The pharmaceutical industry is fighting a losing battle: it

Question

The pharmaceutical industry is fighting a losing battle: it simply does not have the resources to prosecute all of the generic companies which illegally copy the patented molecules. Because the number of companies which will be charged with a crime is so limited, the actions of the pharmaceutical industry will have a minimal impact on the number of companies which illegally copy patented molecules.

The answer to which of the following questions would best help evaluate the accuracy of the conclusion above?

The answer to which of the following questions would best help evaluate the accuracy of the conclusion above?

A) Will pharmaceutical industry lawyers dedicate the majority of their time to prosecuting companies which illegally copy patented molecules?

B) Is a small minority of companies responsible for the majority of illegal copying of molecules?

C) Do many companies which illegally copy the patented molecules share their products with other companies?

D) Will new dedicated enforcement agency permit the pharmaceutical industry to more quickly and easily identify companies who illegally copy patented molecules?

E) Will the threat of prosecution alter the behaviour of those companies which illegally copy patented molecules?

Vercules · Accepted Answer

The argument concludes that the prosecution of a small number of generic companies that copy the patented molecules illegally will have a minimal impact on the overall number of generic companies that engage in illegal copying. The correct answer must relate specifically to this issue and provide additional insight as to whether it seems reasonable.

A) Will pharmaceutical industry lawyers dedicate the majority of their time to prosecuting companies which illegally copy patented molecules?

One premise of the argument states that the pharmaceutical industry does not have the resources to prosecute all companies which copy the patented molecules illegally; while a second premise states the number of companies which will be charged with a crime is limited. These statements indicate that the legal resources of the pharmaceutical industry are too limited to have a major impact on the overall number of generic companies which engage in illegal copying, no matter how these lawyers dedicate their time.

B) Is a small minority of companies responsible for the majority of illegal copying of molecules?

If a small minority of generic companies were responsible for the majority of illegal copying, the actions of the pharmaceutical industry could have a significant impact on the number of copied molecules. The conclusion of the argument, however, was about the number of generic companies that copied patented molecules illegally; this number would remain unaffected.

C) Do many companies which illegally copy the patented molecules share their products with other companies?

Whether patented molecules are copied illegally and then shared with other companies is not relevant to the conclusion.

D) Will new dedicated enforcement agency permit the pharmaceutical industry to more quickly and easily identify companies which illegally copy patented molecules?

Similar to answer choice A, this choice is limited by the premises of the argument. If new dedicated enforcement agency permits the pharmaceutical industry to more quickly and easily identify companies which illegally copy patented molecules, then the pharmaceutical industry will know who is breaking the law. However, the lack of industry resources still restricts the industry’s ability to prosecute a large number of generic companies, even if they are identified as companies that illegally copy patented molecules.

E) Will the threat of prosecution alter the behaviour of those companies which illegally copy patented molecules?

This is correct and our answer. The argument concludes that the prosecution of a small number of companies that copy the patented molecules illegally will have a minimal impact on the overall number of companies that engage in illegal copying. However, if the threat of prosecution were enough to “alter the behavior” of others (i.e., deter them from illegally copying patented molecules), the actions of the pharmaceutical industry could have a significant impact on the number of generic companies that illegally copy patented molecules.

Vercules

Dinesh2Apr · Answer

Conclusion :- The author concludes that since only a few no of companies will be prosecuted, the actions will have a minimal impact on other non prosecuted companies.

Assumption :- The author assumes that prosecution of few companies will not have a deterrent effect on other companies.

POE :
Option A :- not correct, this option talks about PI resources not about the impact of prosecution on companies. 
Option B :- not correct, the passage is not concerned with the impact to illegal copying of molecules, it is concerned with the impact of prosecution on the non prosecuted companies
Option C :- not correct, this option does not talk about impact of prosecution to companies.
Option D :- Out of scope
Option E :- Correct, a Yes/No answer to this question will either strengthen or break the conclusion.

IMO :- E

aditya8062 · Answer

The pharmaceutical industry is fighting a losing battle:  it simply does not have the resources to prosecute all of the generic companies  which illegally copy the patented molecules.  Because the number of companies which will be charged with a crime is so limited , the actions of the pharmaceutical industry will have a minimal impact on the number of companies which illegally copy patented molecules.
isint the bolded portion contradictory ?

Narenn · Answer

There seem no any contradiction in two bold sentences.

Pharmaceutical industry does not have ample resources to prosecute all companies that illegally copy patented molecules so the number of companies which will be charged with a crime will be limited.

Regards,

Abhijit

jacobneroth · Answer

in the question stimulus it mentions that 'the argument concludes that  the prosecution  of a small number of companies that copy the patented molecules illegally will have a minimal impact on the overall number of companies that engage in illegal copying.'
but in the answer choice 'Will  the threat of prosecution  alter the behaviour of those companies which illegally copy patented molecules?'
since in the question stimulus we are only talking about 'the prosecution' and in the answer we are talking about 'the threat of prosecution', shouldn't this answer choice be irrelevant?

gmatexam439 · Answer

The pharmaceutical industry is fighting a losing battle: it simply does not have the resources to prosecute all of the generic companies which illegally copy the patented molecules. Because the number of companies which will be charged with a crime is so limited, the actions of the pharmaceutical industry will have a minimal impact on the number of companies which illegally copy patented molecules.

The answer to which of the following questions would best help evaluate the accuracy of the conclusion above?

The answer to which of the following questions would best help evaluate the accuracy of the conclusion above?

A) Will pharmaceutical industry lawyers dedicate the majority of their time to prosecuting companies which illegally copy patented molecules? - Even if they dedicate their time the resources are too few to be of any use

B) Is a small minority of companies responsible for the majority of illegal copying of molecules? - Even if they are, only a very few will be charged and it won't impact the other companies

C) Do many companies which illegally copy the patented molecules share their products with other companies? - Out of scope

D) Will new dedicated enforcement agency permit the pharmaceutical industry to more quickly and easily identify companies who illegally copy patented molecules? - How quickly the industry finds out corrupted companies is out of scope

E) Will the threat of prosecution alter the behaviour of those companies which illegally copy patented molecules? - Correct. If the threat will alter the behaviour then prosecution will be of use to the industry

varunkhanna9 · Answer

Can anyone guide as to why exactly B is incorrect?

siddhantvarma · Answer

To evaluate the accuracy of the conclusion, we need to identify information that would directly impact the number of companies that will continue to copy patented molecules despite the pharmaceutical industry's efforts illegally.

Argument Breakdown: 
 
  Premise:  The pharmaceutical industry lacks the resources to prosecute all generic companies that illegally copy patented molecules. 
  Intermediate Conclusion:  Because the number of companies prosecuted is limited, the pharmaceutical industry's actions will have a minimal impact on the overall number of companies that continue illegal copying.  
We need to find a question that, when answered, will help determine whether the pharmaceutical industry's limited prosecutorial actions will indeed have minimal impact on the total number of companies that engage in illegal copying.

Analysis of Answer Choices:

A) Will pharmaceutical industry lawyers dedicate the majority of their time to prosecuting companies which illegally copy patented molecules? 
This focuses on allocating resources but does not directly address whether the prosecution will impact the overall behavior of the companies.   We can eliminate A.

B) Is a small minority of companies responsible for the majority of illegal copying of molecules? 
If a small number of companies are responsible for the majority of illegal copying, targeting these companies could significantly reduce illegal activity. This information could suggest that even limited prosecutions might have a significant impact, thus affecting the conclusion.   B sounds good, let's hold onto it.

C) Do many companies which illegally copy the patented molecules share their products with other companies? 
This might address the spread of illegal copies, but it does not directly evaluate the impact of prosecutions on the number of offending companies.   Rule out C.

D) Will new dedicated enforcement agency permit the pharmaceutical industry to more quickly and easily identify companies who illegally copy patented molecules? 
This relates to the identification of offenders but not directly to the impact of prosecuting a limited number of them.   D is eliminated.

E) Will the threat of prosecution alter the behavior of those companies which illegally copy patented molecules? 
If the threat of prosecution deters companies from illegal copying, the pharmaceutical industry's actions could have a broader impact than suggested. This directly impacts the conclusion about the effectiveness of the limited prosecutions.   E is looking good.

Conclusion:

The best answer is   E)  . It directly addresses whether the pharmaceutical industry's limited prosecution efforts will alter the behavior of companies, thereby evaluating the conclusion's accuracy about the minimal impact of these efforts.

Correct Answer: E

siddhantvarma · Answer

varunkhanna9  I'll try to take a shot at thisLet's compare answer choices B and E to see why E is the better option for evaluating the accuracy of the conclusion.

Choice B:

Is a small minority of companies responsible for the majority of illegal copying of molecules?

Relevance:  This question aims to determine whether targeting a small number of companies could significantly reduce the overall amount of illegal copying. If true, prosecuting a small number of companies might have a large impact. 
   Limitation :  While this information is useful, it does not directly address the pharmaceutical industry's ability to affect the behavior of companies through prosecution. It only tells us about the distribution of illegal activity among companies, not about the effectiveness of prosecution in changing overall behavior.  
 Choice E:

Will the threat of prosecution alter the behavior of those companies which illegally copy patented molecules?

Relevance:  This question directly addresses whether the pharmaceutical industry's limited prosecutorial actions can influence the behavior of companies engaged in illegal copying. If the threat of prosecution is effective in deterring illegal copying, the industry's actions could have a broader impact than initially suggested. 
   Strength :  This directly challenges the conclusion that the pharmaceutical industry's efforts will have minimal impact. By evaluating the deterrent effect of prosecution, we gain insight into whether limited prosecutions can indeed reduce the overall number of companies engaging in illegal activity.  
 Comparison:

Scope of Impact (B):  Choice B focuses on the distribution of illegal copying among companies. It suggests that prosecuting a few key players could potentially reduce a significant portion of illegal activity. However, it does not provide direct insight into the overall effectiveness of the pharmaceutical industry's efforts in changing behavior. 
  Behavioral Change (E):  Choice E addresses whether the threat of prosecution can alter the behaviour of companies. This directly tests the conclusion by examining if the pharmaceutical industry's actions can create a deterrent effect, thereby potentially reducing the number of companies engaged in illegal copying.  
  Therefore, E is the best answer and a better option than B.

The pharmaceutical industry is fighting a losing battle: it

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

The pharmaceutical industry is fighting a losing battle: it

Prep Toolkit

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