[考研类试卷]考研英语（阅读）模拟试卷225及答案与解析.doc

《[考研类试卷]考研英语（阅读）模拟试卷225及答案与解析.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《[考研类试卷]考研英语（阅读）模拟试卷225及答案与解析.doc（17页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、考研英语（阅读）模拟试卷 225 及答案与解析Part ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)0 As people in rich countries know very well, eating too much food and burning too few calories is why a substantial number of us are overweight or obese.

2、 Now, however, a remarkable change in perspective has come from the discovery that obesity actually provides people with temporary protection from the harmful effects of fat.The insight has come from re-examining the common assumption that fatness itself drives the development of metabolic syndrome,

3、 which is what causes so much of the actual damage. The syndrome comes with a mixture of life-threatening effects, with cardiovascular disease (diseases relating to the heart and blood vessels) and type 2 diabetes being among the most serious. In fact, it now seems that body fat may be a barrier tha

4、t stops millions of Americans and fatty citizens elsewhere from going on to develop the syndrome. And the real damage is caused by the inflammatory effect of high levels of fat in the bloodstream. And ironically, its fat cells that protect us from this by serving as toxic dumps, locking away the rea

5、l villains of the modern diet.The problem is that this protection only lasts so long, until there is simply no more room inside the fat cells. Thats when they start to break down, leading to a toxic spill into the bloodstream. This sets off an inflammatory response that causes various kinds of damag

6、e to body tissues. In this way, every excess calorie takes people closer to metabolic syndrome.So what can we do to stop a superabundance of fat triggering the syndrome? Of course theres no substitute for a healthy diet and exercise, but incitation to this effect seem to be of limited use. As with c

7、igarettes and alcohol, a tax on caloriespricing foods by their energy contentis increasingly seen as another “lever“ to change behaviour by making obesity too costly.The new research may even suggest treatments to combat metabolic syndrome, such as antiinflammatory drugs. One promising candidate is

8、salsalate, an arthritis drug related to aspirin, and the Joslin Diabetes Center in Boston is now considering large-scale trials.What might be more helpful, though, is simply a wider recognition that fatty and sugary foods are more directly toxic than we had assumed. Ideally, people should be as well

9、 informed about the harmful effects of what they eat as, for example, pregnant women are about drinking and smoking.There is a consolationyou have your fat tissue to protect you when you consume that extra burger or sweetened soda. But now you know the perils of pushing your friendly fat cells beyon

10、d their natural limits.1 Its implied in the first paragraph that the reasons for obesity include overeating and _.（A）lacking exercise（B） absorbing fats（C） keeping unhealthy diets（D）burning calories2 From Paragraph 2 we know that the real villain of actual damages is _.（A）fat cells（B） metabolic syndr

11、ome（C） cardiovascular disease（D）bloodstream fats3 The protective function of fat cells stop working once _.（A）their capacity reaches a limit（B） toxin spills into the bloodstream（C） an inflammatory response appears（D）metabolic syndrome is developed4 The author indicates in the text that obesity can b

12、e restricted by_.（A）putting fats protective function to full use（B） unifying peoples diet and exercise habits（C） raising the prices of cigarettes and alcohol（D）manipulating food prices by their calorie content5 To combat metabolic syndrome, the authors suggestion is to _.（A）develop more anti-inflamm

13、atory drugs（B） ask people to keep away from fatty food（C） strengthen the awareness of the harms of fatty food（D）protect pregnant women from tobacco and wine5 “Whats the difference between God and Larry Ellison?“ asks an old software industry joke. Answer: God doesnt think hes Larry Ellison. The boss

14、 of Oracle is hardly alone among corporate chiefs in having a reputation for being rather keen on himself. Indeed, until the bubble burst and the public turned nasty at the start of the decade, the worship of the celebrity chief executive seemed todemand bossly narcissism, as evidence that a firm wa

15、s being led by an all-conquering hero.Narcissus met a nasty end, of course. And in recent years, boss-worship has come to be seen as bad for business. In his management bestseller, “Good to Great“, Jim Collins argued that the truly successful bosses were not the self-proclaimed stars who adorn the c

16、overs of Forbes and Fortune, but instead self-effacing, thoughtful sorts who lead by inspiring example.A statistical answer may be at hand. For the first time, a new study, “Its All About Me“, to be presented next week at the annual gathering of the American Academy of Management, offers a systemati

17、c, empirical analysis of what effect narcissistic bosses have on the firms they run. The authors, Arijit Chatterjee and Donald Hambrick, of Pennsylvania State University, examined narcissism in the upper rank of 105 firms in the computer and software industries.To do this, they had to solve a practi

18、cal problem: studies of narcissism have relied on surveying individuals personally, something for which few chief executives are likely to have time or inclination. So the authors devised an index of narcissism using six publicly available indicators obtainable without the co-operation of the boss.

19、These are: the prominence of the bosss photo in the annual report; his prominence in company press releases; the length of his “Whos Who“ entry; the frequency of his use of the first person singular in interviews; and the ratios of his cash and non-cash compensation to those of the firms second-high

20、est paid executive.Narcissism naturally drives people to seek positions of power and influence, and because great self-esteem helps your professional advance, say the authors, chief executives will tend on average to be more narcissistic than the general population. Messrs Chatterjee and Hambrick fo

21、und that highly narcissistic bosses tended to make bigger changes in the use of important resources, such as research and development, or in spending; they carried out more and bigger mergers and acquisitions; and their results were both more extreme (more big wins or big losses) and more unstable t

22、han those of firms run by their humbler peers.6 Larry Ellison is mentioned in the first paragraph to show that _.（A）some corporate chiefs like to compare themselves to God（B） many corporate chiefs are notorious for being selfish（C） egotism of a boss is fundamental to the success of a firm（D）a boss n

23、arcissism might have an effect on his business7 The statement “Narcissus met a nasty end“ (Para. 2) implies that _.（A）selfishness of a boss will be subject to public criticism（B） egotism of chief executives may lead to undesirable consequences（C） a self-centered boss is always troubled with business

24、 disasters（D）boss-worship will result in self-asserted leaders8 The study “Its All About Me“ is designed to _.（A）offer all-encompassing answers to the American Academy of Management（B） analyze the effect of selfishness on a boss as well as company employees（C） explore the relationship between a boss

25、 character and business performance（D）test whether narcissism should be valued in the computer industry9 In paragraph 4, the author discusses_.（A）six indicators that might reveal a boss narcissism（B） the reason why a boss might be unwilling to be surveyed（C） how to use an index of narcissism to cond

26、uct surveys（D）a way of improving survey results in the studies of narcissism10 From the text we can conclude that the author thinks _.（A）great self-esteem is the prime source of narcissism（B） chief executives are more likely to become self-absorbed（C） narcissism drives a boss to take less but larger

27、 risks（D）the humbler the boss is, the easier his management might be10 I am addicted to electricity. So are you. And so is your business. We live in an “always on“ worldair conditioners, streetlights, TVs, PCs, cell phones, and more. And with forecasts that well need 40% more electricity by 2030, de

28、termining how we can realistically feed our energy addiction without ruining our environment is the critical challenge of the new century. Of course, wecould buy energy-saving appliances or drive fuel-efficient cars. We can recycle cans, bottles, and newspapers. We can even plant carbon-absorbing tr

29、ees. But, no matter how much we may wish they would, these acts by themselves wont satisfy our energy demands.To do that, we need a diverse energy mix that takes a practical, rather than emotional, approach.Enter nuclear energy. Nuclear alone wont get us to where we need to be, but we wont get there

30、 without it. Despite its controversial reputation, nuclear is efficient and reliable. Its also clean, emitting no greenhouse gases or regulated air pollutants while generating electricity. And with nuclear power, we get the chance to preserve the Earths climate while at the same time meeting our fut

31、ure energy needs.Moreover, many of the management woes that gave the early nuclear business a black eye have finally been overcome.A five-year project in Alabama was completed on time and very close to budget. Also, US-designed reactors have been built in about four years in Asia, and new nuclear pl

32、ants on the drawing board for installation here in America will be licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission under a speedier process that should be far more efficient than the one in place when the 104 nuclear facilities operating today were licensed.But this streamlined process will not compro

33、mise nuclear safety and security. The NRC holds nuclear reactors to the highest safety and security standards of any American industry.A two-day national security simulation in Washington, D.C., in 2002 concluded nuclear plants “are probably our best defended targets.“ And because of their advanced

34、design and sophisticated containment structures, US nuclear plants emit a negligible amount of radiation. Even if you lived next door to a nuclear power plant, you would still be exposed to less radiation each year than you would receive in just one round-trip flight from New York to Los Angeles.Her

35、es the reality: The US needs more energy, and we need to get it without further harming our environment. Everything is a trade-off. Nothing is free, and nuclear plants are not cheap to build. But we have a choice to make: We can either continue the 30-year debate about whether we should embrace nucl

36、ear energy, or we can accept its practical advantages. Love it or not, expanding nuclear energy makes both environmental and business sense.11 According to the first paragraph, in order to satisfy our energy needs, we need to _.（A）mix all kinds of energies（B） focus on our energy addiction（C） do ever

37、ything to save energy（D）establish a diversified energy structure12 According to the passage, nuclear energy could _.（A）enjoy a good and popular fame（B） provide us with adequate energy in future（C） help us get to where we need to be（D）keep our climate clean13 The expression “a black eye“ (Para. 3) mo

38、st probably means _.（A）an unfriendly attitude（B） a pleasant attitude（C） a changing attitude（D）a doubtful attitude14 The national security simulation in 2002 shows that_.（A）nuclear plants should be best protected（B） nuclear radiation would be much less and not so serious（C） nuclear safety and securit

39、y standards would be the strictest（D）nuclear technology should be highly advanced and sophisticated15 The authors attitude toward the nuclear energy could possibly be_.（A） affirmative and supportive（B） controversial and doubtful（C） unnecessary but important（D） important but dangerous15 If American m

40、edicine were a patient, he would weigh 350 pounds and be gaining fast. Despite being repeatedly counseled about the dangers of morbid obesity, he would be making at best half-hearted attempts to mend his gluttonous (excessive drinking and eating) ways. Meanwhile, his doctors, insurance company, poli

41、ticians and regulators would remain in a deep state of denial, clutching theillusion that their patient, other than being a bit overweight, was in tip-top health. Truth be told, the US medical system is headed for multiple organ failure.The spiraling cost of healthcare is well known: $7,100 per pers

42、on this year, projected to increase to $12,000 in 2015 and compounding at more than double the rate of inflation. Already, medical care gobbles up one-sixth of the GDP. Even so, we ask ourselves, how better to spend our money on the best healthcare in the world? Not so fast. The facts show that thes

43、e enormous expenditures may be buying us the best facilities in medical carebut not the best health.For example, Canada spends only 60% as much per person on healthcare as the United States. Yet, since 1980, the longevity of all Canadians has improved more rapidly than that of only white Americans.

44、Yes, the “queues“ in Canada can involve delays in nonemergency care. But these could be shortened with relatively small increases in funding. An article in the US journal Health Affairs investigating the number of Canadians who come here to avoid these waits found the number so small that it asked,

45、“A tip with no iceberg? “ Britain spends only 40% as much as we do on healthcare. But according to the Journal of the American Medical Assn., middle-class insured Americans “are much less healthy than their English counterparts“.In fact, although Americans spend twice as much per person on healthcar

46、e as the other 21 wealthiest countries, data from the World Health Organization show that we live the shortest amount of time in good health2.5 years less than the average in the other countries.Reviewing a Dartmouth Medical School study that found higher mortality rates in areas that spent the most

47、 on Medicare, professor Elliott Fisher concluded that “perhaps a third of medical spending is now devoted to services that dont appear to improve health or the quality of careand may make things worse.“ This means that the US is wasting more than $650 billion a yearhalf again more than the entire De

48、fense Department will spend this year, including the cost of the war in Iraqon unnecessary and often harmful.16 In the opening paragraph, American medicine is compared to a patient to show that _.（A）it has wasted the US government a huge amount of money（B） it is so problematic and troublesome that i

49、t is past cure（C） it is generally wholesome except for some minor problems（D）it is as problem-ridden as a patient with serious illness17 Canada and Britain are mentioned in paragraph 3 to illustrate that _.（A）America spends more money on medical care than Canada and Britain（B） both Canada and Britain are fairly successful in terms of healthcare（C） American expenditure on medical care is not so efficient as expected（D）both Canada and Britain should hike up their expenditures on heal