主体句式：Part of the problem is that...

结构分析：本句有一个表语从句。句子主语是part of the problem，Dr．Cabana and his colleagues believe是插入语，that引导表语从句；在从句中，又有that引导的定语从句修饰ads；在定语从句中又有that引导的定语从句修饰remedies。

句子译文：卡巴娜博士和他的同事认为，部分问题在于家长经不住电视广告的狂轰滥炸。这些电视广告怂恿他们购买那些往往昂贵却没有医疗效果的产品，比如空气和地毯清洁剂、离子发生器和其他一些药品。





题目分析


1．C 推理题。原文对应信息是首段的“Trouble is，more than half of parents are trying strategies that simply don’t work and wasting hundreds of dollars in the process.”在第二段中，作者又进一步论证了这一点，指出家长采取的预防措施是“ weren't helpful ‘and made little sense'”。

2．A 细节题。文章第三段提到了两种过敏源：尘螨和花粉；第四段提到的过敏源是二手烟；加湿器不是过敏源，而是在某种情况下会为过敏源提供滋生地，从而诱发哮喘。

3．D 语义题。本文开头第一、二句为因果关系。第一句提到“Watching a child struggle to breathe during an asthma attack is frightening for any parent．”那么家长为了避免孩子哮喘病发作想尽一切办法甚至花费大笔钱财的做法是再自然不过的了。根据短语所在的语境可猜出语义。

4．B 细节题。原文对应信息是“Part of the problem is that parents are bombarded by television ads that encourage them to buy products such as..．that are often expensive but medically unnecessary.”做父母的爱子心切，只要是对孩子的病情有用的东西真是不惜一切代价弄到。广告的强大攻势更是对父母产生了较强的影响，加之对孩子的病情又不是特别了解，从而丧失了判断力。

5．C 细节题。原文对应信息是末段的“So make sure you understand what's really triggering your child's asthma.”





参考译文



对每一位家长来说，看到自己的孩子哮喘病发作而挣扎着呼吸真是令人胆战心惊。因此，大多数父母想尽一切办法甚至不惜花费大笔钱财来预防其子女哮喘病发作的做法也就再自然不过了。但问题是，有一多半父母采取的应对措施并没有发挥效应，他们只是在浪费大把的钱财——这个结论是依据上周出版的《过敏症和临床免疫学》杂志上刊载的一项研究结果得出来的。

这篇报道采访了10个不同城市的896名哮喘患儿的父母，其中还是有好消息的。80%的父母至少知道一种使孩子病情恶化的诱因。但是，除此以外，很多家长就无计可施了，采取的预防措施帮助不大，“而且毫无道理”，迈克尔·卡巴纳博士如是说。他是牵头这一研究的密歇根大学C．S．Mott儿童医院的儿科医生。

其中一种最为常见的错误就是为由于植物花粉过敏而导致哮喘病加重的孩子购买床褥保护套去抵挡尘螨的侵扰。很多家长忘记了一个更为有效的办法：关紧窗户，避免花粉干扰。另一种常见错误就是为对尘螨过敏的孩子购买加湿器；殊不知加湿器是尘螨最易于繁殖的地方。对于这类过敏症，使用干燥器作用会更大些。

最糟糕的一种情况是家有患哮喘病的孩子，可抽烟的家长不但不戒烟，还不到外面抽，也不换个房间或到车库去抽。吸二手烟一次又一次地被证实是哮喘病发作的主要诱因。很多抽烟的家长不惜花大价钱购买被卡巴纳称为“值得怀疑的器具”的空气过滤器。

卡巴纳博士和他的同事认为，部分问题在于家长经不住电视广告的狂轰滥炸。这些电视广告怂恿他们购买那些往往昂贵却没有医疗效果的产品，比如空气和地毯清洁剂、离子发生器和其他一些药品。医生可能也不会花时间，或者说有时间去向父母解释对于孩子的具体病例什么有用、什么没用。比如说，大龄哮喘病儿童患者通常是过敏症，而五岁或五岁以下的儿童常常是病毒性呼吸道感染疾病。所以你一定得弄清楚孩子患哮喘病的真正诱因，并且记住，花钱最多的办法并不一定就是最好的办法。





Unit 91


IF YOU’RE CONFUSED BY ALL the news about the health effects of eating fish，you’re not alone．On one hand，the omega-3 fatty acids in fish are known to reduce the risk of heart disease，as the American Heart Association reminded us two weeks ago when it restated its recommendation that everybody eat at least two fish servings a week．On the other hand，fish that live in contaminated waterways contain high levels of mercury，which can lead to cognitive problems in developing brains．That's why pregnant women and nursing mothers are advised to limit their consumption.

As if that weren’t confusing enough，two new studies published last week in the New England Journal of Medicine investigated the possible effects of mercury on the heart，and they seem to have reached contradictory conclusions．One found no clear link between mercury levels and heart disease; the other found that men with high levels of mercury in their toenails were more likely to suffer a heart attack than those with low levels．What are we to make of this? The first thing to remember is that this is how science proceeds，by fits and starts and seemingly contradictory results that get resolved only by further study．The second is that not all fish are created equal.

Compared with all the other things you might eat，fish are an excellent source of protein．They tend to eat algae as part of their natural life cycle，converting it into omega-3 fatty acids that can improve your cholesterol profile．But it's also true that our waterways have become increasingly contaminated with all sorts of pollutants，including mercury，and that these pollutants tend to accumulate at different levels in different species．The fish most at risk are predators high in the pelagic food chain，such as swordfish and sharks.

It was to test the effects of mercury on the heart that the two new studies compared the mercury levels in clippings from toenails，where heavy metals tend to be deposited. In one study，researchers led by Dr．Eliseo Guallar at Johns Hopkins found that European and Israeli men with the highest mercury levels were nearly 2.2 times as likely to have a heart attack as those with the lowest levels．The other study，led by Dr．Walter Willett at the Harvard School of Public Health，looked at a selection of American men and found no connection between mercury exposure and risk of heart disease，although Willett told me a“weak association” cannot be ruled out.

For most of us，eating two servings of fish a week should not pose any problems．Guallar，who hails from coastal Spain，continues to flavor his paella with salmon，which has negligible mercury levels．Willett eats swordfish only about twice a month—because of its expense，not any fear of mercury．Fish-oil supplements are high in omega-3 fatty acids and probably don’t contain as much mercury as whole fish．But they don’t taste nearly as good.


注（1）：本文选自Time；

注（2）：本文习题命题模仿对象为2005真题Text 1。



1．In the opening paragraph，the author introduces his topic by ______.

A) making a comparison

B) justifying an assumption

C) posing a contrast

D) explaining a phenomenon

2．The phrase“by fits and starts”（Line 6，Paragraph 2）most probably means ______.

A) something happens smoothly

B) something keeps starting and then stops again

C) something deserves a lot of effort

D) something is troublesome

3．Clippings from toenails were chosen for the research most probably because ______.

A) they are more likely to contain mercury

B) they influence a person's heart

C) they can be easily obtained

D) they are connected with the heart

4．The views of Dr．Eliseo Guallar and Dr．Walter Willett are ______.

A) identical

B) similar

C) opposite

D) complementary

5．What can we infer from the last paragraph?

A) Fish is no threat to humans.

B) Do not be frightened by some fish.

C) Eat fish-oil supplements instead of fish．

D) Taste is more important than the safety of the food.





篇章剖析


本文采用提出问题——分析问题的模式，指出吃鱼对心脏有好处，但是其中所含的汞却对心脏有害，探讨二者该如何取舍。第一段指出人们对吃鱼对健康究竟有无影响、有何影响这一问题感到困惑；第二段以两项新课题为例，进一步说明人们的这一困惑；第三段指出鱼类自身所具有的优点及其存在的一些潜在的危险；第四段详细介绍这两类新课题的研究发现；第五段间接指出我们该如何取舍。





词汇注释


omega-3 fatty acids （不饱和）脂肪酸

contaminate /kənˈtæmɪneɪt/ v. 污染

by fits and starts间歇地，一阵一阵地

algae /ˈældʒiː/ n. 藻类，海藻

at risk有危险

predator /ˈpredətə(r)/ n. 掠夺者，食肉动物

pelagic /pɪˈlædʒɪk/ adj. 浮游的，远洋的

swordfish /ˈsɔːdfɪʃ/ n. 旗鱼

rule out删除，排除，取消

hail from来自

paella /pɑːˈelə/ n. （西班牙）肉菜饭

negligible /ˈneglɪdʒɪb(ə)l/ adj. 可以忽略的，不予重视的





难句突破


It was to test the effects of mercury on the heart that the two new studies compared the mercury levels in clippings from toenails，where heavy metals tend to be deposited.

主体句式：It was..．that...

结构分析：本句是强调句型。判断是否是强调句型的办法是把“It was that”去掉，看是否仍是一个完整的句子。

句子译文：脚趾甲是重金属易于沉积的地方。这两个新课题通过对比脚趾甲中汞的含量检测汞对心脏的影响。





题目分析


1．C 论证方式题。在引入论题时，作者在第一段用了on one hand..．on the other hand，意思是“一方面…另一方面”，就吃鱼与否引出两种完全不同的观点，从而导致很多人就此问题感到困惑。

2．B 语义题。习语by fits and starts所在语境为“The first thing to remember is that this is how science proceeds，by fits and starts and seemingly contradictory results that get resolved only by further study.”从此句我们可看出科学的进程并不是一蹴而就的。此题我们可考虑使用排除法。

3．A 细节题。原文对应信息在第四段：“It was to test the effects of mercury on the heart that the two new studies compared the mercury levels in clippings from toenails，where heavy metals tend to be deposited．”本题的理解请见“难句突破”。

4．C 情感态度题。Dr．Eliseo Guallar和Dr．Walter Willett做的实验相似，但是得出的结论却完全不同。

5．B 推理题。原文对应信息在末段“For most of us，eating two servings of fish a week should not pose any problems.”然后，作者又给出了两个例子来进一步说明这一观点。





参考译文



如果吃鱼对人体健康方面有所影响的报道令你感到困惑的话，那么有你这种感觉的并不单单是你一个人。一方面，美国心脏学会两周前再次建议大家每人每周至少吃两次鱼，他们是这样提醒我们的：鱼肉中所含的不饱和脂肪酸可以降低心脏病的发病率。另一方面，生长于污染水域的鱼体内存有高含量的汞，这可能对发育中的大脑造成认知方面的不良影响。这就是为什么要建议孕妇和哺乳期妇女减少鱼类摄入的原因。

这好像还不足以使你感到困惑不解。上周刊载于《新英格兰医学杂志》上的两项新课题，就汞对心脏可能造成的影响进行了调查研究，两项研究却得出了似乎相互矛盾的结论：一项研究发现汞含量和心脏病之间没有必然联系；另一项研究发现脚趾甲中汞含量高的人与汞含量低的人相比，更容易患心脏病。我们该如何理解？首先要牢记这就是科学的进程，那些时进时退并且看起来相互矛盾的结论只能通过进一步的研究才能得以解决；其次，并不是所有的鱼类天生都一样的。

与其他可食用物相比，鱼类是蛋白质的最佳来源。它们把食用海藻作为自然界生命循环的一部分，并将其转化为能促进胆固醇代谢的不饱和脂肪酸。但是我们越来越多的水源被各种污染物（其中包括汞）所污染也是事实，这些污染物在不同的生物体内以不同程度的含量积聚下来。最危险的鱼是处于海洋上层食物链中的食肉鱼，比如旗鱼和鲨鱼。

脚趾甲是重金属易于沉积的地方。这两个新课题通过对比脚趾甲中汞的含量检测汞对心脏的影响。其中一个课题的研究员由约翰霍普金斯大学的埃利塞奥·瓜利亚尔博士领导，他们发现在欧洲人和以色列人当中，体内汞含量最高的人犯心脏病的几率几乎为汞含量最低的人的2.2倍。另一项课题由哈佛公共卫生学院的沃尔特·威利特博士领导。通过对那些选出来的美国男性公民的研究，他们并未发现人体接触汞元素和心脏病发病之间有什么关系，虽然威利特说不能完全排除其中会有某种“微弱的联系”。

对于我们大多数人来说，一周吃两份鱼类食品不会产生任何问题。鲑鱼中汞的含量可以忽略不计。来自西班牙海岸的瓜利亚尔继续在他吃的肉菜饭里加鲑鱼调味。威利特大约每月只吃两回旗鱼——这是因为旗鱼太贵，而不是因为担心汞含量的问题。鱼油补充品富含不饱和脂肪酸，其中所含的汞元素可能也没有整条鱼那么多，但它们的口感实在太差。





Unit 92


“The fundamental question is whether it is still worthwhile to invest in pharmaceutical science,” says Severin Schwan，the newish boss of Roche，a once-stodgy Swiss drugs firm．A cursory glance at his rivals，who have been trying to concentrate less on coming up with new medicines and more on making simpler things such as“branded” generics and over-the-counter drugs，suggests that the answer is no. Indeed，some analysts claim that the industry's giants face such a precipitous decline in sales from drugs coming off patent，with so few promising new prospects to replace them，that their entire business model is collapsing.

That argument has Mr Schwan leaping out of his seat with indignation．Using a deck of PowerPoint slides he sets out to disprove“the chorus of gloom”．Drug making is“so crude”，he argues，that half of all known diseases cannot be treated at all，and the drugs for the other half work properly only half the time and with huge side effects．“Imagine a car that starts only half the time，and whose brakes often don’t work,” he says．He sees this sorry state of affairs as a huge business opportunity．In particular，he is convinced that rapid advances in diagnostics，genomics and biotechnology will bring“a brand new revolution” in personalised medicine.

Accordingly，Roche is betting big on research into new drugs，even as rivals seek to diversify and“de-risk”．Earlier this year it bought Genentech，a Californian biotech pioneer．It hopes these deals will put it in the vanguard，since developing drugs tailored to individuals will involve tying manufacturing to the results of genetic tests—as，for example，with Genentech's treatment for breast cancer，Herceptin.

By taking over Genentech，Roche has added promising drugs for cancer and other potentially lucrative treatments to its otherwise anaemic research pipeline．Tim Anderson of Bernstein Research calculates that Roche is now among the big drugs firms best positioned to cope with the coming generic assault．He projects that its revenues will grow by a quarter over the next five years and its earnings per share will increase by half.

Several potential snags could hold Roche back，however．One fear is that the bureaucracy of a big pharmaceutical firm will crush Genentech's more innovative culture（it has been called the Google of biotech）．“There is no interference in the way we do things,” insists Richard Scheller，head of research and early development at Genentech．That very few senior executives have left since the takeover supports his claim．Even so，scale is usually not an advantage when it comes to pharmaceutical research and a creative atmosphere can easily dissipate.

Another worry is that Roche's long-term vision may come at the expense of the shorter-term returns expected by some shareholders．Michael Leuchten of Barclays Capital，an investment bank，reckons that personalised medicine will not start generating profits for some time．That may be fine with Roche's patient founding family，which controls the firm thanks to its dual-share structure，but it could dismay other investors．Moreover，there is a risk of catastrophic failure．Mr Schwan notes that new drugs earn outsized rewards—but that is because they are much harder to make．It is anybody's guess whether Roche's newly filled pipeline of early-stage drugs will become commercial hits in ten or 20 years’ time.


注（1）：本文选自Economist；

注（2）：本文习题命题模仿对象：第1、2题分别模仿1999年真题Text 4第1题和Text 2第2题；第3题模仿1998年真题Text 3第2题；第4、5题分别模仿2004年真题Text 2第3题和Text 3第5题。



1．We can learn from the first paragraph that ______.

A) Severin Schwan believes that the entire business model is to destroy the industry

B) drugs with patent expired tend to make less profit in the market

C) Roche may switch its strategy to focus on generics and over-the-counter drugs

D) Roche's competitors will not answer the question raised by Severin Schwan

2．Speaking of personalised medicine，the author implies that ______.

A) it is a new business model for the pharmaceutical industry

B) it will bring a brand new revolution to Roche

C) it may not be approved by Roche's shareholders

D) it may not be feasible in the new future

3．Paragraphs 5 and 6 are written to ______.

A) argue against Severin Schwan's point of view

B) predict the future of Roche

C) introduce Roche's fears

D) point out potential problems of Roche's approach

4．By saying“Roche is now among the big drugs firms best positioned to cope with the coming generic assault” （Lines 3～4，Paragraph 4），Tim Anderson of Bernstein Research means that ______.

A) Roche will beat all the other rivals in terms of producing generic drugs

B) Roche is now capable of competing against generic drugs

C) Roche will acquire a much better capacity in anaemic research

D) Roche is giving the public its promises to produce more new drugs

5．To which of the following is the author likely to agree?

A) Roche's acquisition of other firms is to reduce its innovativeness.

B) Roche may emerge as the new Google of the biotechnology industry.

C) Roche's new drugs in research may not be commercialized in a decade.

D) Roche's shareholders support the company's R&D efforts in new drugs.





篇章剖析


本文前三段首先介绍了世界主要制药公司在新药研发上减少投入的趋势，并主要说明了瑞士的罗氏制药公司在新药研发投资决策中的立场，随后讨论了使用基因生物技术的前景。文章的后三段讨论了罗氏制药公司在未来发展过程中可能面临的一些问题，以及罗氏商业模式的利弊。





词汇注释


stodgy /ˈstɒdʒi/ adj. 平庸的；乏味的；非常守旧的

cursory /ˈkɜːsəri/ adj. 仓促的，草率的；粗略的

generic /dʒɪˈnerɪk/ n. 非专利药，仿制药

precipitous /prɪˈsɪpɪtəs/ adj. 急促的；急剧的

indignation /ˌɪndɪgˈneɪʃən/ n. 愤怒，愤慨，义愤

genomics /dʒəˈnəʊmɪks/ n. 基因组学；基因体学

vanguard /ˈvængɑːd/ n. 前卫，先锋；领导者