阅读理解Passage F In recent years, a growing body of research has shown that our appetite and food intake are influenced by a large number of factors besides our biological need for energy, including our eating environment and our perception of the food in front of us

阅读理解Questions 41 to 50 are based on the following passage

阅读理解Text4 Now that members of Generation Z are graduating college this spring- -the most commonly-accepted definition says this generation was born after 1995, give or take a year- -the attention has been rising steadily in recent weeks

阅读理解Passage 2 Baekeland and Hartmann report that the short sleepers had been more or less average in their sleep needs until the men were in their teens

阅读理解What do Teitel' s words in the last paragraph imply?

阅读理解 After 25 years battling the mother of all viruses, have we finally got the measure of HIV? Three developments featured in this issue collectively give grounds for optimism that would have been scarcely believable a year ago in the wake of another failed vaccine and continuing problems supplying drugs to all who need them. Perhaps the most compelling hope lies in the apparent 'cure' of a man with HIV who had also developed leukemia. Doctors treated his leukemia with a bone marrow transplant that also vanquished the virus. Now US Company Sangamo Biosciences is hoping to emulate the effect using gene therapy. If it works, and that is still a big if, it would open up the possibility of patients being cured with a single shot of gene therapy, instead of taking antiretroviral drugs for life. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) is itself another reason for optimism. Researchers at the World Health Organization have calculated that HIV could be effectively eradicated in Africa and other hard-hit places using existing drugs. The trick is to test everyone often, and give those who test positive ART as soon as possible. Because the drugs rapidly reduce circulating levels of the virus to almost zero, it would stop people passing it on through sex. By blocking the cycle of infection in this way, the virus could be virtually eradicated by 2050. Bankrolling such a long-term program would cost serious money—initially around $3.5 billion a year in South Africa alone, ring to $85 billion in total. Huge as it sounds, however, it is peanuts compared with the estimated $1.9 trillion cost of the Iraq war, or the $700 billion spent in one go propping up the US banking sector. It also look small beer compared with the costs of carrying on as usual, which the WHO says can only lead to spiraling cases and costs. The final bit of good news is that the cost of ART could keep on falling. Last Friday, GlaxoSmithKline chairman Andrew Witty said that his company would offer all its medicines to the poorest countries for at least 25 per cent less than the typical price in rich countries. GSK has already been doing this for ART, but the hope is that the company may now offer it cheaper still and that other firms will follow their lead. No one doubt the devastation caused by AIDS. In 2007, 2 million people died and 2.7 million more contracted the virus. Those dismal numbers are not going to turn around soon—and they won't turn around at all without huge effort and investment. But at least there is renewed belief that, given the time and money, we can finally start riddling the world of this most fearsome of viruses.

阅读理解When a rare disease ALD threatened to kill the four-year-old boy Lorenzo, his parents refused to give up hope

阅读理解Read the following passages carefully and choose one bestanswer for each question in Passage 1 2and 3, and answerthe questions in passage 4 based on your understanding ofthe passage.(4) BANKS mimic other banks. They expose themselves to similar risks by making the same sorts of loans. Each bank’ s appetite for lending rises and falls in sync. What is safe for one institution becomes dangerous if they all do the same, which is often how financial trouble starts. The scope for nasty spillovers is increased by direct linkages. Banks lend to each other as well as to customers, so one firm’ s failure can quickly cause others to fall over, too. Because of these connections, rules to ensure the soundness of each bank are not enough to keep the banking system safe Hence the calls for “macroprudential” regulation to prevent failures of the financial system as a whole. Although there is wide agreement that macroprudential policy is needed to limit systemic risk, there has been very little detail about how it might work. Two new reports help fill this gap. One is a discussion paper from the Bank of England, which sketches out the elements of a macroprudential regime and identifies what needs to be decided before it is put into practice. The other paper, by the Warwick Commission, a group of academics and experts on finance from around the world, advocates specific reforms. The first step is to decide an objective for macroprudential policy. A broad aim is to keep the financial system working well at all times. The bank’ s report suggests a more precise goal: to limit the chance of bank failure to its “social optimum” . Tempering the boom-bust credit cycle and taking some air out of asset- price bubbles may be necessary to meet these aims, but both reports agree that should not be the main purpose of regulation. Making finance safer is ambitious enough. Policymakers then have to decide on how they might achieve their goal. The financial system is too willing to provide credit in good times and too shy to do so in bad times. In upswings banks are keen to extend loans because write-offs seem unlikely. The willingness of other banks to do the same only reinforces the trend. Borrowers seem less likely to default because with lots of credit around, the value of their assets is rising. As the boom gathers pace, even banks that are wary of making fresh loans carry on for fear of ceding ground to rivals. When recession hits, each bank becomes fearful of making loans partly because other banks are also reluctant. Scarce credit hurts asset prices and leaves borrowers prey to the cash-flow troubles of customers and suppliers. Since the cycle is such an influence on banks, macroprudential regulation should make it harder for all banks to lend so freely in booms and easier for them to lend in recessions, it can do this by tailoring capital requirements to the credit cycle. Whenever overall credit growth looks too frothy, the macroprudential body could increase the minimum capital buffer that supervisors make each bank hold. Equity capital is relatively dear for banks, which benefit from an implicit state guarantee on their debt finance as well as the tax break son interest payments enjoyed by all firms. Forcing banks to hold more capital when exuberance reigns would make it costlier for them to supply credit. It would also provide society with an extra cushion against bank failures. Each report adds its own twist to this prescription. The Bank of England thinks extra capital may be needed for certain sorts of credit. If capital penalties are not targeted, it argues, banks may simply cut back on routine loans to free up capital for more exotic lending. The Warwick report says each bank’ s capital should also vary with how long-lived its assets are relative to its funding. Firms with big maturity mismatches are more likely to cause systemic problems and should be penalized. The ease of raising cash against assets and of rolling over debt varies over the cycle, and capital rules need to reflect this Regulators should also find ways to match different risks with the firms which can best bear them Banks are the natural bearers of credit risk since they know about evaluating borrowers Pension funds are less prone to sudden withdrawals of cash and are the best homes for illiquid assets. The Warwick group is keen that macroprudential policy should be guided by rules. If credit asset prices and GDP were all growing above their long-run average rates, say, the regulator would be forced to step in or explain why it is not doing so. Finance is a powerful lobby. Without such a trigger for intervention, regulators may be swayed by arguments that the next credit boom is somehow different and poses few dangers The bank frets about regulatory capture, too, but doubts that any rule would be right for all circumstances. It favours other approaches, such as frequent public scrutiny, to keep regulators honest.When banks attack, no regulatory system is likely to be fail-safe. That is why Bank of England officials stress that efforts to make bank failures less costly for society must be part of regulatory reform. That includes making banks’ capital structures more flexible, so that some kinds of debt turn into loss-bearing equity in a crisis. Both reports favour making systemically important banks hold extra capital, as they pose bigger risks when they fail. The Warwick group also thinks cross-border banks should abide by the rules of their host countries, so that macroprudential regulation fits local credit conditions. That would require that foreign subsidiaries be independently capitalized , which may also be necessary for a cross border bank to have a credible “living will” , a guide to its orderly resolution. This advice will chafe most in the European Union, where standard rules are the basis of the single market. But varying rules on capital could also be used as a macroeconomic tool in the euro area, where monetary policy cannot be tailored to each country’ s needs. Regulation to address negative spillovers that hurt financial stability might then have a positive spillover for economic stability. Answer the following questions in your own words according to the requirements. The answer should be as clear and relevant as possible.

阅读理解The poverty line is the minimum income that people need for an acceptable standard of living.People with incomes below the poverty line are considered poor. Economists study the causes ofpoverty in order to find solutions to the problem.As the general standard of living in the country rises, the poverty line does, too. Therefore, even withtodays relatively high standard of living, about 10 percent of the people in the United States arebelow the poverty line. However, if these people had stable jobs, they could have an acceptablestandard of living. Economists suggest several reasons why poor people do not have jobs.For one thing, more than half of the poor people in the United States are not qualified to work. Over40 percent of the poor people are children. By law, children less than 16 years old cannot work inmany industries. A large number of poor people are old. Many companies do not hire people over 65years old, the normal retirement age.Some poor adults do not look for jobs for a variety of personal reasons: they are sick, they do nothave any motivation, they have family problems, or they do not believe that they can find a job.Other poor people look for a job but cannot find one. Many poor adults never went to high school.Therefore, when they look for jobs, they have few skills that they can offer.At the present time, the government thinks it can reduce poverty in the country in the followingways.First, if the national economy grows, businesses and industries hire more workers. Some of the poorwho are qualified to look for jobs may find employment. Then they will no longer be below thepoverty line.Second, if society invests in the poor, the poor will become more productive. If the governmentspends money on social programs, education, and training for poor people, the poor will have theskills to offer. Then it is more likely that they can find jobs.Finally, if the government distributes society’s income differently, it raises some poor people abovethe poverty line. The government collects taxes from the non-poor and gives money to the poor.These payments to the poor are called welfare. In 1975 over 18 million people in the United Statesreceived welfare.Some economists are looking for better solutions to the poverty problem. However, at the presenttime, many people depend on welfare for a minimally acceptable standard of living.

阅读理解Questions 51 to 60 are based on the following passage

阅读理解Passage 3 The newspaper must provide for the reader the facts, unalloyed, unslanted, objectively selected facts

阅读理解No one can be a great thinker who does not realize that as a thinker it is his first duty to follow his intellect to whatever conclusions it may lead. Truth gains more even by the errors of one who, with due study and preparation, thinks for himself, than by the true opinions of those who only hold them because they do not suffer themselves to think. Not that it is solely, or chiefly, to form great thinkers that freedom of thinking is required. On the contrary, it is as much or even more indispensable to enable average human beings to attain the mental quality which they are capable of. There have been, and may again be, great individual thinkers in a general atmosphere of mental slavery. But there never has been, nor ever will be, in that atmosphere an intellectually active people. While any people has made a temporary approach to such a character, it has been because the dread of heterodox(非正统的) thinking was for a time suspended. Where there is an unspoken convention that principles are not to be disputed; where the discussion of the greatest questions which can occupy humanity is considered to be closed, we cannot hope to find that generally high scale of mental activity which has made some periods of history so remarkable. Never when prolonged arguments avoided the subjects which are large and important enough to rouse enthusiasm was the mind of a people stirred up from its foundations and the impulse given which raised even persons of the most ordinary intellect to something of thinking beings. 　　He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, and if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion. The rational position for him would be suspension of judgment, and unless he contents himself with that, he is either led by authority, or adopts, like the generality of the world, the side to which he feels the most inclination. Nor is it enough that he should hear the arguments of opponents from his own teachers ,presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. That is not the way to do justice to the arguments, or bring them into real contact with his own mind. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them; who defend them in earnest, and do their very utmost for them. He must know them in their seemingly reasonable and persuasive form: he must feel the whole force of the difficulty which the true view of the subject has to encounter and dispose of; otherwise he will never really possess himself of the portion of truth which meets and removes that difficulty. Ninety-nine in a hundred of what are called educated men are in this condition, and even of those who can argue fluently for their opinions. Their conclusion may be true, but it might be false for anything they know. They have never thrown themselves into the mental position of those who think differently from them and considered what such persons may have to say.

阅读理解Science has long had an uneasy relationship with other aspects of culture. Think of Gallileo’s 17th-century trial for his rebelling belief before the Catholic Church or poet William Blake''s harsh remarks against the mechanistic worldview of Isaac Newton. The schism between science and the humanities has, if anything, deepened in this century. 　　Until recently, the scientific community was so powerful that it could afford to ignore its critics but no longer. As funding for science has declined, scientists have attacked "antiscience" in several books, notably Higher Superstition, by Paul R. Gross, a biologist at the University of Virginia, and Norman Levitt, a mathematician at Rutgers University; and The Demon-Haunted World, by Carl Sagan of Cornell University. 　　Defenders of science have also voiced their concerns at meetings such as" The Flight from Science and Reason," held in New York City in 1995,and "Science in the Age of (Mis) information, "which assembled last June near Buffalo. 　　Antiscience clearly means different things to different people. Gross and Levitt find fault primarily with sociologists, philosophers and other academics who have questioned science''s objectivity. Sagan is more concerned with those who believe in ghosts, creationism and other phenomena that contradict the scientific worldview. 　　A survey of news stories in 1996 reveals that the antiscience tag has been attached to many other groups as well, from authorities who advocated the elimination of the last remaining stocks of smallpox virus to Republicans who advocated decreased funding for basic research. 　　Few would dispute that the term applies to the Unabomber, whose manifesto published in 1995, scorns science and longs for return to a pretechnological Utopia. But surely that does not mean environmentalists concerned about uncontrolled industrial growth are antiscience, as an essay in US News & World Report last May seemed to suggest. 　　The environmentalists, inevitably, respond to such critics. The true enemies of science, argues Paul Ehrtich of Stanford University, a pioneer of environmental studies, are those who question the evidence supporting global warming, the depletion of the ozone layer and other consequences of industrial　growth. 　　Indeed, some observers fear that the antiscience epithet is in danger of becoming meaningless. "The term '' antiscience'' can lump together too many, quite different things, "notes Harvard University philosopher Gerald Holton in his 1993 work Science and Anti-Science. "They have in common only one thing that they tend to annoy or threaten those who regard themselves as more enlightened."

阅读理解Text 1 Five-year-old Elia arrived at school with a big box of colored pencils

阅读理解Khami used to be a major centre for（）.

阅读理解The time difference between two neighboring zones is ________ 

阅读理解Passage Four Misconduct is a word that is always on professors minds

阅读理解Passage 3 Read the following passages carefully and then explain in your own English the exact meaning of the numbered and underlined parts

阅读理解Researchers in Japan and Australia say they have made progress in developing blood test that could one day help doctors identify who might get Alzheimers disease

阅读理解 Ten years ago, I got a call from a reporter at a big-city daily paper. 'I'm writing a story on communication skills,' she said. 'Are communication skills important in business?' I assumed I had misheard her question, and after she repeated it for me I still didn't know how to respond. Are communication skills important? 'Er, they are very important,' I managed to squeak out. My brain said: Are breathing skills important? The reporter explained: 'The people I've spoken with so far have been mixed on the subject.' Ten years ago, we were trapped even deeper in the Age of Left-Brain Business. We were way into Six Sigma and ISO 9000 and spreadsheets and regulations and policies. We thought we could line-item budget our way to greatness, create shareholder value by tracking our employees' every keystroke, and employ a dress-code policy to win in the marketplace. And lots of us believed that order and uniformity could save the world-the business world, anyway. We had to go pretty far down that path before we caught onto the limits of process, technology, and linear thinking. The right brain is coming back into style in the business world, and not a moment too soon. Smart salespeople say, 'We've got compelling story that meshes with our customer's values and history.' Strong leaders say, 'We're creating a context for our team members that weaves their passions into ours.' Consultants get big money for providing perspective on the 'user experience.' That's not a linear, analytical process. These days, we're talking about emotion again, and context and meaning. Thank goodness we are. I was about to choke on the death-by-spreadsheet diet, and I wasn't the only one. Job seekers get great jobs today by avoiding the Black Hole of Keyword-Searching Algorithms and going straight to a human decision-maker to share a story that links the job seeker's powerful history with the decision-maker's present pain. Leadership teams spend their off-site weekends talking about not the next 400 strategic initiatives on somebody's list but rather a story-type road map to keep the troops philosophically on board while they take the next hill. The right brain's return is coming just at the right time, when employees are sick of not only their jobs but also the cynical, hypocritical, and obsessively left-brain behaviors they see all around them in corporate life. Smart employers will grab this opportunity to lose the three-inch-thick policy manuals and enforcement mentality. There's no leverage in those, no spark, and no aha. We've seen where the left- brain mentality has gotten us: to the land of spreadsheets, with PowerPoints and burned-out shells where our workforce used to be.