[问题] A CR Q asked for help!

fernandochangUID: 127816

THANKS FOR YOUR EXPLANATIONS!!!
GMAT CRITICAL REASONING REVIEW
7.In countries in which new life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, such drugs are sold at widely affordable prices; those same drugs, where patented, command premium prices because the patents shield patent-holding manufacturers from competitiors. These facts show that future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents on newly developed life-sustaining drugs were to be abolished everywhere.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A)In countries in which life-sustaining drugs cannot be patented, their manufacture is nevertheless a profitable enterprise.
(B)Countries that do not currently grant patents on life-sustaining drug are, for the most part, countries with large populations.
(C)In some countries specific processes for the manufacture of pharmaceutical drug can be patented even in cases in which the drugs themselves cannot be patented.
(D)Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that goes into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits.
(E)Countries that grant patents on life-sustaining drugs almost always ban their importation from countries that do not grant such patents.
(A:D

ZterUID: 120443

D说只有专利保护下，这些厂商才能够用它们获得的高额利润来支付昂贵的研发费用。言下之意是，如果没有专利保护，这些厂商就获得不了高额利润，其结果是无力承担研发费用，那么也就不会有新药产生了。这个结果当然跟“取消专利，降低药价，让大家都有药吃”的初衷相矛盾了。所以削弱。