Live GMAT classes with Target Test Prep start Nov 21 and Nov 22. First class free.

See classes
Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026 winner: Target Test Prep, #1 Test Prep

Target Test Prep was voted #1 Best Test Prep in the 2026 Newsweek Readers’ Choice™ Awards.

★★★★★5.0563 reviews
GMATLiveTeachStarts Nov 22
Josh Braslow, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE CLASSES

Get Ready for GMAT Test Day Faster with Live Online Classes

with Josh Braslow, 20+ years in test prep

Nov 22 · Josh Braslow
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Attend the first class for free
  • Every class is recorded, so you never fall behind
View classes & enroll
Limited seats availableTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeachOnDemandStart anytime
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Target Test Prep EA OnDemand

Self-paced EA prep. Study on your schedule.

EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

with

165+ EA score guarantee
$05-day trial no automatic billing
Schedule
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll Start free 5-day trial
Limited cohort · enrollment openTrial includes full course accessTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemandStart anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Patents - weaken

Expert replies
by szDave » Wed Jan 23, 2013 3:43 am
Hello,

I think the correct answer is C, if yes, why or why not?

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 competitors. 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 drugs are, for the most part, countries with large populations.

c) In some countries specific processes for the manufacture of pharmaceutical drugs 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.
Last edited by szDave on Wed Jan 23, 2013 9:51 am, edited 2 times in total.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by shenoydevika » Wed Jan 23, 2013 6:17 am
Hello!

Ok I believe the correct answer is D

That is just my gut feeling. I'm sorry I can't give you an explanation why I think it is correct.
Join the discussion

by charu_mahajan » Fri Jan 25, 2013 8:38 am
The argument concludes - future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents were abolished

To Weaken this we need to find something that tells us that future access to new drugs will NOT be improved in case we abolish patents.

Consider option D - Pharmaceutical companies can afford the research that goes into the development of new drugs only if patents allow them to earn high profits. The money for research of new drugs will come from the patents' money. This makes our argument look like -

future access to new life-sustaining drugs CANNOT be improved if the practice of granting patents were abolished or

future access to new life-sustaining drugs can be improved if the practice of granting patents were NOT abolished

and hence is the CORRECT weakener.
Join the discussion