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-minutes 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 in- ability to cure the disease and fearing loss of hope in the patien—too often offer aggressive treatment far be- yond what is scientifically justified. In 1950, the U..S. spent $12. 7 billion on health care. In 2002, the cost will be $1540 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 in- firm "have a duty todie 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. Ask 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 unlikelycures 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] 一般来说,“It is said...”往往是作者要批判的观点,因此,作者引用第一句话的目的是为了批判,从而表达自己的观点,第一句指出美国人认为死亡可以选择,而作者在but后面指出"not even a great health-care system can cure death...”,作者的意思很明显就是说美国人对其医疗技术过分自信,因此选项C正确。
单选题
The author uses the example of caner patients to show that ______.
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】[解析] 第二段第三句指出,“Shielded by third-party payers from the cost of our care,we demand every-thing that call possibly be done for us,even if it's useless.”紧接着,作者就举了题干中的例子。由此可以看出,这个例子就是为前面的这一句话服务的,用以证明前面一句话的观点。选项A“医疗资源经常被浪费”即是这个观点的另一种说法,因此正确。
单选题
The author's attitude to ward Richard Lamm's remark is one of______.
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】[解析] Richard Lamm的话出现在第三段最后一句,随后的第四段的第一句“I would not go that far.”作者就对此发表了看法:“我不会那么极端”,接着举了一系列例子说明人老了也可能会有创造力;也就是说,作者对此多少是有些赞同的,但是并不过激。所以B项“有保留的赞同”正确。选项A“强烈反对”、选项C4稍有蔑视”、选项B“热烈支持”都不准确。
单选题
In contrast to the U. S. , Japan and Sweden are funding their medical care______.
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】[解析] 在文中找到日本和瑞典出现的地方,后面的话"As a nation...improve people's lives"指出本国做法的不合理,而“日本和瑞典在医疗方面的花费比我们少得多,他们的人民却比我们更长寿、更健康。”可见,作者是更赞同这种做法的,也就是认为这种做法更合理(morereasonably),即D选项。而不是选项 A“更灵活”,选项B“更奢侈”或选项C“更谨慎”。
单选题
The text intends to express the idea that______. A medicine will further prolong people% lives. B. life beyond a certain limit is not worth living. C. death should be accepted as a fact of llfe. D. excessive demands increase the cost of health care.