The new drug Prozac and the old one Elavil are about equally

Question

The new drug Prozac and the old one Elavil are about equally effective in treating various forms of depression, although patients on the newer drug may have slightly fewer side effects. Thus, revenue from the sale of the new drug is going to far exceed the revenue from the sale of the old drug.

All of the following statements weaken the conclusion of the argument above, EXCEPT:

(A) Elavil is also used as a powerful anti-emetic medicine.
(B) The Drug Control Authorities in six states have refused to allow the sale of Prozac till some more tests are carried out.
(C) Some side effects of Elavil are common to Prozac as well.
(D) Prozac is not recommended as an anti-depressant for diabetics and heart patients.
(E) The unit sale price of Elavil is higher than that of Prozac.

I want to discuss so don't just type in your answer (that is why I have provided the OA). Do explain.

Dawgie · Answer

siyer · Answer

Gosh !! I got this wrong. I didn't even notice the word 'EXCEPT'

Anyone got some Prozac?

hemanthp · Answer

Dawg, 
You said:
 "(E) The unit sale price of Elavil is higher than that of Prozac.
Could increase Elavils sales, since it is cheaper"

The unit price of Elavil is higher. so how does that make it cheaper?

Dawgie · Answer

Edited/Corrected: The higher sales price could increase the revenues of the old drug, Elavil.

Discuss.

siyer · Answer

But we do not know how many units Elavil or Prozac sold. So we can't use this option.

hemanthp · Answer

Yup. So if Prozac has the same benefits as Elavil and fewer side effects and on top of this Prozac is cheaper. Guess what... people are going to go for Prozac. This is the one that not weakens but STRENGTHENS the argument and hence should be the answer. We are asked to which of these option do the opposite of weaken i.e. NEuTRAL or STRENGTHEN. A strengthening option is better.. isn't it?

Dawgie · Answer

You could say the same for choice B, those 6 banned states could account for nothing, you don't know that. I'm eliminating choices that could potentially weaken the conclusion.

Hope this helps,
Dawg

Dawgie · Answer

You are confusing sales volume and revenue. Revenue = sales volume * sales price.

hemanthp · Answer

You are confusing sales volume and revenue. Revenue = sales volume * sales price.

No, I am not. Will try and explain. Lets say volume was 100 units before prozac came into the market. And lets say Elavil's unit price is 10$. So its revenue is 1000$.

After prozac comes in the volume of elavil sold goes down..so naturally the revenue goes down.

Am I making sense?

Dawgie · Answer

Yes the sales volume will go down, but factor in the sales price. Compare that with the revenue of the new drug. The conclusion is saying:

Thus, revenue from the sale of the new drug is going to  far exceed  the revenue from the sale of the old drug.

Even if sales volume went down by some X (we don't know exact figures), if the sales price is higher for Elavil this could weaken the argument that the new drug will  FAR EXCEED  the revenues of the old drug. The higher sales price could compensate for it's lower sales volume.

hemanthp · Answer

Well..you do make a point Dawg.

shaselai · Answer

c. if the side effects are same then it is not due to that

The new drug Prozac and the old one Elavil are about equally

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards