This is another way “me too” drugs can benefit consumers. It rules out the possibility that all “me too” drugs are less effective than the originals.

This weakens the editorial’s argument because it suggests consumers might benefit in a different way if “me too” drugs were prohibited: from the availability of more innovative drugs.

This doesn’t prevent “me too” drugs from benefitting consumers as well. Pharmaceutical companies might make more money on “me too” drugs simply because the lower price allows more people to purchase them.

The editorial says “[m]any” pharmaceutical companies, not all of them, produce “me too” drugs. Even if fewer innovative drugs were developed, that would disadvantage consumers, so this would weaken the argument.

This disadvantages some pharmaceutical companies, but it doesn’t necessarily benefit consumers. It’s not stated whether losses by the companies that develop innovative drugs translate to savings by consumers.