一、從雞蛋中培養(yǎng)流感疫菌
   
    Modern technology has put men on the moon and deciphered the human genome. But when it comes to brewing up flu to make vaccines, science still turns to the incredible edible egg. Ever since the 1940s, vaccine makers have grown large batches of virus inside chicken eggs. But given that some 36,000 Americans die of flu each year, it’s remarkable that our first line of defense is still what Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson calls “the cumbersome and archaic egg-based production.” New cell-based technologies are in the pipeline, however, and may finally get the support they need now that the United States is faced with a critical shortage of flu vaccine. Although experts disagree on whether new ways of producing vaccine could have prevented a shortage like the one happening today, there is no doubt that the existing system has serious flaws.
   
    Each year, vaccine manufacturers place advance orders for millions of specially grown chicken eggs. Meanwhile, public-health officials monitor circulating strains of flu, and each March they recommend three strains—two influenza A strains and one B strain—for manufacturers to include in vaccines. In the late spring and summer, automated machines inject virus into eggs and later suck out the influenza-rich goop. Virus from the eggs’ innards gets killed and processed to remove egg proteins and other contaminants before being packaged into vials for fall shipment.
   
    Why has this egg method persisted for six decades? The main reason is that it’s reliable. But even though the eggs are reliable, they have serious drawbacks. One is the long lead time needed to order the eggs. That means it’s hard to make more vaccine in a hurry, in case of a shortage or unexpected outbreak. And eggs may simply be too cumbersome to keep up with the hundreds of millions of doses required to handle the demand for flu vaccine.
   
    What’s more, some flu strains don’t grow well in eggs. Last year, scientists were unable to include the Fujian strain in the vaccine formulation. It was a relatively new strain, and manufacturers simply couldn’t find a quick way to adapt it so that it grew well in eggs. “We knew the strain was out there,” recalls Theodore Eickhoff of the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, “but public-health officials were left without a vaccine—and, consequently, a more severe flu season.”
   
    Worse, the viruses that pose the greatest threat might be hardest to grow in eggs. That’s because global pandemics like the one that killed over 50 million people between 1918 and 1920 are thought to occur when a bird influenza changes in a way that lets it cross the species barrier and infect humans. Since humans haven’t encountered the new virus before, they have little protective immunity. The deadly bird flu circulating in Asia in 1997 and 1998, for example, worried public-health officials because it spread to some people who handled birds and killed them—although the bug never circulated among humans. But when scientists tried to make vaccine the old-fashioned way, the bird flu quickly killed the eggs.
   
    1.The moon-landing is mentioned in the first paragraph to illustrate_____.
   
    [A] technology cannot solve all of our human problems
   
    [B] progress in vaccine research for influenza has lagged behind
   
    [C] great achievements have been made by men in exploring the unknown
   
    [D] the development of vaccine production methods can not be stopped
   
    2.What step is essential to the traditional production of flu vaccine?
   
    [A] Manufacturers implant the vaccine into ordered chicken eggs.
   
    [B] Scientists identify the exact strain soon after a flu pandemic starts.
   
    [C] Public health measures are taken as an important pandemic-fighting tool.
   
    [D] Viruses are deadened and made clean before being put into vaccine use.
   
    3.The foremost reason why the egg-based method is defective lies in_____.
   
    [A] the complex process of vaccine production [B] its potential threat to human being
   
    [C] the low survival rate for new flu vaccines [D] its contribution to the flu vaccine shortage
   
    4.Which of the following is true according to the passage?
   
    [A] Flu vaccines now mainly use egg-based technology.
   
    [B] A bird influenza has once circulated among humans.
   
    [C] Safety can be greatly improved with cell-culture vaccines.
   
    [D] Modern vaccine production methods are to replace egg-based methods.
   
    5.In the author’s view, the new vaccine production method seems to be_____.
   
    [A] remarkable [B] criticized [C] efficient [D] accepted
   
    答案： 1.B 2.D 3.C 4.A 5.D
   
    核心詞匯與超綱詞匯
   
    (1)decipher(v.)破譯，辨認(難認、難解的東西)
   
    (2)genome(n.)基因組，染色體組
   
    (3)brew(v.)釀制(啤酒)，沏(茶)，煮(咖啡);~ up醞釀;(常用于進行時)(不愉快的事)即將來臨
   
    (4)cumbersome(a.)大而笨重的;繁瑣的，復雜的
   
    (5)archaic(a.)過時的，陳舊的;古代的，早期的
   
    (6)in the pipeline在準備中; 在完成中; 在進行中; (貨物)運輸中; 即將送遞
   
    (7)circulate(v.)循環(huán);傳播，流傳;傳遞，傳閱(~ sth. to sb.)
   
    (8)strain(n.)(動、植物的)系，品系，品種
   
    (9)innards(n.)內(nèi)臟，內(nèi)部結(jié)構(gòu)
   
    (10)pandemic(a.)廣泛流傳的，普遍的，流行的;(大范圍)傳染病的;(n.)全國[全世界]性的流行病
   
    (11)lead time 前置時間，指完成一個程序或作業(yè)所需要的一段時間。
   
    全文翻譯
   
    現(xiàn)代技術(shù)已經(jīng)把人類送上了月球，也破解了人類的基因組。但是當涉及到培養(yǎng)流感病毒生產(chǎn)疫苗時，令人難以置信的是科學家依然在使用可食用雞蛋。自20世紀40年代以來，疫苗的生產(chǎn)者已經(jīng)在雞蛋里培植了大批的病毒。但是，考慮到每年有約3萬6千美國人死于流感，有意思的是我們的第一防線依然是被美國健康和人類服務部部長湯米·湯普森稱作為“麻煩的陳舊的雞蛋方法的生產(chǎn)”。但是，新的細胞生產(chǎn)技術(shù)已經(jīng)投入使用，并且由于美國現(xiàn)在面臨的流感疫苗的嚴重短缺而可能比較終得到它們所需要的支持。雖然專家就生產(chǎn)疫苗的新方法能否阻止現(xiàn)在出現(xiàn)的這種短缺現(xiàn)象無法達成共識，但是可以肯定的是現(xiàn)有的系統(tǒng)有嚴重的缺陷。
   
    每一年疫苗的生產(chǎn)者會提前預定成百萬的特別培育的雞蛋。同時，公共健康官員監(jiān)督正在流行的流感種類，并于每年3月推薦其中的三種，包括兩種A型和一種B型流感，為生產(chǎn)者生產(chǎn)疫苗之用。在春末和夏季，由自動的機器將病毒注射到雞蛋中，然后將充滿流感病毒的粘性物質(zhì)從中吸出。將雞蛋內(nèi)臟中的病毒殺死后加工，取出雞蛋蛋白和其他的雜質(zhì)，然而裝入小瓶，用于秋季時的運輸。
   
    為什么這種雞蛋方法持續(xù)了60年?重要原因是它可靠。但是盡管雞蛋是可靠的，它們也有嚴重的缺陷。首先是訂購雞蛋所需要的前置時間很長。這意味著在突發(fā)的疫苗短缺狀況下很難立刻生產(chǎn)更多的疫苗。要滿足對流感疫苗的需求需要生產(chǎn)幾百萬的劑量，而使用雞蛋也許跟不上這個速度。
   
    而且一些種類的流行病毒在雞蛋中不能很好地生長。去年，科學家沒能夠把福建型流感種類包括在疫苗的生產(chǎn)中。它是一種較新的病毒種類，生產(chǎn)者不能找到很快適應它的方法使它在雞蛋中很好地生長�？屏_拉多州大學健康科學中心的西奧多·艾克�；貞浾f，“我們知道病毒種類在那里”，但是這些公共健康官員沒有疫苗，于是結(jié)果迎來了一場更嚴重的流感。
   
    更糟糕的是，產(chǎn)生比較大威脅的病毒也許是比較難在雞蛋中生長的。這是因為當禽流感改變方式跨越種族界限感染人類時，像1918年至1920年間殺死5000萬人的那種全球性流行病就會爆發(fā)。由于人類在這之前沒有遭遇這樣的新病毒，他們的保護性免疫能力就很差。比如，1997年和1998年在亞洲流行的致命的禽流感使公共健康官員很擔憂，因為它傳播到一些接觸禽類的人類身上并使他們死亡。雖然這種病菌還沒有在人類中傳播過，但當科學家試圖用傳統(tǒng)的方式生產(chǎn)疫苗時，禽流感迅速殺死了雞蛋。

    二、美私有化方案
   
    The National Association of Securities Dealers is investigating whether some brokerage houses are inappropriately pushing individuals to borrow large sums on their houses to invest in the stock market. Can we persuade the association to investigate would-be privatizers of Social Security? For it is now apparent that the Bush administration’s privatization proposal will amount to the same thing: borrow trillions, put the money in the stock market and hope.
   
    Privatization would begin by diverting payroll taxes, which pay for current Social Security benefits, into personal investment accounts. The government would have to borrow to make up the shortfall. This would sharply increase the government’s debt. “Never mind”, privatization advocates say, “in the long run, people would make so much on personal accounts that the government could save money by cutting retirees’ benefits.”
   
    Even so, if personal investment accounts were invested in Treasury bonds, this whole process would accomplish precisely nothing. The interest workers would receive on their accounts would exactly match the interest the government would have to pay on its additional debt. To compensate for the initial borrowing, the government would have to cut future benefits so much that workers would gain nothing at all. However, privatizersclaim that these investments would make a lot of money and that, in effect, the government, not the workers, would reap most of those gains, because as personal accounts grew, the government could cut benefits.
   
    We can argue at length about whether the high stock returns such schemes assume are realistic (they aren’t), but let’s cut to the chase: in essence, such schemes involve having the government borrow heavily and put the money in the stock market. That’s because the government would, in effect, confiscate workers’gains in their personal accounts by cutting those workers’ benefits.
   
    Once you realize whatprivatization really means, it doesn’t sound too responsible, does it? But the details make it considerably worse. First, financial markets would, correctly, treat the reality of huge deficits today as a much more important indicator of the government’s fiscal health than the mere promise that government could save money by cutting benefits in the distant future. After all, a government bond is a legally binding promise to pay, while a benefits formula that supposedly cuts costs 40 years from now is nothing more than a suggestion to future Congresses. If a privatization plan passed in 2005 called for steep benefit cuts in 2045, what are the odds that those cuts would really happen? Second, a system of personal accounts would pay huge brokerage fees. Of course, from Wall Street’s point of view that’s a benefit, not a cost.
   
    1.According to the author, “privatizers”are those_____.
   
    [A] borrowing from banks to invest in the stock market [B] who invest in Treasury bonds
   
    [C] advocating the government to borrow money from citizens [D] who earn large sums of money in personal accounts
   
    2.In the first paragraph, individual borrowing is cited because_____.
   
    [A] it shares similarities with the government’s Social Security policies
   
    [B] there is no guarantee that it will be profitable in the stock market
   
    [C] it is not proper for the brokerage houses to persuade people to borrow money
   
    [D] it is an indication of the Bush administration’s serious concern over the stock market
   
    3.According to its advocates, who will gain from the privatization of Social Security?
   
    [A] Investors in stock markets. [B] Retired workers in the future. [C] The future Congresses. [D] Account information brokers.
   
    4.It can be inferred from the passage that Social Security privatization will_____.
   
    [A] provide high returns for the new governments [B] be strongly opposed by Wall Street
   
    [C] bring the future retirees more benefits [D] allow individuals to invest in personal accounts
   
    5.The author’s attitude towards the privatization proposal is_____.
   
    [A] impartial [B] suspicious [C] neutral [D] approval
   
    答案：1.C 2.A 3.C 4.D 5.B
   
    核心詞匯和超綱詞匯
   
    (1)brokerage(n.)經(jīng)紀人之業(yè)務，回扣
   
    (2)would-be(a.)想要成為的，自稱自許的，自充的，例He founded a school for would-be actors(他創(chuàng)辦學校，訓練有意做演員的人)。
   
    (3)shortfall(n.)不足量
   
    (4)cut to the chase 抄捷徑去追獵物(不繞圈子，開門見山，單刀直入)
   
    (5)confiscate(v.)沒收，充公;征用
   
    (6)deficit(n.)赤字，不足額
   
    全文翻譯
   
    全國證券交易商協(xié)會正在調(diào)查一些證券行是否不適當?shù)卮偈箓�人以房屋為抵押大舉借款投資股票市場。我們能否說服該協(xié)會來調(diào)查提倡社會保障私有化的人呢?因為現(xiàn)在很明顯，布什政府的私有化措施將產(chǎn)生同樣的結(jié)果：借上萬億的債，投資股市并期望從中獲利。
   
    將現(xiàn)在用于支付社會福利金的工資稅轉(zhuǎn)移到個人投資帳戶上，私有化就開始了。政府必須借錢來彌補這種不足。這將急劇增加政府的負債。私有化的提倡者說：沒關(guān)系，從長遠來看，人們在個人帳戶上會賺很多錢，以至于政府可以通過削減離退休人員的福利而節(jié)省開支。
   
    即使如此，如果個人投資帳戶被用于投資國庫債券，那么這個過程將一無所獲。工人們從他們的帳戶上得到的利息將恰好等于政府不得不為它的額外債務而支付的利息。為了彌補這種初始借入，政府將不得不大幅度減少未來福利以至于工人將一無所獲。然而私有化的提倡者聲稱，這些投資將賺很多錢，而且實際上是政府而非工人將從中獲益比較大，因為當個人帳戶增長時，政府將減少福利開支。
   
    我們能長時間地爭論這些方案所認為的高額的股票報酬是否現(xiàn)實(它們并不現(xiàn)實)，但是開門見山地說吧：其實，這些方案需要讓政府大舉借債并將錢投入股票市場。因為實際上政府會通過減少工人的福利而將他們個人帳戶中的收益充公。
   
    一旦你意識到私有化的真正含義時，它聽起來不是很負責，對嗎?但是細節(jié)使它更糟。首先，金融市場將恰當?shù)匕讶缃竦拇罅砍嘧挚醋魇钦�府財政健康狀況的重要標志，而不是政府做出的能夠在遙遠的未來通過減少福利節(jié)省開支的輕率承諾。畢竟，政府債券是具有法律效力的償還承諾，而一個猜想從現(xiàn)在起四十年后會削減開支的利潤公式只不過是對未來眾國會的一個建議。如果在2005年通過的一個私有化計劃要求在2045年大幅度削減收益，那么這種情況真正發(fā)生的幾率是多少呢?其次，個人帳戶系統(tǒng)將償付巨額的經(jīng)紀費用。當然，在華爾街來看，那是收益，不是費用。

    三、英學業(yè)間斷期
   
    Talk to any parent of a student who took an adventurous gap year (a year between school and university when some students earn money, travel, etc.) and a misty look will come into their eyes. There are some disasters and even the most motivated, organised gap student does require family back-up, financial, emotional and physical. The parental mistiness is not just about the brilliant experience that has matured their offspring; it is vicarious living. We all wish pre-university gap years had been the fashion in our day. We can see how much tougher our kids become; how much more prepared to benefit from university or to decide positively that they are going to do something other than a degree.
   
    Gap years are fashionable, as is reflected in the huge growth in the number of charities and private companies offering them. Pictures of Prince William toiling in Chile have helped, but the trend has been gathering steam for a decade. The range of gap packages starts with backpacking, includes working with charities, building hospitals and schools and, very commonly, working as a language assistant, teaching English. With this trend, however, comes a danger. Once parents feel that a well-structured year is essential to their would-be undergraduate’s progress to a better university, a good degree, an impressive CV and well paid employment, as the gap companies’ blurbs suggest it might be, then parents will start organising—and paying for—the gaps.
   
    Where there are disasters, according to Richard Oliver, director of the gap companies’ umbrella organisation, the Year Out Group, it is usually because of poor planning. That can be the fault of the company or of the student, he says, but the best insurance is thoughtful preparation. “When people get it wrong, it is usually medical or, especially among girls, it is that they have not been away from home before or because expectation does not match reality.”
   
    The point of a gap year is that it should be the time when the school leaver gets to do the thing that he or she fancies. Kids don’t mature if mum and dad decide how they are going to mature. If the 18-year-old’s way of maturing is to slob out on Hampstead Heath soaking up sunshine or spending a year working with fishermen in Cornwall, then that’s what will be productive for that person. The consensus, however, is that some structure is an advantage and that the prime mover needs to be the student.
   
    The 18-year-old who was dispatched by his parents at two weeks’ notice to Canada to learn to be a snowboarding instructor at a cost of ￡5,800, probably came back with little more than a hangover. The 18-year-old on the same package who worked for his fare and spent the rest of his year instructing in resorts from New Zealand to Switzerland, and came back to apply for university, is the positive counterbalance.
   
    1. It can be inferred from the first paragraph that parents of gap students may_____.
   
    [A] help children to be prepared for disasters [B] receive all kinds of support from their children
   
    [C] have rich experience in bringing up their offspring [D] experience watching children grow up
   
    2. According to the text, which of the following is true?
   
    [A] the popularity of gap years results from an increasing number of charities.
   
    [B] Prince William was working hard during his gap year.
   
    [C] gap years are not as fashionable as they were ten years ago.
   
    [D] a well-structured gap year is a guarantee of university success.
   
    3. The word “packages” (Line 3, Paragraph 2) means_____.
   
    [A] parcels carried in travelling [B] a comprehensive set of activities
   
    [C] something presented in a particular way [D] charity actions
   
    4. What can cause the disasters of gap years?
   
    [A] Intervention of parents. [B] Careful planning. [C] Good health. [D] Realistic expectation.
   
    5. An 18-year-old is believed to take a meaningful gap year when he/she_____.
   
    [A] lives up to his/her parents’ expectations [B] spends time being lazy and doing nothing
   
    [C] learns skills by spending parents’ money [D] earns his or her living and gains working experience
   
    答案：1.D 2.B 3.B 4.A 5.D
   
    核心詞匯和超綱詞匯
   
    (1)a gap year(中學和大學之間)學業(yè)間斷的一年，間斷年
   
    (2)vicarious(a.)間接感受到的，如He got a ~ thrill out of watching his son score the winning goal(他看到兒子射入獲勝的一球，也同樣感到欣喜若狂)
   
    (3)package(n.)包，盒，袋;(必須整體接受的)一套東西，一套建議，一攬子交易，如a benefits ~一套福利措施an aid ~綜合援助計劃
   
    (4)backpack(v.)背包旅行 go ~ing
   
    (5)umbrella(n.)綜合體，總體，整體，如an ~ group/fund綜合團體/基金
   
    (6)fork out(for sth.)(尤指不情愿地)大量花錢，大把掏錢
   
    (7)slob(n.)懶惰而邋遢的人(v.)slob out/around游手好閑，無所事事
   
    (8)structure(n.)結(jié)構(gòu)，構(gòu)造;精心組織，周密安排，體系
   
    (9)dispatch(v./n.)派遣，調(diào)遣，派出;發(fā)出，發(fā)送
   
    (10)at short notice隨時，沒有提前很長時間通知，at two week’s notice提前兩周通知
   
    (11)hangover(from sth.)(n.)遺留的感覺(或風俗、習慣等)，如the insecure feeling that was a ~ from her childhood(她兒時留下的不安全感)
   
    (12)counterbalance(v.)抗衡，抵消;對……起平衡作用;(n.)(to sth.)平衡抵消物，抗衡
   
    全文翻譯
   
    與度過了新奇的學業(yè)間斷年的孩子的父母交談，他們的眼神中會有一種含糊不清的東西。這一年中有一些危機，即使是目的明確、很有條理的學生，在間斷年期間也需要家庭從經(jīng)濟上、情感上和體力上給予幫助。父母眼中的含糊不僅僅是因為讓他們的孩子成熟起來的美好經(jīng)歷，也是因為他們自己間接感受到的生活方式。我們都希望在我們那個時代大學前的間斷年就已經(jīng)很時興了。我們能看著孩子們變得更堅強，更好地準備從上大學中有所收獲或者積極地決定他們將做一些除了獲得學歷之外的事情。
   
    學業(yè)間斷年現(xiàn)在很時興，這反映在提供它們的慈善團體和私人公司的數(shù)目呈巨額增長。威廉王子在智利吃苦的事情發(fā)揮了作用，但這種趨勢十年來一直在加強。學業(yè)間斷年期間的一整套活動從背包旅行開始，包括和慈善團體一起工作，修建醫(yī)院和學校，以及常見的做語言助教、教英語。然而，隨著這種趨勢而來的也有危險。一旦父母相信那些學業(yè)間斷年公司介紹的內(nèi)容，認為精心安排的一個間斷年對于想成為本科生的孩子進入更好的大學，獲得高學歷，得到令人印象深刻的簡歷和待遇良好的工作是至關(guān)重要的，那么他們就會開始組織并資助間斷年期間的活動。
   
    按照學業(yè)間斷年公司綜合機構(gòu)“走出學業(yè)間斷年團體”的負責人理查德·奧利弗埃的觀點，出現(xiàn)問題往往是因為計劃不周。他說，“這可能是公司或?qū)W生的責任，但是比較保險的方法是作好審慎的準備。當人們把它搞砸時，往往是因為健康問題，尤其是女孩，因為她們從未離開過家，或者期望與現(xiàn)實不符”。
   
    學業(yè)間斷年的意義在于它應該是離校生開始做自己喜歡做的事情的時候。如果由父母來決定孩子怎樣成熟，那么他們不會真地變成熟。如果18歲時變成熟的方式是在倫敦漢普斯泰德石南園中無所事事地曬太陽，或者花上一年時間和康沃爾郡的漁夫一起工作，那么對于另外一個人來說將是有所收獲的。然而，多數(shù)人卻認為進行某種安排是有利的，而且行動的安排者應是學生自己。
   
    如果18歲的年輕人兩周前得到父母的通知，被派去加拿大花5,800英鎊學習成為一名滑雪教練，回來后可能只會留下很少的感覺。同樣的18歲的年輕人，先通過工作賺錢，再用一年中剩下的時間在從新西蘭到瑞士的多個避暑勝地執(zhí)教，回來后申請大學，這樣的經(jīng)歷則是完全不同的積極的做法。

    四、生態(tài)環(huán)境恐怖主義
   
    Islamic terrorism may be a distant threat for Shearer Lumber Products, a timber company based in Idaho. But eco-terrorism is a very real one. In November, the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), an underground organization, gave warning that it had“spiked”trees in the Nez Perce national forest to protest against logging. Spiking involves hiding metal bars in tree trunks, thereby potentially crippling chain saws and hurting people. More such attacks are expected. How do they fit into America’s war on terrorism?
   
    The nation’s forests have seen a sharp increase in violent incidents—equipment vandalized, people intimidated—over the past ten years. Shearer now carefully inspects every tree before cutting and has been using metal detectors to check every trunk being processed. Yet Ihor Mereszczak, of the Nez Perce Forest Service, says it has been hard to get the FBI’s attention, and investigations have got nowhere.
   
    The ELF is only one thread in a web of underground radical environmentalists. Its aim is to inflict as much financial pain as possible on organizations or people who, by its lights, are exploiting the environment. The ELF, though made up of anonymous cells, nonetheless operates a website offering tips on how to cause fires with electric timers. Until recently, it also had a public spokesman.
   
    Together with the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), which operates along the same lines, the ELF is estimated to be responsible for over $45m-worth of damage in North America over the past few years. In 1998, it caused fires that did $12m-worth of damage in Vail, Colorado, to make the point that the ski resort’s expansion was threatening places where lynxes live. Earlier this year, the ELF burned down the offices of a lumber company in Oregon. Since September 11th, the ALF and ELF have claimed responsibility for starting a fire at a primate research center in New Mexico, releasing mink from an Iowa fur farm, and firebombing a federal corral for wild horses in California.
   
    Are they terrorists? The two groups reject the label, claiming to take all precautions against harming “animals, whether humans or not”. But earlier this year Louis Freeh, the FBI’s boss, listed both organizations among the most active domestic terrorist groups. Scott McInnis, the Republican congressman whose district includes Vail, argues it is only a matter of time before somebody gets hurt, and he now expects the FBI to put in more resources.
   
    The House subcommittee on forests, which Mr McInnis heads, will hold a hearing on eco-terrorism in February. But he has annoyed some mainstream green groups by asking them to denounce the ELF’s and ALF’s methods. Greenpeace, for instance, says that its disapproval is self-evident, and resents being asked to express it. Mr. McInnis still wants their answer by December 1st, but the war on eco-terrorism is off to a rocky start.
   
    1. What did the ELF do to Shearer Lumber Products?
   
    [A] Hurt its employees. [B] Crippled its equipments. [C] Hid metals in its trees. [D] Protested against its spiking.
   
    2. We can infer from the passage that_____.
   
    [A] Shearer has experienced many violent incidents [B] new tools have been used to investigate terrorists
   
    [C] FBI has been active in the war on eco-terrorism [D] ELF openly declares its beliefs and ends
   
    3. According to ELF, all of the following are environmentally harmful except_____.
   
    [A] causing fire in the houses [B] expanding ski resort [C] doing research on animals [D] invading into animal habitats
   
    4. It is true of radical environmentalists that they_____.
   
    [A] aim at causing damage to companies [B] resort to violence to achieve their purpose
   
    [C] will do no harm to real people [D] are divided on opinions about terrorism
   
    5.The best title for the text may be_____ .
   
    [A] The Green Threat [B] Protecting Forests [C] Earth’s Liberation [D] Terrorism Defeated
   
    答案：1.C 2.D 3.A 4.B 5.A
   
    核心詞匯和超綱詞匯
   
    (1)spike(n.)尖狀物，尖頭;鞋釘(v.)用尖物刺入(或扎破)
   
    (2)cripple(v.)使殘廢，使跛，使成瘸子;嚴重損壞(或損害);(n.)傷殘人，殘疾人，有缺陷的人
   
    (3)vandalize(v.)摧殘，破壞，任意破壞(公私財物，尤指文化藝術(shù)品)
   
    (4)cell(n.)牢房;細胞;小隔室;電池;(尤指秘密的)政治小組，基層組織，如a terrorist ~(恐怖分子小組)
   
    (5)along/on the lines按……方式
   
    (6)denounce(v.)公開指責，公然抨擊，譴責
   
    全文翻譯
   
    對于駐愛達荷的希勒木材產(chǎn)品公司來說，伊斯蘭恐怖主義也許是遙遠的威脅。但是生態(tài)恐怖主義是確實存在的威脅。十一月份的時候，地下組織“地球解放陣線”警告說他已在內(nèi)茲佩爾塞國家森林的樹木中“釘了釘子”以抗議伐木行為。“釘釘子”包括在樹干中藏金屬棒，從而破壞鏈鋸并有可能傷到人。更多類似的攻擊還會發(fā)生。它們怎樣歸入美國對抗恐怖主義的戰(zhàn)斗中呢?
   
    過去十年中，國家森林里的暴力事件(破壞工具、恐嚇人等)急劇增多。如今希勒在砍樹前仔細檢查每一棵樹，并一直使用金屬探測器檢查所有被加工的樹干。然而，內(nèi)茲佩爾塞國家森林服務中心的Ihor Mereszczak說，很難引起美國聯(lián)邦調(diào)查局的注意，調(diào)查也毫無進展。
   
    “地球解放陣線”只是地下激進環(huán)保主義組織中的一員。它的目的是讓那些根據(jù)它的標準破壞了環(huán)境的個人或組織在經(jīng)濟上盡可能蒙受巨大的損失。該組織雖然由匿名的小組組成，卻經(jīng)營著一個網(wǎng)站就如何用電子計時器縱火給予提示。比較近它還有了公共發(fā)言人。
   
    “地球解放陣線”和按同一種方式運行的“動物解放陣線”一起，估計在過去幾年中造成了多達四千五百萬元的損失。比如,1998年“地球解放陣線”在科羅拉多州的唯爾因抗議滑雪勝地的擴建威脅了山貓的居所而放火;今年初它在俄勒岡州又燒毀了一家伐木公司的辦公室;以及自九月十一日以來，它和同性質(zhì)的“動物解放陣線”一起，聲稱對以下事件負責：新墨西哥州一家靈長類動物研究中心的縱火事件，愛荷華州一家毛皮生產(chǎn)農(nóng)場的貂被放走事件，加利福尼亞州一個用來圈野馬的畜欄遭到燃燒彈攻擊事件。
   
    他們是恐怖主義者嗎?這兩個團體拒絕被稱作“恐怖分子”，而且宣稱他們會采取一切措施來預防對動物(也包括人類)的傷害。但是今年初，聯(lián)邦調(diào)查局局長路易·弗里將兩個組織列為國內(nèi)比較活躍的恐怖主義組織。共和黨籍眾議員麥克伊尼斯所在區(qū)包括唯爾，認為遲早會有人受到傷害，現(xiàn)在他期望聯(lián)邦調(diào)查局局投入更多的資源。
   
    麥克伊尼斯領(lǐng)導的“森林小組委員會”將在二月份召開生態(tài)恐怖主義的聽證會。但是，他已經(jīng)觸怒了一些主流的綠色組織，因為他要求它們公開譴責“地球解放陣線”和“動物解放陣線”的做法。比如，“綠色和平”組織宣稱它的反對是不言而明的，并對被要求表態(tài)表示氣憤。麥克伊尼斯先生仍然要求他們在11月1日給出回答，關(guān)于生態(tài)恐怖主義的戰(zhàn)斗有了一個開端。

    五、胚胎研究
   
    BBC ‘s Casualty programme on Saturday evening gave viewers a vote as to which of two patients should benefit from a donation. But it failed to tell us that we would not need to make so many life-and-death decisions if we got to grip with the chronic organ shortage. Being pussyfooting around in its approach to dead bodies, the Government is giving a kicking to some of the most vulnerable in our society. One depressing consequence of this is that a significant number of those on the waiting list take off to foreign countries to purchase an organ from a living third-world donor, something that is forbidden in the United Kingdom. The poor have no option but to wait in vain.
   
    The Human Tissue Authority’s position on the retention of body parts for medical research after a post-mortem examination is equally flawed. The new consent forms could have been drafted by some evil person seeking to stop the precious flow of human tissue into the pathological laboratory. The forms are so lengthy that doctors rarely have time to complete them and, even if they try, the wording is so graphic that relatives tend to leg it before signing. In consequence, the number of post mortems has fallen quickly.
   
    The wider worry is that the moral shortsightedness evident in the Human Tissue Act seems to infect every facet of the contemporary debate on medical ethics. Take the timid approach to embryonic stem cell research. The United States, for example, refuses government funding to scientists who wish to carry out potentially ground-breaking research on the surplus embryos created by IVF treatment.
   
    Senators profess to be worried that embryonic research fails to respect the dignity of “potential persons”. Rarely can such a vacuous concept have found its way into a debate claming to provide enlightenment. When is this “potential” supposed to kick in? In case you were wondering, these supposedly precious embryos are at the same stage of development as those that are routinely terminated by the Pill without anyone crying. Thankfully, the British Government has refused the position of the United States and operates one of the most liberal regimes in Europe, in which licences have been awarded to researchers to create embryos for medical research. It is possible that, in years to come, scientists will be able to grow organs in the lab and find cures for a range of debilitating diseases.
   
    The fundamental problem with our approach to ethics is our inability to separate emotion from policy. The only factor that should enter our moral and legal deliberations is that of welfare, a concept that is meaningless when applied to entities that lack self-consciousness. Never forget that the research that we are so reluctant to conduct upon embryos and dead bodies is routinely carried out on living, pain-sensitive animals.
   
    1. What has caused the chronic organ shortage?
   
    [A] a decrease in donation rates. [B] inefficient governmental policy.
   
    [C] illegal trade in human organs. [D] news media’s indifference.
   
    2. The expression “pussyfooting around” (Line 3, Paragraph 1) might mean______.
   
    [A] unfair [B] hesitant [C] secret [D] strict
   
    3. The moral shortsightedness is revealed in the fact that _____.
   
    [A] the government has stopped the experiment on human tissue
   
    [B] the donation consent forms are difficult to understand
   
    [C] the Human Tissues Act is an obstacle to important medical research
   
    [D] embryonic research shows disregard for human life
   
    4. To which of the following is the author most likely to agree?
   
    [A] the rich and the poor are equal in the face of death. [B] more scientists are needed for the medical advancement.
   
    [C] there is a double standard in medical ethics. [D] the dead deserve the same attention as the living.
   
    5. The author is most critical of_____.
   
    [A] the media [B] doctors [C] U. S. Legislators [D] the British government
   
    答案:1.B 2.B 3.C 4.C 5.C
   
    核心詞匯和超綱詞匯
   
    (1)get to grips with認真處理
   
    (2)chronic(a.)慢性的，長期的，延續(xù)很長的
   
    (3)pussyfoot(v.)(about/around)謹慎的，顧慮重重的
   
    (4)approach (n.) 方式、方法、態(tài)度，如The school has decided to adopt a different ~ to discipline(學校決定采取另外一種方式解決紀律問題)
   
    (5)vulnerable(a.)易受攻擊的，脆弱的，敏感的
   
    (6)retention(n.)保留，保持;retain(v.)
   
    (7)leg it逃跑
   
    (8)purport(v.)自稱，標榜;(n.)主要意思，大意，主旨
   
    (9)kick in開始生效(或見效)
   
    (10)regime(n.)統(tǒng)治方式，統(tǒng)治制度，政權(quán)，政體;組織方法，管理體制
   
    (11)deliberation(n.)熟思，考慮，商議
   
    全文翻譯
   
    英國廣播公司的“急診服務處”節(jié)目于周六晚上讓電視觀眾投票，決定兩個病人之中哪一個應該受益于器官捐贈。但是該節(jié)目沒有告訴我們?nèi)绻�認真處理長期的器官缺乏問題，就沒有必要做那么多生死抉擇。政府對待尸體問題顧慮重重，給我們社會中比較弱勢的群體一個打擊。它造成的一個令人沮喪的后果是等待名單上很大一部分人飛到國外從第三世界捐贈者那里購買活體器官，而這在英國是被禁止的。窮人除了徒然地等待之外別無選擇。
   
    人體組織局在驗尸后保留身體部位用于醫(yī)學研究的觀點也同樣有缺陷。新的捐贈同意書可能由某個懷有惡意、試圖阻止人體組織運往病理化驗所的人物起草。同意書如此冗長，以至于醫(yī)生很少有時間讀完它們，即便他們努力了，由于上面的措辭以圖表表示，因此當事人的親戚往往在簽名之前逃跑了。結(jié)果驗尸的數(shù)量驟然下降。
   
    更廣泛的憂慮是《人體組織法令》明顯的道德短視似乎全面影響了當前的醫(yī)學倫理爭論。以小心翼翼的胚胎干細胞研究為例，美國政府拒絕為科學家提供基金，在由試管受精創(chuàng)造的剩余胚胎上進行具有潛在的突破性的研究。
   
    一些參議員表示擔心胚胎研究未能尊重“潛在的人”的尊嚴。這樣一個空洞的概念很難設(shè)法進入聲稱要提供啟示的爭論之中。什么時候這種“潛在”才能生效呢?免得你感到奇怪，這些想象上寶貴的胚胎與那些例行公事地被避孕丸扼殺卻沒有任何人哭泣的的生命處于同樣的發(fā)展階段。令人感激的是，英國政府已經(jīng)拒絕接受美國的立場并成立了一個歐洲比較自由的體制，在這里，研究者被授權(quán)為醫(yī)學研究制造胚胎。在未來的幾年科學家很由可能能夠在實驗室中培育器官并找出一系列使人衰弱的疾病的治愈辦法。
   
    我們對待倫理的方法上存在的基本的問題是沒有能力把情感與政策分開，這表現(xiàn)在尸體和胚胎的神話上。唯一應該進入我們道德和法律的慎重考慮之中的因素是幸福。幸福是一個概念，當它被運用到缺乏自我意識的實體上的時候是沒有意義的。永遠不要忘記我們?nèi)绱瞬辉高M行的胚胎和尸體的研究正在一些活生生的、有疼痛知覺的動物上照常實行。

    六、索尼公司的管理問題
   
    In the late 1980s, Akio Morita, the co-founder of Sony Corp. , embarked on the most costly shopping expedition of his long career. A visionary who believed that Sony’s future lay in the convergence of hardware and “content” such as music and film, Morita eventually set his sights on Columbia Pictures Entertainment, with its two studios and a vast library of movie titles and television series. In September, 1989, after months of on-again, off-again negotiations, Sony agreed to pay the inflated asking price of $3.2 billion and assume $1.6 billion in debt.
   
    What was the rationale for such a decision? According to John Nathan’s Sony: The Private Life, it was motivated only by senior executives’ desire to please the company patriarch. Even Morita, then Sony’s chairman and CEO, believed that Columbia’s price tag, originally $35 per share, was exorbitant. In a closed-door meeting in August, 1989, details of which have never been fully revealed, he told his seven top aides, who made up the decision-making executive committee, that he was abandoning the idea of the acquisition.
   
    That would have been the end of it had Morita not voiced regret over dinner that evening with the committee members. “It’s too bad,” he lamented, “I’ve always dreamed of owning a Hollywood studio.” The next day, the group reconvened and promptly decided that Sony would purchase Columbia after all. In the weeks that followed, Sony upped its bid from an initial $15 to $27 a share and, by late September, made a deal that was ridiculed by industry experts. In 1994, mismanagement forced Sony to write off $2.7 billion and assume a loss of $510 million for its Hollywood experiment.
   
    Sony: The Private Life is filled with such insiders’ tales, making it the most vivid and detailed account in English of the personalities who built the $50 billion-plus consumer-electronics giant. Nathan, a professor of Japanese cultural studies at the University of California, got access to dozens of executives who had contributed to or witnessed Sony’s development since its 1946 founding in war-devastated Tokyo. Nathan offers, however, only limited analysis of Sony, the corporation. And he tends to go over well-trodden ground: how Sony established itself in the U.S. and how it developed famous products or devices. Much of this has appeared before in articles and, to a lesser extent, in books.
   
    This is not to say that Nathan’s book has no point of view. The company’s underlying problem, as illustrated in the Columbia case, is that the environment in which the Sony Corporation has historically conducted its affairs is less public than personal, less rational than sentimental. In conclusion, Nathan says that, under the current leadership of President Nobuyuki Idei, Sony is emerging as a rational company. Moreover, Idei and his practical-minded managers are intent on reinventing Sony as an Internet company. From now on, says Nathan, “personal relationships are not likely again to figure decisively.” But how will this Sony fare? Nathan admits that a dazzling future is far from guaranteed.
   
    1. Which of the following is true of Sony’s acquisition of Columbia Pictures?
   
    [A] It was motivated by Morita’s desire to project an image of success.
   
    [B] Sony’s top executives were quite convinced of its benefits for the company.
   
    [C] Entertainment industry insiders believed it was the failure of Hollywood.
   
    [D] It was the expensive expansion from electronics into entertainment.
   
    2. The word “patriarch” (line 2, paragraph 2) most probably means_____.
   
    [A] founder [B] monarch [C] elder [D] forerunner
   
    3. It can be inferred from the last two paragraphs that_____.
   
    [A] Sony: The Private Life is the biography of Akio Morita
   
    [B] Sony’s Japanese leaders have been too practical-minded
   
    [C] this management problem of Sony cannot be rectified overnight
   
    [D] Nathan did not write about how Sony established itself as the electronics giant
   
    4. Nathan’s attitude towards Morita seems to be of_____.
   
    [A] strong distaste [B] implicit criticism [C] enthusiastic support [D] reserved consent
   
    5. The best title for the passage may be_____.
   
    [A] Sony’s Shopping Expedition [B] Sony: the Private Life
   
    [C] Who Drove Sony to Ground [D] Sony: Management by Impulse
   
    答案:1.D 2.A 3.C 4.B 5.D
   
    核心詞匯和超綱詞匯
   
    (1)embark (v.) 上船，裝船;~ on/upon sth.從事，著手，開始(新的或艱難的事情)
   
    (2)expedition(n.)遠征，探險;探險隊;發(fā)出，派遣
   
    (3)visionary(n.)空想家，夢想者，好幻想的人　vision(n.)幻想，幻影
   
    (4)convergence(n.)集中，收斂converge(v.)聚合，集中于一點
   
    (5)library(n.)系列叢書(或磁帶等)，文庫，如a ~ of children’s classics兒童文學名著系列叢書
   
    (6)on-again, off-again一上一下，遭遇到種種波折
   
    (7)asking price賣主的開叫價，賣出價
   
    (8)rationale(n)(解釋某個特別決定、行動、信仰的)基本原理，根本原因，理論依據(jù)
   
    (9)exorbitant(a.)過度的，過高的，昂貴的
   
    (10)lament(v.)悔恨，悲嘆，哀悼
   
    (11)reconvene(v.)重新集合，重新召集convene(v.)召集, 集合
   
    (12)tread(v.)trod trodden踩，踐踏;行走
   
    (13)ground(n.)(興趣、知識和思想的)范圍、領(lǐng)域，如We have to go over the same~(我們得討論同樣的話題)。
   
    (14)fare(n.)費用，旅客，食物(v.)過日子，遭遇，受招待How did you~in London?(你在倫敦過得怎樣?)
   
    全文翻譯
   
    在20世紀80年代后期，索尼公司的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人盛田昭夫開始了他長期事業(yè)生涯中比較昂貴的購物旅行。夢想家盛田昭夫相信索尼公司的未來在于硬件和音樂、電影這樣的“內(nèi)容”相結(jié)合，于是比較終將目光投向哥倫比亞電影公司及其兩個工作室和大量電影字母和電視劇集的文庫。1989年9月，經(jīng)過幾個月幾經(jīng)波折的談判，索尼公司同意支付飛漲的賣出價32億美元從而承擔16億美元的債務。
   
    這個決定的理論依據(jù)是什么?根據(jù)約翰內(nèi)森所著《索尼公司的私人生活》，這個決定是出于高級行政人員要取悅公司創(chuàng)始人的愿望。甚至那時擔任索尼公司主席和首席執(zhí)行管的盛田昭夫也認為哥倫比亞的標價(開始是35美元一股)太昂貴。在1989年8月召開的一次從未完全公開的閉門會議中，他告訴組成具有決策權(quán)的執(zhí)行委員會的七位高級助手，他將放棄收購的想法。
   
    那天晚上用餐時如果盛田昭夫沒有向委員會成員表示遺憾的話這件事情本應就這么結(jié)束了。他哀嘆，“太糟了，我一直想擁有一個好萊塢工作室”。第二天，這個團隊重新召開會議并倉促決定索尼公司將比較終購買哥倫比亞。在接下來的幾周內(nèi)，索尼公司將其標價從開始的15美元一股上升到27美元。到了九月末，成交了一筆為業(yè)界專家嘲笑的交易。1994年，管理不善迫使索尼公司為它的好萊塢實驗注銷掉27億美元資產(chǎn)和5.1億美元的損失。
   
    《索尼公司的私人生活》充滿了這樣的內(nèi)幕故事，因此成為對建立價值500億美元的消費者電子產(chǎn)品巨頭的名人們比較生動詳細的描述。內(nèi)森是加利福尼亞大學日本文化研究的教授，接觸到很多作過貢獻或目睹索尼公司自1946年在受戰(zhàn)爭破壞的東京建立以來的發(fā)展的行政人員。然而，內(nèi)森只提供了對索尼公司的有限的分析，他總是重復老掉牙的話題：索尼公司如何在美國建立起來的，如何發(fā)展著名的產(chǎn)品和設(shè)備。這些內(nèi)容很多以前在文章中出現(xiàn)，但較少出現(xiàn)在書中。
   
    這并不是說內(nèi)森的書沒有觀點。正如哥倫比亞事件所說明的，公司的潛在問題是“索尼公司歷史事件發(fā)生的環(huán)境較個人化而非公開化，較感性而非理性”。 總之，內(nèi)森說，在現(xiàn)任主席出井伸之的領(lǐng)導下，索尼公司正成為一個理性的公司。而且，出井伸之和他追求實際的經(jīng)理們專心把索尼公司重新改造為一家因特網(wǎng)公司。內(nèi)森說，“從現(xiàn)在開始，個人關(guān)系不可能再起決定作用”。但是這個索尼公司將經(jīng)營得如何?內(nèi)森承認，美好的未來遠不能得到保證。