129. The pharmaceutical industry argues that because new drugs will not be developed unless heavy development costs can be recouped in later sales, the current 20 years of protection provided by patents should be extended in the case of newly developed drugs. However, in other industries new-product development continues despite high development costs, a fact that indicates that the extension is unnecessary.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the pharmaceutical industry's argument against the challenge made above?

(A) No industries other than the pharmaceutical industry have asked for an extension of the 20-year limit on patent protection.

(B) Clinical trials of new drugs, which occur after the patent is granted and before the new drug can be marketed, often now take as long as 10 years to complete.

(C) There are several industries in which the ratio of research and development costs to revenues is higher than it is in the pharmaceutical industry.

(D) An existing patent for a drug does not legally prevent pharmaceutical companies from bringing to market alternative drugs, provided they are sufficiently dissimilar to the patented drug. B

(E) Much recent industrial innovation has occurred in products---for example, in the computer and electronics industries---for which patent protection is often very ineffective.

129.

The pharmaceutical industry’s argument is best supported by an explanation of why the patent period sufficient for other industries to recoup their development costs is insufficient for the pharmaceutical industry. Choice B is the best answer because it provides an explanation: required clinical trials prevent new drugs from being sold for much of the time they receive patent protection.

Choice A is incorrect: the fact that the pharmaceutical industry’s request is unique does nothing to justify that request. Choice C and E, if true, could undermine the pharmaceutical industry’s argument, so they are incorrect. Choice D indicates that alternative drugs might render patent protection worthless, but that is clearly no reason to extend the protection.

不太看得懂OG的解释, for A and B

b 是加强，但是文章要求的是对这个计划进行weaken说这个计划不行。

c Other companies 是无关的，不是文章讲的，题目要求的是就该公司的计划进行weaken。

d 只是一个一般的叙述，讲了一下，和这个计划相关的内容，可不可以联系没productivity稳定是没什么直接关系的，说不定不联系，一样很高的productivity.