【導(dǎo)讀】Questions11—13.Questions14—16.D.Becausetheydon’tenjoyit.C.

　　

【正文】 emical . How to Go on a Diet. Questions 63 to 65 are based on the following passage: Many stray dogs and cats wander the streets of cities. Usually they end up in animal shelters, where staffs must find ways to dispose of them. One legitimate disposal route has been the research laboratory. But in California, animal rights groups recently have been leaning hard on animal shelters, effectively cutting off much of the supply. About 30 years ago, Los Angeles voters soundly defeated a proposal to prohibit the release of animals for laboratory use. But today, with new proposals being submitted to city councils and county boards, the results could well be different. And the new proposals are much more sweeping. They would create review boards for all animal experimentation. A group of California investigators even have anized a mittee for animal research in medicine. “ Most scientists don’ t realize the danger,” says Caltech neurobiologist John M. Allman, who uses monkeys to study the anization of the brain. “ Such movements in the past— in this country, at least— have largely been the efforts of small, fragmented and relatively ineffective groups. But this new movement is carefully orchestrated, well anized, and well financed. It is easy to look at the history of animal experimentation and pile a catalog of horrors. But the day is long past when a researcher can take any animal and do anything he pleases to it with a total disregard for its welfare and fort. People don?t realize,” says Allman, “that we are already extensively reviewed. In my work I must follow the ethical codes laid down by the National Institutes of Health and the American Physiological Society, among others. And we might have a surprise visit at any time from the . Department of Agriculture?s inspectors. It?s the USDA field veterinarians who do the enforcing. Believe me, these inspections are anything, but routine, and these fellows have a great deal of power. Because their reports can adversely affect federal funding, their remendations are, in reality, orders.” It is important that the animal rights advocates do not impose their solutions on society. It would be tragic indeed— when medical science is close to learning so much more that is very useful to our health and welfare— if already regulationburdened and budgetrestrained researchers were further hampered? I wonder about those purists who seek to halt all animal experimentation on moral grounds: Do they also refuse, for themselves and others, to accept any remedy— or information— that gained through animal experimentation? And do they have the right to make such decisions on behalf of all the patients in cancer wards? Email: Tel:01088571280 88570560 63. According to Para. 2, which of the following statements is TRUE? A. People in Los Angeles voted against sending animals to laboratory 30 years ago. B. People in Los Angeles voted for sending animals to animal shelters 30 years ago. C. Now people in Los Angeles hold the same attitudes toward the laboratory use of animals as 30 years ago. D. The attitude of people in Los Angeles toward the laboratory use of animals has changed in the past 30 years. 64. If animal rights advocates realize their ideas on the experimentation, what will happen? A. The scientists are sure to gain more research results. B. It may help the scientists to gain more financial aid. C. The development of medical science may slow down. D. The government may loosen their regulation of the experimentation. 65. What is the author’ s attitude towards people who oppose animal experimentation? A. Supportive. B. Opponent. C. Indifferent. D. Unclear. Part B Directions: Read the following passage carefully and then give short answers to the five questions. Write your answers on the ANSWER SHEET 2. Life on earth depends on water, and there is no substitute for it. The current assumption is that our basic needs for water— whether for drinking, agriculture, industry or the raising of fish will always have to be met. Given that premise, there are two basic routes we can go: more equitable access to water or more drastic engineering solutions (more dams, for instance, or massive shifts of water form Canada to the southwestern United States using pipelines from one river basin to another.) Looking at the engineering solution first, a lot of my research concentrates on what happens to wetlands when you build dams in river basins, particularly in Africa. The ecology of such areas is almost entirely driven by the seasonal regime of the river— the pulse of the water. And the fact is that if you build a dam, you generally wreck the downstream ecology. In the past, such problems have been hidden by a dearth of information. But in the next century, governments will Email: Tel:01088571280 88570560 have no excuse for their blissful ignorance. The engineers’ ability to control water flows has created new kinds of unpredictability too. Dams in Africa have meant fewer fish, less grazing and less floodplain agriculture— none of which were anticipated. And their average economic life is assumed to be thirty years. Dams don?t exist forever, but what will replace them is not clear. The challenge for the next century is to find new means of controlling water. Although GM technology will allow us to breed better dryland crops, there is no market incentive for panies to develop crops suitable for the microclimates of the Sahel and elsewhere in Africa. Who is going to pay for research on locally appropriate crops in the Third World? This brings us to the key issue in any discussion of water: money. To talk about a water crisis