Pharmaceutical companies that develop life-saving drugs often face criticism for high prices that put treatments beyond many patients' reach. These companies argue that high prices recoup research costs and fund future drug development. Critics counter that much basic research is publicly funded, and that executive compensation and marketing budgets undercut the research-costs argument.
Based on the passage, it can be inferred that
pharmaceutical companies never conduct research
debates about drug pricing involve complex questions about who funds and who benefits from research
all life-saving drugs should be distributed free of charge
the critics fully accept the pharmaceutical companies' justification
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the best answer. The debate involves research funding sources and beneficiaries.
- Context clues: Companies cite research costs; critics note public funding and question where money goes.
- Meaning: The disagreement centers on who bears costs and who reaps benefits.
- Verify: Both funding (public vs. private) and spending (research vs. marketing) are contested.
💡 Strategy: When arguments and counter-arguments address funding and beneficiaries, infer those are the core issues.
Choice A is incorrect because companies claim to fund research. Choice C is incorrect because the passage doesn't advocate a specific solution. Choice D is incorrect because critics "counter" the companies' argument.