Bunuel
For large pharmaceutical companies, the profit motive has long been a deterrent to the preparation of medicines that treat illnesses afflicting primarily people who cannot easily afford to pay for medicines. While diseases such as cholera and malaria claim millions of lives every year, medicines that the companies have developed and that can prevent these deaths are simply not made available for this purpose. Pharmaceutical companies have expressed essentially the same attitude toward preparing antidotes in the event of germ warfare.
The passage is structured to lead to which of the following conclusions?
(A) Large pharmaceutical companies fail to appreciate the potential dangers of germ warfare.
(B) The government must subsidize the preparation of germ-war antidotes in order to prevent a large-scale catastrophe.
(C) Potential victims of germ warfare cannot rely on large pharmaceutical companies for antidotes that might be needed during war.
(D) A victim of cholera or malaria is more likely to die from germ warfare than a person who has not contracted either disease.
(E) Large pharmaceutical companies do not have sufficient resources to develop antidotes for use in the event of germ warfare.
The passage is about Pharma companies which produce medications mainly based on profit motive, this attitude acts as a deterrent to produce medicines afforable to people suffering from primary illnesses. The price point is higher (profit motive), so that even though accessible it becomes unaffordable to the public.
Then, examples of Cholera and Malaria is given to support the above mentioned idea.
The last line mentions , the same attitude of Pharma companies in preparing antidotes during germ warfare.
We need to find the conclusion:
A) Large pharmaceutical companies fail to appreciate the potential dangers of germ warfare.
This is a wrong option - if the Pharma companies have failed to appreciate the potential dangers of germ warfare, they could not have developed antidotes to treat it.
(B) The government must subsidize the preparation of germ-war antidotes in order to prevent a large-scale catastrophe.
The question stem doesn’t contain any clues leading to possible solution on this problem, OR didn’t contain words like in future to make these medications affordable or accessible, something has to be done. Even though, this seems a logical and reasonable solution - this cannot be considered as a conclusion. Hence, wrong.
(C) Potential victims of germ warfare cannot rely on large pharmaceutical companies for antidotes that might be needed during war.This is the correct option - it clearly mentions in the advent of germ warfare, the potential victims cannot rely on large Pharma companies for antidotes, as these medicines will be beyond the affordable reach of general public. Thus, supporting the core crux of the question stem.
(D) A victim of cholera or malaria is more likely to die from germ warfare than a person who has not contracted either disease.
The question doesn’t speak about communicable or non communicable diseases in general. Fatality due to diseases is neither discussed in the question. Hence, wrong.
(E) Large pharmaceutical companies do not have sufficient resources to develop antidotes for use in the event of germ warfare.
Resource paucity is not discussed in the question stem, the price point of Pharma companies and the affordability of the general public is the central theme discussed. Hence, wrong.
Option C