-
The predictability of our death rates is something that has long puzzled social scientists. After all, there is no natural reason why 2,500 people should accidentally shoot themselves each year
or why 7,000 should drown or 55,000 die in their cars. No one establishes a quota (定额) for each type of death. It just happens that they follow a consist
ent pattern year after year.
A few years ago a Canadian psychologist named Gerald Wilde became interested in this phenomenon. He noticed that mortality rates for violent and accidental deaths throughout 
the Western world have remained strangely static throughout the whole of the century, despite all the technological advances and increases in safety standards that have happened in that time. Wilde developed an interesting theory called “risk homeostasis”. According to this theory, people naturally live with a certain level of risk. When something is made safer, people will get around the measure in some way to get back to the original level of danger. If, for instance, they are required to wear seat belts, they will feel safer and thus will drive a little faster and a little more recklessly, thereby statistically canceling out the benefits that the seat belt offers. Other studies have shown that where a crossing is made safer, the accident rate invariably falls there but rises elsewhere along the same stretch of road as if making up for the drop. It appears, then, that we have an inborn need for danger. In all events, it is becoming clearer and clearer to scientists that the factors influencing our lifespan are far more subtle and complex than had been previously thought. It now appears that if you wish to live a long life, it isn’t simply a matter of paying attention to certain precautions such as eating the right foods, not smoking, and driving with care. You must also have the right attitude. Scientists at the Duke University Medical Center made a 15-year study of 500 persons personalities and found, somewhat to their surprise, that people with a suspicious or mistrustful nature die prematurely far more often than people with a sunny disposition. Looking on the bright side, it seems, can add years to your life span.
1.What social scientists have long felt puzzled about is why __________.
A. the death rate can not be predicted
B.the death toll remained stable year after year
C.a quota for each type of death has not come into being
D.people lost their lives every year for this or that reason
2.In his research, Gerald Wilde finds that technological advances and increases in safety standards __________.
A.have helped solve the problem of so high death rate
B.have oddly accounted for death rates in the past century
C. have reduced death rates for violent and accidental deaths
D. have achieved no effect in bringing down the number of deaths
3.According to the theory of “risk homeostasis”, some traffic accidents result from ___________.
A. our inborn desire for risk
B. our fast and reckless driving
C. our ignorance of seat belt benefits
D. our instinctive interest in speeding
4.By saying “statistically canceling out the benefits that the seat belt offers” (Para. 2), the author means __________.
A. wearing seat belts does not have any benefits from the statistic point of view
B. deaths from wearing seat belts are the same as those from not wearing them
C. deaths from other reasons counterbalance the benefits of wearing seat belts
D. wearing seat belts does not necessarily reduce deaths from traffic accidents
5.Which of the following may contribute to a longer life span?
A. Showing adequate trust instead of suspicion of others
B. Eating the food low in fat and driving with great care
C. Cultivating an optimistic personality and never losing heart
D. Looking on the bright side and developing a balanced level of risk
-
One of the greatest killers in the Western world is heart disease.The death rate( 率) from the disease has been increasing at an alarming speed for the past thirty years.Today in Britain,for example,about four hundred people a day die of heart disease.Medical experts know that people can reduce their chances of getting heart disease by exercising regularly,by not smoking,by changing their diets,and by paying more attention to reducing stress(压力) in their work.
However,Western health-care systems are still not paying enough attention to the prevention of the disease.There is a need for more programs to educate the public about the causes and prevention of heart disease.Instead of supporting such programs,however,the U.S.health-care system is spending large sums of money on the surgical( 外 科 的 ) treatment of the disease after it develops.This emphasis( 强 调 ) on treatment clearly has something to do with the technological advances that have taken place in the past ten to fifteen years.In this time,modern technology has enabled doctors to develop new surgical techniques.Many operations that were considered impossible or too risky(有风险的) a few years ago are now performed every day in U.S.hospitals.The result has been a huge increase in heart surgery.
Although there is no doubt that heart surgery can help a large number of people,some people point out that the emphasis on the surgical treatment of the disease has three clear disadvantages.First,it attracts interest and money away from the question of prevention.Second,it causes the costs of general hospital care to rise.After hospitals buy the expensive equipment that is necessary for modern heart surgery,they must try to recover the money they have spent.To do this,they raise costs for all their patients,not just those patients whose treatment requires the equipment.The third disadvantage is that doctors are encouraged to perform surgery—even on patients for whom an operation is unnecessary—because the equipment and expert skills are there.A government office recently stated that major heart surgery was often performed even though its chances of success were low.In one type of heart surgery,for example,only 15 percent of patients improved their conditions after the surgery.However,more than 100,000 of these operations are performed in the United States every year.
1.What effect has modern technology had on medicine?
A.It has reduced the costs of medical treatment.
B.It hasn’t helped save any patients.
C.It has encouraged doctors to do more heart surgeries.
D.It has helped educate people about the prevention of heart disease.
2.“To do this”(in Paragraph 3) means _____ .
A.to help patients recover
B.to increase the number of heart surgeries
C.to get back the money spent on the equipment
D.to buy new equipment for the treatment of heart disease
3.The author would agree that _____ .
A.more money should be spent on the prevention of heart disease
B.heart surgery has helped most patients improve their conditions
C.modern technology has made heart surgery more risky than before
D.the public have known a great deal about the causes of heart disease
4.Which would be the best title for the passage?
A.The Greatest Killer in the West
B.Heart Disease:Treat or Prevent
C.Old Technology and Heart Surgery
D.Heart Surgery:Advantages
-
, it’s predicted that global temperature will rise futher at current rates of CO2 emission.
A. Roughly B. Curiously
C. Sadly D. Particularly
-
New crime prediction software should reduce not only the murder rate, but the rate of other crimes. Developed by Richard Berk, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, the software has already used in Baltimore and Philadelphia to predict which individuals on probation(缓刑) or parole(假释) are most likely to murder and to be murdered.
“When a person goes on probation or parole he is supervised(监督) by an officer. The question is ‘what level of supervision is appropriate?’” said Berk. It used to be that parole officers used the person’s criminal record, and their judgment to make decisions.
“This research replaces those seat-of-the –pants calculations,” he said.
Technology helps determine level of supervision. On average there is one murder for every 100,000 people. Even among high-risk groups the murder rate is one in 100. Predicting such a rare event is very difficult, but advances in computer technology works.
Years ago, the researchers made a dataset of more than 60,000 various crimes. Using the software they developed, they found some much more likely to commit murder when paroled or probated. They could identify eight future murderers out of 100.
Berk’s software examines roughly two dozen variables(可变因素), from criminal record to geographic location. The type of crimes, and more importantly, the age at which that crime was committed, were two of the most predictive variables.
“People assume that if someone murdered then they will murder in the future,” said Berk. “ What really matters is what that person did as a young individual. Predicting future crimes sounds well. But we aren’t anywhere near being able to do that.”
“Berk’s scientific answer leaves policymakers with difficult questions. By labeling one group of people as high risk, and supervise them closely, there should be fewer murders, which the potential victims should be happy about. It also means that those high-risk individuals will be supervised more aggressively. For human rights advocates, that means punishing people who, most likely, will not commit a crime in the future,” said Bushway. “It comes down to a question of whether you would rather make these errors or those errors.”
1.The underlined words(in Para.3) probably mean___.
A. calculations based on subjective opinions
B. calculations based on widespread voting
C. calculations made by advanced technology
D. calculations based on serious considering
2.For 650 people with crime records, how many potential murderers would the software find?
A. 65. B. 13. C. 52. D. 65.
3.From Para 7, we can infer that______.
A. the technology developed by Richard Berk will soon be widely used in the US
B. the technology would not be widely accepted in the short term
C. whether a person murders or not largely decided by his upbringing while young
D. if a person murdered when he was fifty, he is sure to murder again while on probation
4.Which would be the best title for the passage?
A. Closely Supervise Potential Murders
B. Measures Taken to Prevent Criminal Behavior
C. Technology Revolutionizes Judges’ Way of Working
D. Software is Developed to Predict Criminal Behavior
-
New crime prediction software should reduce not only the murder rate, but the rate of other crimes. Developed by Richard Berk, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania, the software has already used in Baltimore and Philadelphia to predict which individuals on probation(缓刑) or parole(假释) are most likely to murder and to be murdered.
“When a person goes on probation or parole he is supervised(监督) by an officer. The question is ‘what level of supervision is appropriate?’” said Berk. It used to be that parole officers used the person’s criminal record, and their judgment to make decisions.
“This research replaces those seat-of-the –pants calculations,” he said.
Technology helps determine level of supervision. On average there is one murder for every 100,000 people. Even among high-risk groups the murder rate is one in 100. Predicting such a rare event is very difficult, but advances in computer technology works.
Years ago, the researchers made a dataset of more than 60,000 various crimes. Using the software they developed, they found some much more likely to commit murder when paroled or probated. They could identify eight future murderers out of 100.
Berk’s software examines roughly two dozen variables(可变因素), from criminal record to geographic location. The type of crimes, and more importantly, the age at which that crime was committed, were two of the most predictive variables.
“People assume that if someone murdered then they will murder in the future,” said Berk. “What really matters is what that person did as a young individual. Predicting future crimes sounds well. But we aren’t anywhere near being able to do that.”
“Berk’s scientific answer leaves policymakers with difficult questions. By labeling one group of people as high risk, and supervise them closely, there should be fewer murders, which the potential victims should be happy about. It also means that those high-risk individuals will be supervised more aggressively. For human rights advocates, that means punishing people who, most likely, will not commit a crime in the future,” said Bushway. “It comes down to a question of whether you would rather make these errors or those errors.”
1.The underlined words in Para.3 probably mean___.
A. calculations based on subjective opinions
B. calculations based on widespread voting
C. calculations made by advanced technology
D. calculations based on serious considering
2.From Para 7, we can infer that______.
A. the technology developed by Richard Berk will soon be widely used in the US
B. the technology would not be widely accepted in the short term
C. whether a person murders or not largely decided by his upbringing while young
D. if a person murdered when he was fifty, he is sure to murder again while on probation
3.Bushway’s attitude to the technology put forward by Richard Berk is ____.
A. positive B. negative
C. objective D. Indifferent
-
With many major economic problems________ to be solved, there is no point predicting the growth rate of this year now.
A. remaining B. remained
C. have remained D. having remained
-
Our news is constantly filled with the reality of death and dying. And each of us, if we live long enough, experiences the loss of persons we loved. Children ages eight through ten were asked what they thought about death,and these are some of their answers:
“When you die,God takes care of you like your mother did. When you were alive,only God doesn’t yell at you all the time.’’(Beth,9)
“When you die,they bury you in the ground and your soul goes to heaven,but your body can’t go to heaven because it’s too crowded there already.” (Jimmy, 8)
“Only the good people go to heaven. The other people go where it’s hot all the time like in Florida. ” (Judy,9)
“Doctors help you so you won’t die until you pay their bills.”(Stephanie,9)
I've observed that the loss of a loved one can be one of the most difficult things we humans can face. I’ve known friends of sick and dying people to sit by a bedside or in a hospital room for hours,even days, at a time. I've seen food in homes of people who are dying overflow from kitchen to dining room—food brought by comforting friends from church and con cerned neighbours. And I've observed friends just listen for as long as it takes.
When U.S. Congressman Sam Rayburn (1882—1961) discovered that he was ill,he announced to the House of Representatives he was going home to Texas for medical tests. Some wondered why he did not stay in Washington where there were excellent medical facilities. His answer was a beautiful tribute (颂词) to friendship:"Bonham is a place where people know it when you’re sick,and where they care when you die. ”
No one wants to go through difficult times alone. So Rayburn traded the best of medical technology for the closeness of loving friends. He knew that good friends are good medicine. Often the best.
1.According to the passage, the four children's answers show .
A. they have the same idea on death
B. they have different opinions on death
C. they have experienced death
D. they have the loss of their parents
2.What’s the opinion of the author on friendship?
A. Caring friends is necessary in times of happiness.
B. Caring friends is necessary in time of trouble.
C. It’s easy for human to face the loss of a relative.
D. Everyone needs to face the loss of a friend.
3.What was Sam Rayburn most concerned about when ill?
A. The closeness of loving friends.
B. The medical examination.
C. The excellent medical facilities.
D. The development of his home.
4.What’s the best title of the passage?
A. Friendship Cannot Stand Always on One Side.
B. A Friend Is Easier Lost Than Found.
C. True Friendship Lasts Forever.
D. Good Friends Are Good Medicine.
-
The belief that new technologies are causing the death of work is the idea that never goes away. Despite evidence to the contrary, we still view technological change today as being more rapid and dramatic in its consequences for work than ever before. But this is nothing new. People have always viewed the technological changes that take place during their lives the most dramatic and dangerous that ever happened in history.
In the 1930s, the British economist（经济学家）John Maynard Keynes predicted the widespread use of electricity would produce a world where people spend most of their time doing nothing. In the United States during the 1960s, the government repeatedly investigates fears that automatic machines would permanently reduce the amount of work available, In 1988, one Australian historian claimed that at least a quarter of the workforce would be without jobs within 10 years because of computers.
Of course, none of these disasters came to pass in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia, or anywhere else.
Yet today, we are seeing the return of these predictions, with some experts claiming the world of work once more undergoing radical and unprecedented change. They argue that robots and other workplace technologies are causing a reduction in the total amount of work available, or are bringing a more rapid pace substitution of machines for humans has been seen previously.
But there is a little evidence to support such beliefs, Statistics show that the percentage of people in work, the number of hours they work, and how frequently they change jobs have remained remarkably constant over the past 20 years.
This stability should not come as a surprise, There are good reasons why we should not expect new technologies to cause the death of work. New technologies always cause job losses, but that is only part of the story. What also needs to be understood is how they increase the amount of work available.
One way this happens is through the increases in incomes that accompany the use of new technologies. With the introduction of these technologies, good and services can be produced faster, which results in higher real incomes for workers. Higher incomes then increase demand for other products and consequently more workers are needed to make them. Additionally, while new technologies are likely to substitute for some types of workers, they will also increase demand for other types of workers, especially those with higher level skills and expertise.
So, the end of work is no closer today than at any time in the past. But there is still a need to keep disproving the prediction, to reduce people’s fears.
1.What is the function of the second paragraph?
A. To explain the importance of developing new technology.
B. To give historical examples of unnecessary fear about new technology.
C. To argue that technological dangers are becoming more serious.
D. To show how technology affected employment in the past.
2.How can employment statistics over the past 20 years best be described?
A. Confusing B. Reliable
C. Stable D. Variable
3.According to paragraph 7, why does demand for products often increase after new technology is introduced?
A. Productivity improvements help raise workers’ salaries.
B. There is more demand for new skills in the economy.
C. There are more goods for people to choose from.
D. Higher quality goods at lower prices encourage consumption.
4.What is the author's opinion about the introduction of new technology?
A. It does not have an effect on most people’s jobs.
B. Its danger to peoples employment possibilities is overstated.
C. It usually leads to a significant increase in employment.
D. Its benefits are usually not worth the introduction.
-
The belief that new technologies are causing the death of work is the idea that never goes away. Despite evidence to the contrary, we still view technological change today as being more rapid and dramatic in its consequences for work than ever before. But this is nothing new. People have always viewed the technological changes that take place during their lives as the most dramatic and dangerous that ever happened in history.
In the 1930s, the British economist(经济学家) John Maynard Keynes predicted the widespread use of electricity would produce a world where people spend most of their time doing nothing. In the United States during the 1960s, the government repeatedly investigates fears that automatic machines would permanently reduce the amount of work available. In 1988, one Australian historian claimed that at least a quarter of the workforce would be without jobs within 10 years because of computers.
Of course, none of these disasters came to pass in the United Kingdom, the United States and Australia, or anywhere else.
Yet today, we are seeing the return of these predictions, with some experts claiming the world of work is once more undergoing radical（激进的）and unprecedented（前所未有的） change. They argue that robots and other workplace technologies are causing a reduction in the total amount of work available, or are bringing a more rapid pace of substitution of machines for humans than has been seen previously.
But there is a little evidence to support such beliefs. Statistics show that the percentage of people in work, the number of hours they work, and how frequently they change jobs have remained remarkably constant over the past 20 years.
This stability should not come as a surprise. There are good reasons why we should not expect new technologies to cause the death of work. New technologies always cause job losses, but that is only part of the story. What also needs to be understood is how they increase the amount of work available.
One way this happens is through the increases in incomes that accompany the use of new technologies. With the introduction of these technologies, goods and services can be produced faster, which results in higher real incomes for workers. Higher incomes then increase demand for other products and consequently more workers are needed to make them. Additionally, while new technologies are likely to substitute for some types of workers, they will also increase demand for other types of workers, especially those with higher level skills and expertise.
So, the end of work is no closer today than at any time in the past. But there is still a need to keep disproving the prediction, to reduce people’s fears.
1.What is the function of the second paragraph?
A. To explain the importance of developing new technology.
B. To show how technology affected employment in the past.
C. To argue that technological dangers are becoming more serious.
D. To give historical examples of unnecessary fear about new technology.
2.How can employment statistics over the past 20 years best be described?
A. Confusing B. Steady
C. Reliable D. Variable
3.According to paragraph 7, why does demand for products often increase after new technology is introduced?
A. There are more goods for people to choose from.
B. There is more demand for new skills in the economy.
C. Productivity improvements help raise workers’ salaries.
D. Higher quality goods at lower prices encourage consumption.
4.What is the author’s opinion about the introduction of new technology?
A. It does not have an effect on most people’s jobs.
B. Its benefits are usually not worth the introduction.
C. It usually leads to a significant increase in employment.
D. Its danger to people’s employment possibilities is overstated.
-
______ is of vital importance that we ______ something to protect our precious cultural heritage.
A.It, do B.What, did C.That, should do D.Whether, will do
or why 7,000 should drown or 55,000 die in their cars. No one establishes a quota (定额) for each type of death. It just happens that they follow a consist
ent pattern year after year.
the Western world have remained strangely static throughout the whole of the century, despite all the technological advances and increases in safety standards that have happened in that time. Wilde developed an interesting theory called “risk homeostasis”. According to this theory, people naturally live with a certain level of risk. When something is made safer, people will get around the measure in some way to get back to the original level of danger. If, for instance, they are required to wear seat belts, they will feel safer and thus will drive a little faster and a little more recklessly, thereby statistically canceling out the benefits that the seat belt offers. Other studies have shown that where a crossing is made safer, the accident rate invariably falls there but rises elsewhere along the same stretch of road as if making up for the drop. It appears, then, that we have an inborn need for danger. In all events, it is becoming clearer and clearer to scientists that the factors influencing our lifespan are far more subtle and complex than had been previously thought. It now appears that if you wish to live a long life, it isn’t simply a matter of paying attention to certain precautions such as eating the right foods, not smoking, and driving with care. You must also have the right attitude. Scientists at the Duke University Medical Center made a 15-year study of 500 persons personalities and found, somewhat to their surprise, that people with a suspicious or mistrustful nature die prematurely far more often than people with a sunny disposition. Looking on the bright side, it seems, can add years to your life span.