34. (31982-!-item-!-188;#058&005681)
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.
选A
but 庵不懂 為啥麼C 不對內?? 釋因為沒解釋到 continued to increase嗎?? 那不然成本降低也是可以增加獲利的阿!!
請教囉
这个疑惑很显然是阅读理解问题。
题干说：政府限制药品出厂价格不得提高，但是消费额仍然持续增加。
问题问：哪个事实可以解释这个现象。
选项A：药厂使用新药来代替老药。我们可以推论，新药价格比老药高，可以绕过政府限制。
选项C：药厂通过加强流程来维持高利润。这可以推论为什么药厂在政府限价情况下不会倒闭，但无法解释为什么消费额持续增加。
意思理解清楚了，选择还不清楚么？
还是很疑惑。原文说 the ministry of health prohibited drug manufacturers from raising any of their products' prices。这就是说不管是新药旧药，都不许涨价。
那么工厂即使开发新药也不会造成人均消费上涨呀？
我想：因为是新药，原来也就不存在价格，涨价也就无从提起吧。
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |