考研英语（阅读）-试卷93
(总分60, 做题时间90分钟)
2. Reading Comprehension
Section II Reading Comprehension
Part ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D.
Africa"s unhappy distinction of being the world"s epicentre of HIV, the infection causing AIDS, is being challenged by Asia, from where 40% of the dia"s growth is forecast to come over the next few years. Already in China, contaminated blood transfusions in some villages have claimed the lives of most young adults, leaving only children and their grandparents alive. In Port Moresby, the capital of Papua New Guinea(PNG), about 60% of
hospital beds are now o生日派对英文
ccupied by AIDS patients. Faced with predictions that AIDS could cost Asian and Pacific countries tens of billions of dollars a year by 2010, two initiatives involving co-operation between government, business and aid workers have been launched in Australia to try to stop its spread. The first is a partnership between the Australian government and the(Bill)Clinton Foundation, a global body t up four years ago by the former American president to fight AIDS. Australia will provide A $ 25m($ 18m)to work with the foundation in China, Vietnam and PNG, mainly to supply tests and anti-retroviral drugs. The are not necessarily the region"s three most afflicted countries: India, where 5m people live with HIV, has the most cas outside South Africa. But they do po a risk of HIV spreading beyond their borders, especially from PNG, Australia"s clost neighbour and its former colony. Over the past decade, HIV has grown alarmingly in PNG to reach 50,000 estimated cas, about 2% of the adult population. Alexander Downer, Australia"s foreign minister, worries about HIV"s potential to become a "national catastrophe" there, possibly rising to 500, 000 cas by 2025. Unprotected x has driven most of the spread in PNG. In China(500,000 estimated cas)and Vietna
m(260,000 cas), contaminated blood transfusions, prostitution and intravenous drug u are the main avenues. The government-Clinton coalition will work with a cond co-operative effort involving **panies that have operations in Asia. This has been formed through the Lowy Institute, a Sydney think-tank, which argues that AIDS, left unchecked, could prove another potential source of regional instability along with terrorism. Margaret Jackson, chairman of Qantas, Australia" s biggest airline, who heads the business coalition, says having 8. 3m people infected with HIV in Asia and the Pacific threatens the economic life of Asia, especially that of China, Australia"s cond-biggest export market. The outlo英语基础学习
ok is grim: the number of sufferers is forecast to more than double to 20m by 2010—unless rich countries, like Australia, start exporting their own successful experience in curbing AIDS.
1.
It is implied in the text that______.
A Asia is becoming another epicenter of HIV in the world
B most young adults are likely to be infected by HIV
C blood transfusions are no longer considered safe
D there are more AIDS patie梦见菜刀
nts in PNG than in China
2.
Australia has launched two initiatives to______.
A lower the cost of Asian countries on AIDS
B cooperate with government, business and aid workers
C forecast more accurately how much AIDS could cost
D prevent the rapid spread of HIV in Asia and Pacific countries
3.
The country afflicted most by HIV in Asia and Pacific is______.
A China
B India
C Vietnam
D Papua New Guinea
4.
In China, ______ contributes most to HIV spreading.
A prostitution
B unprotected x
C intravenous drug u
D contaminated blood transfusions
5.
Australia on its own initiative helps its neighbors curb AIDS most probably becau______.
A it is the richest among the countries in Asia and the Pacific
B it is the only country with few AIDS cas in Asia and the Pacific
C the economic life and regional stability might be threatened by unchecked AIDS
D the number of AIDS patients is forecast to increa much faster
Rearch on embryonic stem cells is controversial becau it requires the destruction of live human embryos. Supporters find it eas姬松茸的做法
y to minimize the significance of this fact becau the embryos are only a few days old—nothing more than "blastocysts". But if it"s OK to destroy 5-day-old emb帽子怎么洗
ryos to further scientific inquiry, is it OK to destroy embryos that are five weeks old? Five months? Eight months? Science can"t answer that question. You don"t have to be part of the pro-life movement to have qualms about this kind of scientific inquiry. James Thomson, the University of Wisconsin biologist who pioneered the field, has said, "If human embryonic stem cell rearch does not make you at least a little bit uncomfortable, you have not thought about it enough. " The president"s new order suggests we shouldn"t think too much. In 2001, supporters of embryonic stem cell rearch called on Bush to allow experiments using "surplus" frozen embryos in fertility clinics, arguing that they would be dispod of anyway. But Obama didn"t limit his new policy to the fertilized eggs. On the contrary, he left open the possibility of funding studies using embryos created specifically so their cells can be harvested—which Congress has barred, but which some advocates would like to allow. The president took
no position on whether scientists should be permitted to create embryos for the sole purpo of dismembering them for their stem cells. He did, however, reject another option. "We will ensure," he said, "that our government never opens the door to the u of cloning for human reproduction. It is dangerous, profoundly wrong and has no place in our society, or any society. " But this position is hard to square with his profesd approach. On one hand, the president says his policy is "about letting scientists like tho here today do their jobs, free from manipulation or coercion". On the other, he will u coercion to keep them from doing reproductive cloning. What this mandate means is simple: It may be permissible for scientists to create cloned embryos and kill them. It"s not permissible to create cloned embryos and let them live. Their cells may be ud for our benefit, but not for their own. There lies the reality of embryonic stem cell rearch: It turns incipient human beings **modities to be exploited for the sake of people who are safely past that defenless stage of their lives. It"s a change that pos risks not just to days-old human embryos. The rest of us may one day reap important medical benefits from this rearch. But we may lo something even more vital.
6.
The author argues that rearch on embryonic stem cells is______.
A ethically unacceptable
B scientifically ill-founded
C uful in treating dias
D not worth rigorous debate
7.
It is implied in the text that pro-life activists______.
A appreciate and accept Obama"s new order gladly
B support the rearch on embryonic stem cells
C are skeptical of any kind of scientific inquiry
D agree with the viewpoint of James Thomson
8.
The author indicates that President Obama tends to______.
A prohibit clinics from using frozen embryos
B allow creating embryos to get stem cells
C finance studies on embryonic stem cells
D restrict the disposition of fertilized eggs
9.
The author is skeptical of President Obama"s claim that______.
A the restriction on human reproductive cloning will never be lifted
B scientists are free from manipulation or coercion in their rearch
C scientists may be allowed to create embryos for getting stem cells
D the u of cloning for human reproduction has no place in U. S.
10.
The policy change on embryonic stem cell rearch is worrying in that______.
A human embryos may be turned **modities for sale
B all of us may suffer vere damage caud by the rearch
C few people can get any medical benefit from the rearch
D the newly created human embryos might be dismembered
It ems unlikely that Andrew Speaker, the Atlanta lawyer who has been widely reviled for traveling by air after being diagnod with drug-resistant tuberculosis, infected anyone. Notably, both tho who condemn Speaker"s recklessness and tho who sympathize with him agree the relevant question公司企业简介
is the danger he pod to other people, which was the justification for his forcible isolation in a Denver hospital. The ca, of the TB-infected traveler helps clarify the grounds for government interventions aimed at preventing dia or injury. When Speaker left for his wedding and honeymoon in Europe on May 12, he knew he had a drug-resistant strain of tuberculosis but did not know he had extensively drug-resistant(XDR)TB, a rare variety that"s very hard to treat. He had no fever, he was not coughing, and tests of his sputum found no TB bacteria. He says his doctors had assured him he was not contagious. According to Speaker, local public health officials, while recommending that he not fly, repeatedly told him he would not pos
e a significant threat to fellow pasngers. That account is confirmed by Speaker"s father, who says he has an audio recording to prove it. While Speaker was in Rome, the CDC informed him he had XDR TB, told him he was on the U. S. "no fly" list, and recommended that he report to an Italian hospital for indefinite isolation. Knowing his best shot at successful treatment was in Denver, Speaker took a circuitous route home, flying to Montreal and driving across the U. S. border. Speaker and his family insist he never would have traveled if he thought he might transmit tuberculosis to others. In situations like this, there is room for argument about how to balance the safety of bystanders against the civil liberties of dia carriers. But at least in dealing with potentially deadly microorganisms that move from person to person, the rationale for government action is to prevent people from harming each other. By contrast, much of what pass for "public health" today is aimed at preventing people from harming themlves. Activists and politicians u the language of public health to legitimize government efforts to discourage a wide range of risky habits, including smoking, drinking, overeating, underexercising, gambling, driving a car without a at belt, and riding a motorcycle witho
ut a helmet. Unlike tuberculosis, the risks associated with the activities are not impod on people; they are voluntarily assumed. In a society that los sight of that crucial distinction, the government has an open-ended licen to meddle in what ud to be considered private decisions. Anyone who expos himlf to the risk of dia or injury becomes a menace to public health.
