For several years, per capita expenditure on prescription drugs in Voronia rose by fifteen percent or more annually.  In order to curb these dramatic increases, the ministry of health prohibited drug manufacturers from raising any of their products' prices.  Even though use of prescription drugs did not expand after this price freeze, per capita expenditure for prescription drugs continued to increase by a substantial percentage each year.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why the ministry's action did not achieve its goal?

(A) After price increases were prohibited, drug manufacturers concentrated on producing new medications to replace existing products.

(B) The population of Voronia rose steadily throughout the period.

(C) Improvements in manufacturing processes enabled drug manufacturers to maintain high profit levels on drugs despite the price freeze.

(D) In addition to imposing a price freeze, the government encouraged doctors to prescribe generic versions of common drugs instead of the more expensive brand-name versions.

(E) After price increases were prohibited, some foreign manufacturers of expensive drugs ceased marketing them in Voronia.

还是不是很清楚思路， 请各位讲讲吧，谢谢~~~

我試著回答看看，

过去幾年每個人的醫療花費 一直往上攀升，未了抑止這個現象，醫療官員禁止藥廠將他們的產品漲價。 儘管，處方藥品的使用沒有上漲但是花費仍然上漲了。 請解釋。

A)因為不能調漲現有的藥品，所以藥廠研發新的藥物去取代舊的藥品。所以花費上漲

B)人口上漲，但是處方用藥並沒有隨著上漲，所以不能解釋

C)利潤高與人民的醫療花費沒有關聯

D)政府鼓勵醫生開便宜的藥品處方，更不能解釋位什麼花費仍然上漲

E)外國的藥廠停止在V這個地方做行銷，無關

如有不對，煩請指正

我觉得楼上解释的不是很详细

这道题A我是这样理解的：既然不让涨价 那就不涨了 我另外开发别的药 定价定的高点 这样人均消费还是会长的

就好比：利君沙 现在10块一盒 政府不让涨价 那我就不涨 但我开发的新药我上来就定价15一盒 人均还是上涨的

请指正