单选题 It is said that in England death is pressing, in Canada inevitable and in California optional. Small wonder. Americans" life expectancy has nearly doubled over the past century. Failing hips can be replaced, clinical depression controlled, cataracts removed in a 30-minute surgical procedure. Such advances offer the aging population a quality of life that was unimaginable when I entered medicine 50 years ago. But not even a great health-care system can cure death—and our failure to confront that reality now threatens this greatness of ours.
Death is normal; we are genetically programmed to disintegrate and perish, even under ideal conditions. We all understand that at some level, yet as medical consumers we treat death as a problem to be solved. Shielded by third-party payers from the cost of our care, we demand everything that can possibly be done for us, even if it"s useless. The most obvious example is late-stage cancer care. Physicians— frustrated by their inability to cure the disease and fearing loss of hope in the patient—too often offer aggressive treatment far beyond what is scientifically justified.
In 1950, the U.S. spent $0.7 billion on health care. In 2002, the cost will be $1,540 billion. Anyone can see this trend is unsustainable. Yet few seem willing to try to reverse it. Some scholars conclude that a government with finite resources should simply stop paying for medical care that sustains life beyond a certain age—say 83 or so. Former Colorado governor Richard Lamm has been quoted as saying that the old and infirm "have a duty to die and get out of the way", so that younger, healthier people can realize their potential.
I would not go that far. Energetic people now routinely work through their 60s and beyond, and remain dazzlingly productive. At 78, Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone jokingly claims to be 53. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O"Connor is in her 70s, and former surgeon general C. Everett Koop chairs an Internet start-up in his 80s. These leaders are living proof that prevention works and that we can manage the health problems that come naturally with age. As a mere 68-year-old, I wish to age as productively as they have.
Yet there are limits to what a society can spend in this pursuit. As a physician, I know the most costly and dramatic measures may be ineffective and painful. I also know that people in Japan and Sweden, countries that spend far less on medical care, have achieved longer, healthier lives than we have. As a nation, we may be overfunding the quest for unlikely cures while underfunding research on humbler therapies that could improve people"s lives.

单选题 What is implied in the first sentence?

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】[解析] 该题关键在于理解篇首第一句的含义。原句是：“It is said that in England death is pressing, in Canada inevitable and in California optional.”这句话可译为：“据说，在英国死亡是迫在眉睫的，在加拿大(死亡)是不可避免的，在加利福尼亚(死亡)是可以选择的。”文章下面也接着讲述了很多有关medical care的问题。由此我们不难看出美国人的骄傲和狂妄，他们认为美国拥有高端的医疗技术，死亡是可以控制的。所以C项是正确的。

单选题 The author uses the example of cancer patients to show that ______.

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】[解析] 解题依据是原文第二段最后一句话“Physicians—frustrated by their inability to cure the disease and fearing loss of hope in the patient—too often offer aggressive treatment far beyond what is scientifically justified.”这句话的意思就是：“医生们因自己的无能为力而灰心丧气，但又担心病人丧失信心，于是经常采取超出正常科学范围的过激的治疗方法。”尽管选项B和C的意思在这里也有所体现，但不是重点，作者要强调的是治疗far beyond what is scientifically justified，所以A是恰当的。文中并没有提及D项内容，所以D排除。

单选题 The author"s attitude toward Richard Lamm"s remark is one of ______.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】[解析] 文中Lamm认为“the old and infirm have a duty to die and get out of the way, so that younger, healthier people can realize their potential”。由此可知，Lamm认为老年人应该死去。在接下来的一段，作者发表了看法：I would not go that far. 即“我不会那么极端”。最后一段中，作者又认为一味追求活的时间长也是很痛苦、很昂贵的。所以说，作者其实是大体同意Lamm的观点，但是没有Lamm那么极端而已，是有所保留的同意。