单选题Why does the author say the sinking of the Wilhelm Gustloff was the worst tragedy in maritime history?

单选题How many factors could shape public opinion, as mentioned in the text?

单选题The passage shows that the author's attitude toward these awards is______.

单选题 Questions 18～20 are based on a talk introducing American adult education programs. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 18～20.

单选题—It isn't my pen. Whose is it? —It's ______. [A] he [B] him [C] his

单选题 Mr. Smith, a passenger on the transcontinental train, appeared before the judge. A police officer claimed he had attempted to{{U}} {{U}} 1 {{/U}} {{/U}}paying his fare. The defendant refused to consult a lawyer{{U}} {{U}} 2 {{/U}} {{/U}}suggested that the officer{{U}} {{U}} 3 {{/U}} {{/U}}aware{{U}} {{U}} 4 {{/U}} {{/U}}all the circumstances. He appealed{{U}} {{U}} 5 {{/U}} {{/U}}the judge, when interpreting the evidence, to{{U}} {{U}} 6 {{/U}} {{/U}}into account the absence of any{{U}} {{U}} 7 {{/U}} {{/U}}criminal record in his{{U}} {{U}} 8 {{/U}} {{/U}}His ticket, he said, was stolen shortly before the train crossed the international{{U}} {{U}} 9 {{/U}} {{/U}}. At that time and in that territory he was unwilling to{{U}} {{U}} 10 {{/U}} {{/U}}the incident to the local railway authorities or cancel the{{U}} {{U}} 11 {{/U}} {{/U}}of his journey, in{{U}} {{U}} 12 {{/U}} {{/U}}of the severe maltreatment to which he might be{{U}} {{U}} 13 {{/U}} {{/U}}He emphasized his readiness to{{U}} {{U}} 14 {{/U}} {{/U}}any{{U}} {{U}} 15 {{/U}} {{/U}}punishment the judge imposed. In his summary the{{U}} {{U}} 16 {{/U}} {{/U}}indicated he was convinced that Smith's{{U}} {{U}} 17 {{/U}} {{/U}}was partly justified. Technically,{{U}} {{U}} 18 {{/U}} {{/U}}, he had committed an offence. Crime must not be encouraged or the processes of the law interfered{{U}} {{U}} 19 {{/U}} {{/U}}. He found Smith{{U}} {{U}} 20 {{/U}} {{/U}}and fined him one dollar.

单选题The FDA may rescind its approval of Avastin, a colon-cancer drug. If the summer of 2009 was the season of "death panels," as the debate over health-care reform exploded, this is the season of "17.5k dead women a year. " That's the body count scaremongers are predicting if the Food and Drug Administration rescinds its provisional approval of the drug Avastin for metastatic breast cancer, a decision expected by year's end. Although the move has nothing to do with the new health-care law, uncertainty about "Obama-care" has given opponents an opening to terrify people about what's coming—like bureaucrats rationing health care to save money. The reality is far different and, for those who care more about helping cancer patients than about scoring political points, much sadder. That's because in 2008, when the FDA gave "fast track" approval for Avastin in breast cancer that has metastasized—usually to the lungs, bones, liver, or brain—it was conditional on the manufacturer, Genentech, running additional clinical trials of the drug's safety and efficacy. There was good reason for that. Avastin is an angiogenesis inhibitor, a class of cancer drugs that have not lived up to their hype: although they stop one mechanism by which malignant cells grow blood vessels to sustain them, the cells often activate a different mechanism and go on proliferating. Although Avastin does extend the lives of patients with metastatic colorectal and kidney cancer, and remains FDA-approved for those uses, the new studies show it does not work the same miracle against metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Instead, Avastin increased what's called progression-free survival (how long before cancer spreads or grows) by about one to three weeks, depending on which chemo agent it was paired with. But it did not keep women alive any longer than chemo alone. To some advocates, progression-free survival without an increase in overall survival is still welcome, since it suggests patients have a better quality of life during their last months. But it's hard to make that case for Avastin. Not only did it not keep women alive, but it also caused hypertension, hemorrhaging, bowel perforations, and other side effects. "It seems as if the drug's toxicity cancels out any benefit," cancer surgeon David Gorski of the Karmanos Cancer Institute told me. Perforated bowels do not equal a better quality of life. These dismal results are what led an FDA panel to vote 12—1 in July to rescind the conditional approval of Avastin for MBC. Critics of health-care reform, predictably, saw nefarious motives—in particular, evidence that Obamacare will ration expensive drugs. (Avastin costs some $88,000 a year, though few patients live that long. ) The Wall Street Journal editorialized about the "Avastin mugging," and Sen. David Vitter accused the FDA of "assigning a value to a day of a person's life. " If Avastin did extend lives for, let's say, $10,000 a day, Vitter might have a case. But it doesn't extend life at all. That makes allegations like the 17,500 dead women (from a right-wing blog) "utter demagoguery of the most vile and despicable sort," Gorski wrote on the blog Science-Based Medicine. There are stories galore of women with metastatic breast cancer who are alive "because of Avastin. " Indeed, patients have been flooding the airwaves and blogosphere with claims that Avastin helped them. But the only way to tell whether Avastin deserves the credit for keeping patients alive is through large studies. "There are always patients who live longer than average," biostatistician Donald Berry of the MD?Anderson Cancer Center told me. "They attribute it to the treatment; people love to make attributions. " But when the proportion of patients alive at any given time in a study is the same whether they are receiving Avastin or not—as the two large trials found—then crediting Avastin is "very likely wrong. " That some women did live longer on Avastin, Berry explained, "may simply reflect the natural heterogeneity of the disease and say nothing about the therapy. " Doctors can keep prescribing Avastin for metastatic breast cancer off-label, though insurers will not pay for it. Some activists welcome that. There is "no evidence of clinical benefit from Avastin, yet there is harm," says Fran Visco, president of the National Breast Cancer Coalition. "We need to demand more of treatment before we unleash it on the public. " Science-based medicine isn't always pretty. But it's better than politics-based medicine, which is what some critics of the Avastin decision are practicing—and much better than deluding ourselves into thinking something works when it doesn't.

单选题What is the result of mothers' getting professional jobs?

单选题Australia is the world's ______ largest country. A. 4th B. 5th C. 6th D. 7th

单选题Why does the author say "minority-owned business in the United States had unprecedented opportunities"?

单选题 Questions 11 ～ 13 are based on the following talk. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 11 ～ 13.

单选题Whydidthedriverstophiscarthefirsttime?A.Becausehesawablackcloudfollowinghiscar.B.Becauseheheardaloudnoisefromthebackofthecar.C.Becauseheheardastrangenoisefromthebackofthecar.D.Becausehewantedtogetsomethingfromthegasstation.

单选题What is the author's attitude towards the existence of mosquitoes?

单选题 Questions 11--13 are based on the following news. You now have 15 seconds to read Questions 11--13.

单选题Most Americans spend far more of their leisure time on the mass media than people in any other countries. (1) , most of us hear, see, (2) read some of the media while (3) other activities. Thus an (4) large number of our waking hours are spent with the mass media. (5) all the media, television is clearly (6) , with newspapers a close second, as a (7) of news and other information. Our (8) to all media is important, (9) , because all of them contribute materials for the construction of that world in our heads. For most people, increased use of one medium does not (10) use of another. In fact, in certain cases, and especially for certain purposes, the more one uses one medium, the more (11) one is to use others. There are various (12) that can cause you to (13) yourself to the media (14) , avoiding much of the material with which you disagree. Some of that selective exposure is probably (15) the psychological pressure you feel to avoid the discomfort caused by confrontation with facts and ideas contrary to your beliefs, attitudes, or behavior. However, some selective exposure is not due to the pressure for consistency but to other factors, such as your age, education, and even the area in which you live and the people with whom you associate. Quite a few sorts of factors that (16) your media experience is the social context of exposure: whether you are alone or with others when you are exposed to a medium; whether you are at home, at the office, in a theater, and so on. These contexts are as much as a (17) part of the message you will (18) as film image on the screen or words on the page. In addition, that social context affects-both directly and indirectly-the media (19) to which you become exposed. New friends or colleagues get you interested in different things. Other members of the family often select media content (20) you would not have selected, and you become exposed to it. These various factors have so much influence on your media exposure that so little of that exposure is planned.