What can we infer from the first parag...

Do who choose to go on exotic, far-flung holidays deserve free health advice before they travel And even if they pay, who ensures that they get good, up-to-date information Who, for that matter, should collect that information in the first place For a variety of reasons, travel medicine in Britain is a responsibility nobody wants. As a result, many travellers go abroad prepared to avoid serious disease.
Why is travel medicine so unloved Partly there"s an identity problem. Because it takes an interest in anything that impinges on the health of travellers, this emerging medical specialism invariably cuts across the traditional disciplines. It delves into everything from seasickness, jet lag and the hazards of camels to malaria and plague. But travel medicine has a more serious obstacle to overcome. Travel clinics are meant to tell people how to avoid ending up dead or in a hospital when they come home, but it is notoriously difficult to get anybody pay out money for keeping people healthy.
Travel medicine has also been colonized by commercial interests; the vast majority of travel clinics in Britain are run by airlines or travel companies. And while travel concerns are happy to sell profitable injections, they may be less keen to spread bad news about travellers" diarrhea in Turkey, or to take time to spell out preventive measures travellers could take. "The NHS finds it difficult to define travellers" health, says Ron Behrens, the only NHS consultant in travel and director of the travel clinic of the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in London." Should it come within the NHS or should it be paid for It"s Gary area, and opinion is spilt. No one seems to have any responsibility for defining its role, he says.
To compound its low status in the medical hierarchy, travel medicine has to rely on statistics that are patchy at best. In most cases we just don"t know how many Britons contract diseases when abroad. And even if a disease linked to travel there is rarely any information about where those afflicted went, what they are, how they behaved, or which vaccinations they had. This shortage of hard facts and figures makes it difficult to give detailed advice to people, information that might even save their lives.
A recent leader in British Medical Journal argued. "Travel medicine will emerge as credible disciplines only if the risks encountered by travellers and the relative benefits of public health interventions are well defined in terms of their relative occurrence, distribution and control. Exactly how much money is wasted by poor travel advice. The real figure is anybody"s guess, but it could easily run into millions. Behrens gives one example. Britain spends more than ￡1 million each year just on cholera vaccines that often don"t work and so give people a false sense of security." Information on the prevention and treatment of all forms of diarrhea would be a better priority, he says.What can we infer from the first paragraph

A．Travel medicine is hard to prevail.
B．People know little about travel medicine.
C．People don"t believe in travel medicine.
D．Travellers can seldom get up-to-date information.

单项选择题

Parenthood isn"t a career-killer. The effect of parenthood is not that severe as people imagine. In fact, economists with two or more kids tend to produce more research, not less, than their one-child or childless colleagues. But female economists in particular can pay a price in terms of productivity after becoming mothers, especially if they"re young or unmarried.
That"s, according to new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, a working paper ("Parenthood and Productivity of Highly Skilled Labour: Evidence from the Grove of Academe") published this month by Matthias Krapf of the University of Zurich, Heinrich Ursprung of the University of Konstanz and Christian Zimmermann of the regional reserve bank.
"There is a widespread conviction that motherhood is extremely costly in terms of professional career advancement. In particular, it is often argued that the only way for young women to make a challenging career is to remain childless," they wrote. "Our study of the academic labour market arrives at a somewhat less dreary picture: we do not observe a family gap in research productivity among female academic economists. Moreover, motherhood-induced decreases in research productivity are less pronounced than usually purported."
The authors in early 2012 surveyed about 10,000 economists through the Research Papers in Economics online platform, matching the academics" answers with their publication records. They gauged an economist"s productivity by looking at their output: published research, weighted by journal quality. Some of their findings are as follows:
"Mothers of at least two children are, on average, more productive than mothers of only one child, and mothers in general are more productive than childless women. Fathers of at least two children are also more productive than fathers of one child and childless men. Toward the end of their careers, however, childless men appear to be somewhat more productive than fathers of one child."
Parenthood does appear linked to lower productivity while the children are 12 and younger: mothers average a 17.4% loss, while fathers average a 5% loss. A female economist with three children, on average, loses the equivalent of four years of research output by the time her kids become teenagers.
Women who are married or in a stable relationship "do not have any drop in research productivity in the three years following childbirth." For single mothers, research output drops by roughly a third over the same period.
Female economists who have their first child before the age of 30 are less productive, while "for older first-time mothers, the effect remains negative, but it is much smaller and lacks statistical significance."
Male economists without tenure become more productive after having a child, while tenured male economists won"t be more productive. There is no similar effect for female economists.What is the relationship between the first two paragraphs

A．Comparison and contrast.
B．Paragraph 2 is the illustration of paragraph 1.
C．Cause and effect.
D．The two paragraphs are two sides of the same topic.

单项选择题

Exercise is good for you. But most people really know very little about how to exercise. Look at the following true-false tests. You will be surprised!
The best way to reduce the mid-section is to do abdominal exercise.
False. Many people believe that when specific muscles are exercised, the fatty tissues in the immediate area are "burned up". The truth is that exercise bums fat from all over the body and not from one specific area, regardless of the type of exercise. Of course, if you reduce the fat throughout your body, you will certainly see results around your waistline too!
To maintain an adequate level of physical fitness, you need to exercise only twice a week.
False. Studies conducted by NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, show that unexercised muscles lose their strength very quickly. After 48 to 72 hours, you must use the muscles again to re-establish the good physical effects.
To lose weight you should always "work up a good sweat" when exercising.
False. Sweating only lowers body temperature to prevent overheating; it does not help you reduce. You may weigh less immediate after a workout, but this is due to water loss. Once you replace the liquid, you replace the weight.
You bum more calories jogging one mile than walking the same distance.
False. You use the same amount of energy whether you walk or jog the mile, since in both cases you are moving the same weight the same distance. The speed doesn"t matter. Of course, if you jog rather than walk for 30 minutes, you"ll cover more distance, and therefore bum more calories.
If your breathing doesn"t return to normal within minutes after you finish exercising, you"ve exercised too much.
True. Five minutes or so after exercising, your breathing should be normal, your heart shouldn"t be pounding, and you shouldn"t be exhausted. Beneficial exercise is not overly difficult, unpleasant, and refreshing.
Walking is one of the best exercises.
True. Walking helps circulation of blood through-out the body, and thus has a direct effect on your overall feeling.
Vigorous stretching exercises keep muscles flexible.
False. Stretching exercises (for example: twisting or bending at the waist, touching your toes) should be done slowly, allowing the muscles to relax and "let go". Vigorous stretching makes the muscles tighter.
The minimum amount of time you should spend exercising in a day is 20 minutes.
True. There are more than 400 muscles that attach to your skeleton. A good exercise routine should contract and stretch all these muscles, and this simply cannot be done with four or five exercises in five or ten minutes. From experience, I"ve found that about 20 minutes is the minimum amount of time needed for an adequate workout.What does the author mean by saying "You will be surprised!" (Line 2, Para.1)

A．People will regret when they realize their false exercising habits.
B．Many people have false exercising habits.
C．Many people believe their false exercising habits are true.
D．Many people can"t absorb so much information.

单项选择题

Do who choose to go on exotic, far-flung holidays deserve free health advice before they travel And even if they pay, who ensures that they get good, up-to-date information Who, for that matter, should collect that information in the first place For a variety of reasons, travel medicine in Britain is a responsibility nobody wants. As a result, many travellers go abroad prepared to avoid serious disease.
Why is travel medicine so unloved Partly there"s an identity problem. Because it takes an interest in anything that impinges on the health of travellers, this emerging medical specialism invariably cuts across the traditional disciplines. It delves into everything from seasickness, jet lag and the hazards of camels to malaria and plague. But travel medicine has a more serious obstacle to overcome. Travel clinics are meant to tell people how to avoid ending up dead or in a hospital when they come home, but it is notoriously difficult to get anybody pay out money for keeping people healthy.
Travel medicine has also been colonized by commercial interests; the vast majority of travel clinics in Britain are run by airlines or travel companies. And while travel concerns are happy to sell profitable injections, they may be less keen to spread bad news about travellers" diarrhea in Turkey, or to take time to spell out preventive measures travellers could take. "The NHS finds it difficult to define travellers" health, says Ron Behrens, the only NHS consultant in travel and director of the travel clinic of the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in London." Should it come within the NHS or should it be paid for It"s Gary area, and opinion is spilt. No one seems to have any responsibility for defining its role, he says.
To compound its low status in the medical hierarchy, travel medicine has to rely on statistics that are patchy at best. In most cases we just don"t know how many Britons contract diseases when abroad. And even if a disease linked to travel there is rarely any information about where those afflicted went, what they are, how they behaved, or which vaccinations they had. This shortage of hard facts and figures makes it difficult to give detailed advice to people, information that might even save their lives.
A recent leader in British Medical Journal argued. "Travel medicine will emerge as credible disciplines only if the risks encountered by travellers and the relative benefits of public health interventions are well defined in terms of their relative occurrence, distribution and control. Exactly how much money is wasted by poor travel advice. The real figure is anybody"s guess, but it could easily run into millions. Behrens gives one example. Britain spends more than ￡1 million each year just on cholera vaccines that often don"t work and so give people a false sense of security." Information on the prevention and treatment of all forms of diarrhea would be a better priority, he says.The phrase "delves into" (Line 3, Para.2) can be replaced by ______.

A．refrains from
B．holds back
C．digs into
D．worries about

单项选择题

Parenthood isn"t a career-killer. The effect of parenthood is not that severe as people imagine. In fact, economists with two or more kids tend to produce more research, not less, than their one-child or childless colleagues. But female economists in particular can pay a price in terms of productivity after becoming mothers, especially if they"re young or unmarried.
That"s, according to new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, a working paper ("Parenthood and Productivity of Highly Skilled Labour: Evidence from the Grove of Academe") published this month by Matthias Krapf of the University of Zurich, Heinrich Ursprung of the University of Konstanz and Christian Zimmermann of the regional reserve bank.
"There is a widespread conviction that motherhood is extremely costly in terms of professional career advancement. In particular, it is often argued that the only way for young women to make a challenging career is to remain childless," they wrote. "Our study of the academic labour market arrives at a somewhat less dreary picture: we do not observe a family gap in research productivity among female academic economists. Moreover, motherhood-induced decreases in research productivity are less pronounced than usually purported."
The authors in early 2012 surveyed about 10,000 economists through the Research Papers in Economics online platform, matching the academics" answers with their publication records. They gauged an economist"s productivity by looking at their output: published research, weighted by journal quality. Some of their findings are as follows:
"Mothers of at least two children are, on average, more productive than mothers of only one child, and mothers in general are more productive than childless women. Fathers of at least two children are also more productive than fathers of one child and childless men. Toward the end of their careers, however, childless men appear to be somewhat more productive than fathers of one child."
Parenthood does appear linked to lower productivity while the children are 12 and younger: mothers average a 17.4% loss, while fathers average a 5% loss. A female economist with three children, on average, loses the equivalent of four years of research output by the time her kids become teenagers.
Women who are married or in a stable relationship "do not have any drop in research productivity in the three years following childbirth." For single mothers, research output drops by roughly a third over the same period.
Female economists who have their first child before the age of 30 are less productive, while "for older first-time mothers, the effect remains negative, but it is much smaller and lacks statistical significance."
Male economists without tenure become more productive after having a child, while tenured male economists won"t be more productive. There is no similar effect for female economists.The word "dreary" (Line 4, Para.3) may mean ______.

A．exciting
B．relieved
C．inspiring
D．downcast

单项选择题

Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave up the dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I wasn"t surprised when this didn"t make the news here in the United States—we"re now the only wealthy country without such a policy.
The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical Leave Act , passed in 1993. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks" unpaid leave for care of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought it bitterly, describing it as "government-run personnel management" and a "dangerous precedent". In fact, every step of the way, as (usually) Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the law, business groups have been strongly opposed.
As Yale law professor Anne Alstott argues, justifying parental support depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents , she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives: there is "no exit" when it comes to children. "Society expects—and needs—parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual, emotional and moral capabilities. And society expects—and needs—parents to persist in their roles for 18 years, or longer if needed."
While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not providing care. What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state, for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children"s welfare, yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parenting as a personal choice for which there is no collective responsibility is not merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those benefits because they accrue (不断积累) to the whole of society as today"s children become tomorrow"s productive citizenry (公民). In fact, by some estimates, the value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money (including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these investments generate huge social benefits—as they clearly do—the benefits of providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer.What do we learn about paid family leave from the first paragraph

A．America is now the only developed country without the policy.
B．It has now become a hot topic in the United States.
C．It came as a surprise when Australia adopted the policy.
D．Its meaning was clarified when it was established in Australia.

单项选择题

Nowadays, computer is becoming more and more widely used. But people are not that familiar with knowledge of computer. How to operate computers still requires much devotion. Computer people talk a lot about the need for other people to become "computer-literate" , in other words, to learn to understand computers and what makes them tick. Not all experts agree, however, that this is a good idea.
One pioneer, in particular, David Tebbutt, is the founder of Computertown in UK. Although many people see this as a successful attempt to bring people closer to the computer, David does not see it that way. He said that Computertown UK was formed for just the opposite reason, to bring computers to the people and make them "people-literate".
David first got the idea when he visited one of America"s best-known computer "guru" figures, Bob Albrecht, Albrecht, in the small university town of Palo Alto in Northern California. Albrecht had started a project called Computertown USA in the local library, and the local children used to call round every Wednesday to borrow some time on the computer there, instead of borrowing library books. Albrecht was always on hand to answer any questions and to help the children discover about computers in their own way.
Over here, in Britain, Computertowns have taken off in a big way, and there are now about 40 scattered over the country. David Tebbutt thinks they are most successful when tied to a computer club. He insists that there be a vast and important difference between the two, although they complement each other. The clubs cater for the enthusiasts, who have been with some computer knowledge already, who get together and eventually from an expert computer group. This frightens away non-experts, who are happier going to Computertowns where there are computers available for them to experiment on, with experts available to encourage them and answer any questions. They are not told what to do, how to operate, and they find out.
David Tebbutt finds it interesting to see the two different approaches working side by side. The computer experts have to learn not to tell people about the operating principle of computers, but they have to be able to explain the answers to the questions that people really want to know. In some Computertowns there are question sessions, rather like radio phone-ins, where the experts listen to a lot of questions and then try to work out some structure to answer them. People do not have to learn computer jargons, even to be "computer-literate", but the experts have to translate computer mysteries into easily understood terms; then computers will be easier for people to operate, and the computers will become "people literate".What does "computer-literate" (Line 4, Para.1) mean

A．Everyone is necessary to have a computer.
B．People know much knowledge about computers.
C．Knowledge about computers is hard to absorb.
D．Computers are becoming more and more widely used.

单项选择题

Do who choose to go on exotic, far-flung holidays deserve free health advice before they travel And even if they pay, who ensures that they get good, up-to-date information Who, for that matter, should collect that information in the first place For a variety of reasons, travel medicine in Britain is a responsibility nobody wants. As a result, many travellers go abroad prepared to avoid serious disease.
Why is travel medicine so unloved Partly there"s an identity problem. Because it takes an interest in anything that impinges on the health of travellers, this emerging medical specialism invariably cuts across the traditional disciplines. It delves into everything from seasickness, jet lag and the hazards of camels to malaria and plague. But travel medicine has a more serious obstacle to overcome. Travel clinics are meant to tell people how to avoid ending up dead or in a hospital when they come home, but it is notoriously difficult to get anybody pay out money for keeping people healthy.
Travel medicine has also been colonized by commercial interests; the vast majority of travel clinics in Britain are run by airlines or travel companies. And while travel concerns are happy to sell profitable injections, they may be less keen to spread bad news about travellers" diarrhea in Turkey, or to take time to spell out preventive measures travellers could take. "The NHS finds it difficult to define travellers" health, says Ron Behrens, the only NHS consultant in travel and director of the travel clinic of the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in London." Should it come within the NHS or should it be paid for It"s Gary area, and opinion is spilt. No one seems to have any responsibility for defining its role, he says.
To compound its low status in the medical hierarchy, travel medicine has to rely on statistics that are patchy at best. In most cases we just don"t know how many Britons contract diseases when abroad. And even if a disease linked to travel there is rarely any information about where those afflicted went, what they are, how they behaved, or which vaccinations they had. This shortage of hard facts and figures makes it difficult to give detailed advice to people, information that might even save their lives.
A recent leader in British Medical Journal argued. "Travel medicine will emerge as credible disciplines only if the risks encountered by travellers and the relative benefits of public health interventions are well defined in terms of their relative occurrence, distribution and control. Exactly how much money is wasted by poor travel advice. The real figure is anybody"s guess, but it could easily run into millions. Behrens gives one example. Britain spends more than ￡1 million each year just on cholera vaccines that often don"t work and so give people a false sense of security." Information on the prevention and treatment of all forms of diarrhea would be a better priority, he says.Which of the following statement is not the problem of travel medicine

A．Traditional disciplines are not enough for travel medicine.
B．Travel medicine has been colonized by commercial interests.
C．The statistics about travellers are hard to obtain.
D．People spend much money on poor travel advice.

单项选择题

Exercise is good for you. But most people really know very little about how to exercise. Look at the following true-false tests. You will be surprised!
The best way to reduce the mid-section is to do abdominal exercise.
False. Many people believe that when specific muscles are exercised, the fatty tissues in the immediate area are "burned up". The truth is that exercise bums fat from all over the body and not from one specific area, regardless of the type of exercise. Of course, if you reduce the fat throughout your body, you will certainly see results around your waistline too!
To maintain an adequate level of physical fitness, you need to exercise only twice a week.
False. Studies conducted by NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, show that unexercised muscles lose their strength very quickly. After 48 to 72 hours, you must use the muscles again to re-establish the good physical effects.
To lose weight you should always "work up a good sweat" when exercising.
False. Sweating only lowers body temperature to prevent overheating; it does not help you reduce. You may weigh less immediate after a workout, but this is due to water loss. Once you replace the liquid, you replace the weight.
You bum more calories jogging one mile than walking the same distance.
False. You use the same amount of energy whether you walk or jog the mile, since in both cases you are moving the same weight the same distance. The speed doesn"t matter. Of course, if you jog rather than walk for 30 minutes, you"ll cover more distance, and therefore bum more calories.
If your breathing doesn"t return to normal within minutes after you finish exercising, you"ve exercised too much.
True. Five minutes or so after exercising, your breathing should be normal, your heart shouldn"t be pounding, and you shouldn"t be exhausted. Beneficial exercise is not overly difficult, unpleasant, and refreshing.
Walking is one of the best exercises.
True. Walking helps circulation of blood through-out the body, and thus has a direct effect on your overall feeling.
Vigorous stretching exercises keep muscles flexible.
False. Stretching exercises (for example: twisting or bending at the waist, touching your toes) should be done slowly, allowing the muscles to relax and "let go". Vigorous stretching makes the muscles tighter.
The minimum amount of time you should spend exercising in a day is 20 minutes.
True. There are more than 400 muscles that attach to your skeleton. A good exercise routine should contract and stretch all these muscles, and this simply cannot be done with four or five exercises in five or ten minutes. From experience, I"ve found that about 20 minutes is the minimum amount of time needed for an adequate workout.Which is not the reason why jogging one mile bum the same calories with walking the same distance

A．Because you are moving the same weight the same distance in both cases.
B．Because you use the same amount of energy whether you walk or jog the mile.
C．Because the speed has no influence on the calories burning.
D．Because the posture of jogging and walking are similar.

单项选择题

Parenthood isn"t a career-killer. The effect of parenthood is not that severe as people imagine. In fact, economists with two or more kids tend to produce more research, not less, than their one-child or childless colleagues. But female economists in particular can pay a price in terms of productivity after becoming mothers, especially if they"re young or unmarried.
That"s, according to new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, a working paper ("Parenthood and Productivity of Highly Skilled Labour: Evidence from the Grove of Academe") published this month by Matthias Krapf of the University of Zurich, Heinrich Ursprung of the University of Konstanz and Christian Zimmermann of the regional reserve bank.
"There is a widespread conviction that motherhood is extremely costly in terms of professional career advancement. In particular, it is often argued that the only way for young women to make a challenging career is to remain childless," they wrote. "Our study of the academic labour market arrives at a somewhat less dreary picture: we do not observe a family gap in research productivity among female academic economists. Moreover, motherhood-induced decreases in research productivity are less pronounced than usually purported."
The authors in early 2012 surveyed about 10,000 economists through the Research Papers in Economics online platform, matching the academics" answers with their publication records. They gauged an economist"s productivity by looking at their output: published research, weighted by journal quality. Some of their findings are as follows:
"Mothers of at least two children are, on average, more productive than mothers of only one child, and mothers in general are more productive than childless women. Fathers of at least two children are also more productive than fathers of one child and childless men. Toward the end of their careers, however, childless men appear to be somewhat more productive than fathers of one child."
Parenthood does appear linked to lower productivity while the children are 12 and younger: mothers average a 17.4% loss, while fathers average a 5% loss. A female economist with three children, on average, loses the equivalent of four years of research output by the time her kids become teenagers.
Women who are married or in a stable relationship "do not have any drop in research productivity in the three years following childbirth." For single mothers, research output drops by roughly a third over the same period.
Female economists who have their first child before the age of 30 are less productive, while "for older first-time mothers, the effect remains negative, but it is much smaller and lacks statistical significance."
Male economists without tenure become more productive after having a child, while tenured male economists won"t be more productive. There is no similar effect for female economists.Which conditions as follows can lead to less productivity

A．Women have two children or more.
B．Women have no children.
C．Men have two children or more.
D．Women with stable marriage relationship.

单项选择题

Nowadays, computer is becoming more and more widely used. But people are not that familiar with knowledge of computer. How to operate computers still requires much devotion. Computer people talk a lot about the need for other people to become "computer-literate" , in other words, to learn to understand computers and what makes them tick. Not all experts agree, however, that this is a good idea.
One pioneer, in particular, David Tebbutt, is the founder of Computertown in UK. Although many people see this as a successful attempt to bring people closer to the computer, David does not see it that way. He said that Computertown UK was formed for just the opposite reason, to bring computers to the people and make them "people-literate".
David first got the idea when he visited one of America"s best-known computer "guru" figures, Bob Albrecht, Albrecht, in the small university town of Palo Alto in Northern California. Albrecht had started a project called Computertown USA in the local library, and the local children used to call round every Wednesday to borrow some time on the computer there, instead of borrowing library books. Albrecht was always on hand to answer any questions and to help the children discover about computers in their own way.
Over here, in Britain, Computertowns have taken off in a big way, and there are now about 40 scattered over the country. David Tebbutt thinks they are most successful when tied to a computer club. He insists that there be a vast and important difference between the two, although they complement each other. The clubs cater for the enthusiasts, who have been with some computer knowledge already, who get together and eventually from an expert computer group. This frightens away non-experts, who are happier going to Computertowns where there are computers available for them to experiment on, with experts available to encourage them and answer any questions. They are not told what to do, how to operate, and they find out.
David Tebbutt finds it interesting to see the two different approaches working side by side. The computer experts have to learn not to tell people about the operating principle of computers, but they have to be able to explain the answers to the questions that people really want to know. In some Computertowns there are question sessions, rather like radio phone-ins, where the experts listen to a lot of questions and then try to work out some structure to answer them. People do not have to learn computer jargons, even to be "computer-literate", but the experts have to translate computer mysteries into easily understood terms; then computers will be easier for people to operate, and the computers will become "people literate".Why did David Tebbutt oppose the idea of "computer-literate"

A．Because "computer-literate" can hardly bring people closer to the computer.
B．Because "computer-literate" can bring people further to the computer.
C．Because he believed Computertown can bring people much closer to computer.
D．Because he believed that making computer "people-literate" is more significant.

单项选择题

Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave up the dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I wasn"t surprised when this didn"t make the news here in the United States—we"re now the only wealthy country without such a policy.
The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical Leave Act , passed in 1993. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks" unpaid leave for care of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought it bitterly, describing it as "government-run personnel management" and a "dangerous precedent". In fact, every step of the way, as (usually) Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the law, business groups have been strongly opposed.
As Yale law professor Anne Alstott argues, justifying parental support depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents , she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives: there is "no exit" when it comes to children. "Society expects—and needs—parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual, emotional and moral capabilities. And society expects—and needs—parents to persist in their roles for 18 years, or longer if needed."
While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not providing care. What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state, for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children"s welfare, yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parenting as a personal choice for which there is no collective responsibility is not merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those benefits because they accrue (不断积累) to the whole of society as today"s children become tomorrow"s productive citizenry (公民). In fact, by some estimates, the value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money (including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these investments generate huge social benefits—as they clearly do—the benefits of providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer.What has prevented the passing of work-family balance laws in the United States

A．The incompetence of the Democrats.
B．The existing Family and Medical Leave Act.
C．The lack of a precedent in American history.
D．The opposition from business circles.

单项选择题

Do who choose to go on exotic, far-flung holidays deserve free health advice before they travel And even if they pay, who ensures that they get good, up-to-date information Who, for that matter, should collect that information in the first place For a variety of reasons, travel medicine in Britain is a responsibility nobody wants. As a result, many travellers go abroad prepared to avoid serious disease.
Why is travel medicine so unloved Partly there"s an identity problem. Because it takes an interest in anything that impinges on the health of travellers, this emerging medical specialism invariably cuts across the traditional disciplines. It delves into everything from seasickness, jet lag and the hazards of camels to malaria and plague. But travel medicine has a more serious obstacle to overcome. Travel clinics are meant to tell people how to avoid ending up dead or in a hospital when they come home, but it is notoriously difficult to get anybody pay out money for keeping people healthy.
Travel medicine has also been colonized by commercial interests; the vast majority of travel clinics in Britain are run by airlines or travel companies. And while travel concerns are happy to sell profitable injections, they may be less keen to spread bad news about travellers" diarrhea in Turkey, or to take time to spell out preventive measures travellers could take. "The NHS finds it difficult to define travellers" health, says Ron Behrens, the only NHS consultant in travel and director of the travel clinic of the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in London." Should it come within the NHS or should it be paid for It"s Gary area, and opinion is spilt. No one seems to have any responsibility for defining its role, he says.
To compound its low status in the medical hierarchy, travel medicine has to rely on statistics that are patchy at best. In most cases we just don"t know how many Britons contract diseases when abroad. And even if a disease linked to travel there is rarely any information about where those afflicted went, what they are, how they behaved, or which vaccinations they had. This shortage of hard facts and figures makes it difficult to give detailed advice to people, information that might even save their lives.
A recent leader in British Medical Journal argued. "Travel medicine will emerge as credible disciplines only if the risks encountered by travellers and the relative benefits of public health interventions are well defined in terms of their relative occurrence, distribution and control. Exactly how much money is wasted by poor travel advice. The real figure is anybody"s guess, but it could easily run into millions. Behrens gives one example. Britain spends more than ￡1 million each year just on cholera vaccines that often don"t work and so give people a false sense of security." Information on the prevention and treatment of all forms of diarrhea would be a better priority, he says.What does the author mean by saying "..., but it is notoriously difficult to get anybody pay out money for keeping people healthy." (Para.2)

A．People don"t pay attention to their health.
B．Few people are willing to support travel medicine.
C．Most travellers firmly believe that they will be safe.
D．Health comes last compared with others.

单项选择题

Exercise is good for you. But most people really know very little about how to exercise. Look at the following true-false tests. You will be surprised!
The best way to reduce the mid-section is to do abdominal exercise.
False. Many people believe that when specific muscles are exercised, the fatty tissues in the immediate area are "burned up". The truth is that exercise bums fat from all over the body and not from one specific area, regardless of the type of exercise. Of course, if you reduce the fat throughout your body, you will certainly see results around your waistline too!
To maintain an adequate level of physical fitness, you need to exercise only twice a week.
False. Studies conducted by NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, show that unexercised muscles lose their strength very quickly. After 48 to 72 hours, you must use the muscles again to re-establish the good physical effects.
To lose weight you should always "work up a good sweat" when exercising.
False. Sweating only lowers body temperature to prevent overheating; it does not help you reduce. You may weigh less immediate after a workout, but this is due to water loss. Once you replace the liquid, you replace the weight.
You bum more calories jogging one mile than walking the same distance.
False. You use the same amount of energy whether you walk or jog the mile, since in both cases you are moving the same weight the same distance. The speed doesn"t matter. Of course, if you jog rather than walk for 30 minutes, you"ll cover more distance, and therefore bum more calories.
If your breathing doesn"t return to normal within minutes after you finish exercising, you"ve exercised too much.
True. Five minutes or so after exercising, your breathing should be normal, your heart shouldn"t be pounding, and you shouldn"t be exhausted. Beneficial exercise is not overly difficult, unpleasant, and refreshing.
Walking is one of the best exercises.
True. Walking helps circulation of blood through-out the body, and thus has a direct effect on your overall feeling.
Vigorous stretching exercises keep muscles flexible.
False. Stretching exercises (for example: twisting or bending at the waist, touching your toes) should be done slowly, allowing the muscles to relax and "let go". Vigorous stretching makes the muscles tighter.
The minimum amount of time you should spend exercising in a day is 20 minutes.
True. There are more than 400 muscles that attach to your skeleton. A good exercise routine should contract and stretch all these muscles, and this simply cannot be done with four or five exercises in five or ten minutes. From experience, I"ve found that about 20 minutes is the minimum amount of time needed for an adequate workout.Which of the following exercising notion is true

A．Doing abdominal exercise to reduce the mid-section.
B．More sweat in your body, more weight you lose.
C．Exercising only twice a week can keep you fit.
D．Exercise at least for 20 minutes one day.

单项选择题

Parenthood isn"t a career-killer. The effect of parenthood is not that severe as people imagine. In fact, economists with two or more kids tend to produce more research, not less, than their one-child or childless colleagues. But female economists in particular can pay a price in terms of productivity after becoming mothers, especially if they"re young or unmarried.
That"s, according to new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, a working paper ("Parenthood and Productivity of Highly Skilled Labour: Evidence from the Grove of Academe") published this month by Matthias Krapf of the University of Zurich, Heinrich Ursprung of the University of Konstanz and Christian Zimmermann of the regional reserve bank.
"There is a widespread conviction that motherhood is extremely costly in terms of professional career advancement. In particular, it is often argued that the only way for young women to make a challenging career is to remain childless," they wrote. "Our study of the academic labour market arrives at a somewhat less dreary picture: we do not observe a family gap in research productivity among female academic economists. Moreover, motherhood-induced decreases in research productivity are less pronounced than usually purported."
The authors in early 2012 surveyed about 10,000 economists through the Research Papers in Economics online platform, matching the academics" answers with their publication records. They gauged an economist"s productivity by looking at their output: published research, weighted by journal quality. Some of their findings are as follows:
"Mothers of at least two children are, on average, more productive than mothers of only one child, and mothers in general are more productive than childless women. Fathers of at least two children are also more productive than fathers of one child and childless men. Toward the end of their careers, however, childless men appear to be somewhat more productive than fathers of one child."
Parenthood does appear linked to lower productivity while the children are 12 and younger: mothers average a 17.4% loss, while fathers average a 5% loss. A female economist with three children, on average, loses the equivalent of four years of research output by the time her kids become teenagers.
Women who are married or in a stable relationship "do not have any drop in research productivity in the three years following childbirth." For single mothers, research output drops by roughly a third over the same period.
Female economists who have their first child before the age of 30 are less productive, while "for older first-time mothers, the effect remains negative, but it is much smaller and lacks statistical significance."
Male economists without tenure become more productive after having a child, while tenured male economists won"t be more productive. There is no similar effect for female economists.Which of the following statement is Not True

A．Female economists can pay a price for productivity after becoming mothers.
B．Towards retirements, childless men seem to be more productive.
C．Female economists without tenure become more productive after having a child.
D．Mothers" productivity is lower than fathers" while their children are 12 and younger.

单项选择题

Nowadays, computer is becoming more and more widely used. But people are not that familiar with knowledge of computer. How to operate computers still requires much devotion. Computer people talk a lot about the need for other people to become "computer-literate" , in other words, to learn to understand computers and what makes them tick. Not all experts agree, however, that this is a good idea.
One pioneer, in particular, David Tebbutt, is the founder of Computertown in UK. Although many people see this as a successful attempt to bring people closer to the computer, David does not see it that way. He said that Computertown UK was formed for just the opposite reason, to bring computers to the people and make them "people-literate".
David first got the idea when he visited one of America"s best-known computer "guru" figures, Bob Albrecht, Albrecht, in the small university town of Palo Alto in Northern California. Albrecht had started a project called Computertown USA in the local library, and the local children used to call round every Wednesday to borrow some time on the computer there, instead of borrowing library books. Albrecht was always on hand to answer any questions and to help the children discover about computers in their own way.
Over here, in Britain, Computertowns have taken off in a big way, and there are now about 40 scattered over the country. David Tebbutt thinks they are most successful when tied to a computer club. He insists that there be a vast and important difference between the two, although they complement each other. The clubs cater for the enthusiasts, who have been with some computer knowledge already, who get together and eventually from an expert computer group. This frightens away non-experts, who are happier going to Computertowns where there are computers available for them to experiment on, with experts available to encourage them and answer any questions. They are not told what to do, how to operate, and they find out.
David Tebbutt finds it interesting to see the two different approaches working side by side. The computer experts have to learn not to tell people about the operating principle of computers, but they have to be able to explain the answers to the questions that people really want to know. In some Computertowns there are question sessions, rather like radio phone-ins, where the experts listen to a lot of questions and then try to work out some structure to answer them. People do not have to learn computer jargons, even to be "computer-literate", but the experts have to translate computer mysteries into easily understood terms; then computers will be easier for people to operate, and the computers will become "people literate".The phrase "cater for" (Line 4, Para.4) can be replaced by ______.

A．exclude
B．accord with
C．run by
D．opposed by

单项选择题

Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave up the dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I wasn"t surprised when this didn"t make the news here in the United States—we"re now the only wealthy country without such a policy.
The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical Leave Act , passed in 1993. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks" unpaid leave for care of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought it bitterly, describing it as "government-run personnel management" and a "dangerous precedent". In fact, every step of the way, as (usually) Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the law, business groups have been strongly opposed.
As Yale law professor Anne Alstott argues, justifying parental support depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents , she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives: there is "no exit" when it comes to children. "Society expects—and needs—parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual, emotional and moral capabilities. And society expects—and needs—parents to persist in their roles for 18 years, or longer if needed."
While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not providing care. What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state, for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children"s welfare, yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parenting as a personal choice for which there is no collective responsibility is not merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those benefits because they accrue (不断积累) to the whole of society as today"s children become tomorrow"s productive citizenry (公民). In fact, by some estimates, the value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money (including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these investments generate huge social benefits—as they clearly do—the benefits of providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer.What is Professor Anne Alstott"s argument for parental support

A．The cost of raising children in the U.S. has been growing.
B．Good parenting benefits society.
C．The U.S. should keep up with other developed countries.
D．Children need continuous care.

单项选择题

Do who choose to go on exotic, far-flung holidays deserve free health advice before they travel And even if they pay, who ensures that they get good, up-to-date information Who, for that matter, should collect that information in the first place For a variety of reasons, travel medicine in Britain is a responsibility nobody wants. As a result, many travellers go abroad prepared to avoid serious disease.
Why is travel medicine so unloved Partly there"s an identity problem. Because it takes an interest in anything that impinges on the health of travellers, this emerging medical specialism invariably cuts across the traditional disciplines. It delves into everything from seasickness, jet lag and the hazards of camels to malaria and plague. But travel medicine has a more serious obstacle to overcome. Travel clinics are meant to tell people how to avoid ending up dead or in a hospital when they come home, but it is notoriously difficult to get anybody pay out money for keeping people healthy.
Travel medicine has also been colonized by commercial interests; the vast majority of travel clinics in Britain are run by airlines or travel companies. And while travel concerns are happy to sell profitable injections, they may be less keen to spread bad news about travellers" diarrhea in Turkey, or to take time to spell out preventive measures travellers could take. "The NHS finds it difficult to define travellers" health, says Ron Behrens, the only NHS consultant in travel and director of the travel clinic of the Hospital for Tropical Diseases in London." Should it come within the NHS or should it be paid for It"s Gary area, and opinion is spilt. No one seems to have any responsibility for defining its role, he says.
To compound its low status in the medical hierarchy, travel medicine has to rely on statistics that are patchy at best. In most cases we just don"t know how many Britons contract diseases when abroad. And even if a disease linked to travel there is rarely any information about where those afflicted went, what they are, how they behaved, or which vaccinations they had. This shortage of hard facts and figures makes it difficult to give detailed advice to people, information that might even save their lives.
A recent leader in British Medical Journal argued. "Travel medicine will emerge as credible disciplines only if the risks encountered by travellers and the relative benefits of public health interventions are well defined in terms of their relative occurrence, distribution and control. Exactly how much money is wasted by poor travel advice. The real figure is anybody"s guess, but it could easily run into millions. Behrens gives one example. Britain spends more than ￡1 million each year just on cholera vaccines that often don"t work and so give people a false sense of security." Information on the prevention and treatment of all forms of diarrhea would be a better priority, he says.What can we conclude from the last paragraph

A．Travel advices are not important.
B．Travel medicine is hard to be credible.
C．How to prevent and treat disease can actually help travel medicine popularize.
D．People haven"t realized the importance of travel medicine.

单项选择题

Exercise is good for you. But most people really know very little about how to exercise. Look at the following true-false tests. You will be surprised!
The best way to reduce the mid-section is to do abdominal exercise.
False. Many people believe that when specific muscles are exercised, the fatty tissues in the immediate area are "burned up". The truth is that exercise bums fat from all over the body and not from one specific area, regardless of the type of exercise. Of course, if you reduce the fat throughout your body, you will certainly see results around your waistline too!
To maintain an adequate level of physical fitness, you need to exercise only twice a week.
False. Studies conducted by NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, show that unexercised muscles lose their strength very quickly. After 48 to 72 hours, you must use the muscles again to re-establish the good physical effects.
To lose weight you should always "work up a good sweat" when exercising.
False. Sweating only lowers body temperature to prevent overheating; it does not help you reduce. You may weigh less immediate after a workout, but this is due to water loss. Once you replace the liquid, you replace the weight.
You bum more calories jogging one mile than walking the same distance.
False. You use the same amount of energy whether you walk or jog the mile, since in both cases you are moving the same weight the same distance. The speed doesn"t matter. Of course, if you jog rather than walk for 30 minutes, you"ll cover more distance, and therefore bum more calories.
If your breathing doesn"t return to normal within minutes after you finish exercising, you"ve exercised too much.
True. Five minutes or so after exercising, your breathing should be normal, your heart shouldn"t be pounding, and you shouldn"t be exhausted. Beneficial exercise is not overly difficult, unpleasant, and refreshing.
Walking is one of the best exercises.
True. Walking helps circulation of blood through-out the body, and thus has a direct effect on your overall feeling.
Vigorous stretching exercises keep muscles flexible.
False. Stretching exercises (for example: twisting or bending at the waist, touching your toes) should be done slowly, allowing the muscles to relax and "let go". Vigorous stretching makes the muscles tighter.
The minimum amount of time you should spend exercising in a day is 20 minutes.
True. There are more than 400 muscles that attach to your skeleton. A good exercise routine should contract and stretch all these muscles, and this simply cannot be done with four or five exercises in five or ten minutes. From experience, I"ve found that about 20 minutes is the minimum amount of time needed for an adequate workout.Which of the following statements is Not True

A．Exercise bums fat from all over the body and not from one specific area
B．Jogging for 30 minutes and walking for the same time bum you the same calories.
C．Walking help the blood over your body calculate.
D．Robust stretching makes the muscles tighter.

单项选择题

Parenthood isn"t a career-killer. The effect of parenthood is not that severe as people imagine. In fact, economists with two or more kids tend to produce more research, not less, than their one-child or childless colleagues. But female economists in particular can pay a price in terms of productivity after becoming mothers, especially if they"re young or unmarried.
That"s, according to new research from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, a working paper ("Parenthood and Productivity of Highly Skilled Labour: Evidence from the Grove of Academe") published this month by Matthias Krapf of the University of Zurich, Heinrich Ursprung of the University of Konstanz and Christian Zimmermann of the regional reserve bank.
"There is a widespread conviction that motherhood is extremely costly in terms of professional career advancement. In particular, it is often argued that the only way for young women to make a challenging career is to remain childless," they wrote. "Our study of the academic labour market arrives at a somewhat less dreary picture: we do not observe a family gap in research productivity among female academic economists. Moreover, motherhood-induced decreases in research productivity are less pronounced than usually purported."
The authors in early 2012 surveyed about 10,000 economists through the Research Papers in Economics online platform, matching the academics" answers with their publication records. They gauged an economist"s productivity by looking at their output: published research, weighted by journal quality. Some of their findings are as follows:
"Mothers of at least two children are, on average, more productive than mothers of only one child, and mothers in general are more productive than childless women. Fathers of at least two children are also more productive than fathers of one child and childless men. Toward the end of their careers, however, childless men appear to be somewhat more productive than fathers of one child."
Parenthood does appear linked to lower productivity while the children are 12 and younger: mothers average a 17.4% loss, while fathers average a 5% loss. A female economist with three children, on average, loses the equivalent of four years of research output by the time her kids become teenagers.
Women who are married or in a stable relationship "do not have any drop in research productivity in the three years following childbirth." For single mothers, research output drops by roughly a third over the same period.
Female economists who have their first child before the age of 30 are less productive, while "for older first-time mothers, the effect remains negative, but it is much smaller and lacks statistical significance."
Male economists without tenure become more productive after having a child, while tenured male economists won"t be more productive. There is no similar effect for female economists.What is the main idea of this passage

A．Parenthood will kill one"s career.
B．How does having kids affect one"s productivity
C．To be mother means less productivity.
D．More children, lower productivity.

单项选择题

Nowadays, computer is becoming more and more widely used. But people are not that familiar with knowledge of computer. How to operate computers still requires much devotion. Computer people talk a lot about the need for other people to become "computer-literate" , in other words, to learn to understand computers and what makes them tick. Not all experts agree, however, that this is a good idea.
One pioneer, in particular, David Tebbutt, is the founder of Computertown in UK. Although many people see this as a successful attempt to bring people closer to the computer, David does not see it that way. He said that Computertown UK was formed for just the opposite reason, to bring computers to the people and make them "people-literate".
David first got the idea when he visited one of America"s best-known computer "guru" figures, Bob Albrecht, Albrecht, in the small university town of Palo Alto in Northern California. Albrecht had started a project called Computertown USA in the local library, and the local children used to call round every Wednesday to borrow some time on the computer there, instead of borrowing library books. Albrecht was always on hand to answer any questions and to help the children discover about computers in their own way.
Over here, in Britain, Computertowns have taken off in a big way, and there are now about 40 scattered over the country. David Tebbutt thinks they are most successful when tied to a computer club. He insists that there be a vast and important difference between the two, although they complement each other. The clubs cater for the enthusiasts, who have been with some computer knowledge already, who get together and eventually from an expert computer group. This frightens away non-experts, who are happier going to Computertowns where there are computers available for them to experiment on, with experts available to encourage them and answer any questions. They are not told what to do, how to operate, and they find out.
David Tebbutt finds it interesting to see the two different approaches working side by side. The computer experts have to learn not to tell people about the operating principle of computers, but they have to be able to explain the answers to the questions that people really want to know. In some Computertowns there are question sessions, rather like radio phone-ins, where the experts listen to a lot of questions and then try to work out some structure to answer them. People do not have to learn computer jargons, even to be "computer-literate", but the experts have to translate computer mysteries into easily understood terms; then computers will be easier for people to operate, and the computers will become "people literate".Which of the following is not the difference between computertown and computer club

A．There are computer fans with some computer knowledge in the club.
B．There are experts in computertowns available to answer any questions.
C．The computertown develops faster than computer club.
D．The computer club may develop into an expert computer group.

单项选择题

Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave up the dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I wasn"t surprised when this didn"t make the news here in the United States—we"re now the only wealthy country without such a policy.
The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical Leave Act , passed in 1993. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks" unpaid leave for care of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought it bitterly, describing it as "government-run personnel management" and a "dangerous precedent". In fact, every step of the way, as (usually) Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the law, business groups have been strongly opposed.
As Yale law professor Anne Alstott argues, justifying parental support depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents , she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives: there is "no exit" when it comes to children. "Society expects—and needs—parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual, emotional and moral capabilities. And society expects—and needs—parents to persist in their roles for 18 years, or longer if needed."
While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not providing care. What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state, for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children"s welfare, yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parenting as a personal choice for which there is no collective responsibility is not merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those benefits because they accrue (不断积累) to the whole of society as today"s children become tomorrow"s productive citizenry (公民). In fact, by some estimates, the value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money (including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these investments generate huge social benefits—as they clearly do—the benefits of providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer.What does the author think of America"s large body of family laws governing children"s welfare

A．They fail to ensure children"s healthy growth.
B．The fail to provide enough support for parents.
C．They emphasize parents" legal responsibilities.
D．They impose the care of children on parents.

单项选择题

Exercise is good for you. But most people really know very little about how to exercise. Look at the following true-false tests. You will be surprised!
The best way to reduce the mid-section is to do abdominal exercise.
False. Many people believe that when specific muscles are exercised, the fatty tissues in the immediate area are "burned up". The truth is that exercise bums fat from all over the body and not from one specific area, regardless of the type of exercise. Of course, if you reduce the fat throughout your body, you will certainly see results around your waistline too!
To maintain an adequate level of physical fitness, you need to exercise only twice a week.
False. Studies conducted by NASA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, show that unexercised muscles lose their strength very quickly. After 48 to 72 hours, you must use the muscles again to re-establish the good physical effects.
To lose weight you should always "work up a good sweat" when exercising.
False. Sweating only lowers body temperature to prevent overheating; it does not help you reduce. You may weigh less immediate after a workout, but this is due to water loss. Once you replace the liquid, you replace the weight.
You bum more calories jogging one mile than walking the same distance.
False. You use the same amount of energy whether you walk or jog the mile, since in both cases you are moving the same weight the same distance. The speed doesn"t matter. Of course, if you jog rather than walk for 30 minutes, you"ll cover more distance, and therefore bum more calories.
If your breathing doesn"t return to normal within minutes after you finish exercising, you"ve exercised too much.
True. Five minutes or so after exercising, your breathing should be normal, your heart shouldn"t be pounding, and you shouldn"t be exhausted. Beneficial exercise is not overly difficult, unpleasant, and refreshing.
Walking is one of the best exercises.
True. Walking helps circulation of blood through-out the body, and thus has a direct effect on your overall feeling.
Vigorous stretching exercises keep muscles flexible.
False. Stretching exercises (for example: twisting or bending at the waist, touching your toes) should be done slowly, allowing the muscles to relax and "let go". Vigorous stretching makes the muscles tighter.
The minimum amount of time you should spend exercising in a day is 20 minutes.
True. There are more than 400 muscles that attach to your skeleton. A good exercise routine should contract and stretch all these muscles, and this simply cannot be done with four or five exercises in five or ten minutes. From experience, I"ve found that about 20 minutes is the minimum amount of time needed for an adequate workout.The best title of the passage may be ______.

A．True-false Tests About Exercise
B．People Know Little About Exercise
C．Different Ways of Exercising
D．How to Exercise

单项选择题

Nowadays, computer is becoming more and more widely used. But people are not that familiar with knowledge of computer. How to operate computers still requires much devotion. Computer people talk a lot about the need for other people to become "computer-literate" , in other words, to learn to understand computers and what makes them tick. Not all experts agree, however, that this is a good idea.
One pioneer, in particular, David Tebbutt, is the founder of Computertown in UK. Although many people see this as a successful attempt to bring people closer to the computer, David does not see it that way. He said that Computertown UK was formed for just the opposite reason, to bring computers to the people and make them "people-literate".
David first got the idea when he visited one of America"s best-known computer "guru" figures, Bob Albrecht, Albrecht, in the small university town of Palo Alto in Northern California. Albrecht had started a project called Computertown USA in the local library, and the local children used to call round every Wednesday to borrow some time on the computer there, instead of borrowing library books. Albrecht was always on hand to answer any questions and to help the children discover about computers in their own way.
Over here, in Britain, Computertowns have taken off in a big way, and there are now about 40 scattered over the country. David Tebbutt thinks they are most successful when tied to a computer club. He insists that there be a vast and important difference between the two, although they complement each other. The clubs cater for the enthusiasts, who have been with some computer knowledge already, who get together and eventually from an expert computer group. This frightens away non-experts, who are happier going to Computertowns where there are computers available for them to experiment on, with experts available to encourage them and answer any questions. They are not told what to do, how to operate, and they find out.
David Tebbutt finds it interesting to see the two different approaches working side by side. The computer experts have to learn not to tell people about the operating principle of computers, but they have to be able to explain the answers to the questions that people really want to know. In some Computertowns there are question sessions, rather like radio phone-ins, where the experts listen to a lot of questions and then try to work out some structure to answer them. People do not have to learn computer jargons, even to be "computer-literate", but the experts have to translate computer mysteries into easily understood terms; then computers will be easier for people to operate, and the computers will become "people literate".The best title of the passage may be ______.

A．The Development of Computertowns
B．People are Becoming "Computer-literate"
C．The Computers are Becoming "People Literate"
D．The Relationship Between People and Computer

单项选择题

Only two countries in the advanced world provide no guarantee for paid leave from work to care for a newborn child. Last spring one of the two, Australia, gave up the dubious distinction by establishing paid family leave starting in 2011. I wasn"t surprised when this didn"t make the news here in the United States—we"re now the only wealthy country without such a policy.
The United States does have one explicit family policy, the Family and Medical Leave Act , passed in 1993. It entitles workers to as much as 12 weeks" unpaid leave for care of a newborn or dealing with a family medical problem. Despite the modesty of the benefit, the Chamber of Commerce and other business groups fought it bitterly, describing it as "government-run personnel management" and a "dangerous precedent". In fact, every step of the way, as (usually) Democratic leaders have tried to introduce work-family balance measures into the law, business groups have been strongly opposed.
As Yale law professor Anne Alstott argues, justifying parental support depends on defining the family as a social good that, in some sense, society must pay for. In her book No Exit: What Parents Owe Their Children and What Society Owes Parents , she argues that parents are burdened in many ways in their lives: there is "no exit" when it comes to children. "Society expects—and needs—parents to provide their children with continuity of care, meaning the intensive, intimate care that human beings need to develop their intellectual, emotional and moral capabilities. And society expects—and needs—parents to persist in their roles for 18 years, or longer if needed."
While most parents do this out of love, there are public penalties for not providing care. What parents do, in other words, is of deep concern to the state, for the obvious reason that caring for children is not only morally urgent but essential for the future of society. The state recognizes this in the large body of family laws that govern children"s welfare, yet parents receive little help in meeting the life-changing obligations society imposes. To classify parenting as a personal choice for which there is no collective responsibility is not merely to ignore the social benefits of good parenting; really, it is to steal those benefits because they accrue (不断积累) to the whole of society as today"s children become tomorrow"s productive citizenry (公民). In fact, by some estimates, the value of parental investments in children, investments of time and money (including lost wages), is equal to 20-30% of gross domestic product. If these investments generate huge social benefits—as they clearly do—the benefits of providing more social support for the family should be that much clearer.Why does the author object to classifying parenting as a personal choice

A．It is regarded as a legal obligation.
B．It relies largely on social support.
C．It generates huge social benefits.
D．It is basically a social undertaking.

你可能感兴趣的试题