = more long term revenue despite lower prices
C ❌ Actually strengthens the original argument (more costs + less revenue = worse for manufacturers)
D ❌ Other countries' patent laws are completely out of scope
E ❌ Comparison to generic prices doesn't establish long term benefit for manufacturers
Kinshook
Currently, prescription drug prices are set by drug companies according to market demands. A new regulation under consider would allow the government to require the drug manufacturers to sell certain drugs at lower prices in exchange of faster regulatory approvals for the drug themselves. This new practice would result in drug companies receiving less revenue per year for each drug available on the market and would therefore impede the development of new medicines.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly suggests that the new regulation favors drug manufacturers long-term economic interest?
A. Prescription drugs are normally purchased on advertising and efficacy and not pricing
B. Regulatory approval takes longer than two years during which time the manufacturer can not recover the heavy cost spent to develop the drug.
C. Two of the most expensive parts of the process by which manufacturers bring drug to market are the testing and approval procedures.
D. Regulation like the one under consideration was first enacted in a country where there is no patent protection for drugs developed for human consumption.
E. The lower prices required by government would still be higher than the prices of generic alternatives.
Source: 800score