LSAT 105 – Section 2 – Question 02
LSAT 105 - Section 2 - Question 02
February 1999You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.
Target time: 1:19
This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds
Question QuickView |
Type | Tags | Answer Choices |
Curve | Question Difficulty |
Psg/Game/S Difficulty |
Explanation |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PT105 S2 Q02 |
+LR
+Exp
| Weaken +Weak | A
91%
165
B
2%
155
C
0%
149
D
1%
151
E
7%
158
|
130 140 151 |
+Easier | 145.978 +SubsectionMedium |
Summarize Argument
The director argues that development costs for the new government-requested vaccine should be subsidized. This is because marketing vaccines is less likely to be profitable than any other pharmaceutical product, since vaccines only need to be administered once and thus sell less than products administered many times.
Notable Assumptions
The director assumes that if the government requests a product, that product should be subsidized to account for the missed profit the company would make from a more marketable product. The director also assumes that relatively lower sales of the vaccine wouldn’t be mitigated by its price or level of sales.
A
Vaccines are administered to many more people than are most other pharmaceutical products.
If the vaccines are administered more widely than most drugs, then the reach of sales would mitigate the fact vaccines are only administered once per patient. This suggests the vaccine will be profitable despite the director’s argument.
B
Many of the diseases that vaccines are designed to prevent can be successfully treated by medicines.
If the vaccine is only one of several pharmaceutical treatment options, it will necessarily be the least lucrative of those. This seems to support the director’s argument.
C
Pharmaceutical companies occasionally market products that are neither medicines nor vaccines.
We’re not interested about some third category of products. The stimulus deals with vaccines and medicines.
D
Pharmaceutical companies other than the Rexx Pharmaceutical Company produce vaccines.
Perhaps those companies should also be subsidized by the government if their vaccines are government-requested. We don’t have enough information here to affect the director’s argument.
E
The cost of administering a vaccine is rarely borne by the pharmaceutical company that manufactures that vaccine.
Even if the cost of administering the vaccine is passed on elsewhere, the manufacturing company still pays the production and marketing costs. These are the costs the director thinks should be subsidized.
Take PrepTest
Review Results
LSAT PrepTest 105 Explanations
Section 1 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
- Question 26
Section 2 - Logical Reasoning
- Question 01
- Question 02
- Question 03
- Question 04
- Question 05
- Question 06
- Question 07
- Question 08
- Question 09
- Question 10
- Question 11
- Question 12
- Question 13
- Question 14
- Question 15
- Question 16
- Question 17
- Question 18
- Question 19
- Question 20
- Question 21
- Question 22
- Question 23
- Question 24
- Question 25
Section 3 - Reading Comprehension
- Passage 1 – Passage
- Passage 1 – Questions
- Passage 2 – Passage
- Passage 2 – Questions
- Passage 3 – Passage
- Passage 3 – Questions
- Passage 4 – Passage
- Passage 4 – Questions
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment. You can get a free account here.