was a difficult question - used elimination again

First of all D and E are out , E is out becaause dosnt explain the increase in per capita expenditure , it says expensive drugs were out so according to if i can make a conclusion per capital expenditure should fall not rise

B is out because - it states pop of V has increased ? so nothing
it can lead to conclusion that consumption would increase and price is fixed hence per capital expenditure should fall not rise ( Can go in any direction hence eak argument )

We are left with A and C

C says even after the price freeze companies can maintain profit , ok
what has profit got to do with per capita expenditure nothing


Hence A

means since govt has put a restriction on price of existing drugs company would come out with new set of drugs where they can determine the price hence rise in per capita expenditure

here we have to weaken the ministry's argument i.e per capita expenditure on prescribed drugs decreases

B : strengthen
c: not related
d: not related
e: strengthen
a: weaken coz manufacturer can produce new product with high prices. so manufact..... is not increasing the price and per capita expenditure is increasing.
hence A is the answer.

I agree with you guys. I also think that the right answer is A