Questions 61 to 65 are based on the following passage.
Recent reports suggest that tea can cause brittle bones-but you'll probably be safe if youdrink less than a gallon a day.
Do you fancy a cup of tea? We drink, on average, three mugs a day. But you might want totry another strong alcohol after hearing the case of a 47-year-old woman, published in theNew England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), who developed brittle bones and lost all of her teethafter drinking too much tea.
Tea may not be so great for prostates (前列腺) either. Last year, research from theUniversity of Glasgow found that men who drank more than seven or more cups of tea a dayhad a 50% higher risk of prostate cancer. And in 2009 a paper in the British Medical Journalshowed that drinking very hot tea(70oC or more) increased the likelihood of esophageal (食管的) cancer.
Still gasping for that cup of tea? There is some evidence that tea can be good for you too,with antioxidant properties, so maybe you're not actually drinking enough of the stuff.
The poor woman in the NEJM study is not alone. There are a few other cases of people whohave damaged their bones through too much tea. But she (like those in other studies) wasdrinking excessive amounts: 100 - 150 tea bags a day to make 12 cups of tea. A litre of teacan contain up to 9mg of fluoride(氟化物), which in excess can cause skeletal fluorosis ( 氟中毒), reducing bone quality and causing pain and stiffening of the ligaments (韧带). Other studiesshow you generally need to drink a gallon a day for three decades to develop this condition.
You also shouldn't worry about the Glasgow study as it wasn't designed to show thatdrinking tea actually caused prostate cancer. All it proved was an association and people wereonly asked how much tea they drank at the start of the study, which went on for about 28years.
The National Cancer Institute in the U.S. concludes that the evidence isn't good enough tosay tea either harms or helps our health. However it does seem sensible in the light of the BMJstudy to wait for your tea to cool down for a few minutes.
Black tea, which makes up 75% of the world's consumption, may have healthy propertiesfrom its plant chemicals called poly phenols(多酚), which are antioxidants. Green tea containsmore poly phenols but isn't so nice to dunk digestives into.
A review of the evidence in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, sponsored by the TeaCouncil--which, the authors say, had no part in the study--found the research showed morethan three cups of black tea a day reduced heart disease. It found no evidence of harm "inamounts typically consumed". So as long as you drink less than a gallon of tea a day youshould be absolutely fine.
61. What can be inferred about tea from Paragraph 3?
A) Very hot tea may cause prostate cancer.
B) There may be a link between very hot tea and esophageal cancer.
C) Over-drinking tea is the cause of prostate cancer.
D) Drinking too much tea may worsen esophageal cancer.
62. Excessive intake of fluoride may
A) increase the likelihood of heart attack
B) cause the bone fracture
C) cause fluorosis in the blood
D) weaken the bone quality and hurt the ligaments
63. Which of the following instructions is encouraged to practice?
A) Drinking less tea in the future.
B) Drinking no tea at all.
C) Drinking tea that is not too hot.
D) Drinking green tea instead of black tea.
64. Black tea is considered as healthy drink because
A) it contains antioxidants
B) it is made from plant
C) poly phenols are added to it
D) it helps one digest
65. What can be inferred from the last paragraph?
A) Under no circumstance can you drink more than a gallon of tea a day.
B) Black tea can be seen as a cure for heart disease.
C) Drinking tea does no harm at all, regardless of how much you consume.
D) Tea Council's participation into the research may decrease its credibility.
Questions 56 to 60 are based on the following passage.
Caught in a squeeze between the health needs of aging populations on one hand and the financial crisis on the other, governments everywhere are looking for ways to slow the growth in health-care spending. Increasingly, they are looking to the generic-drugs (普通药物) industry as a savior. In November Japan's finance ministry issued a report complaining that the country's use of generics was less than a third of that in America or Britain. In the same month Canada's competition watchdog criticized the country's pharmacies for failing to pass on the savings made possible by the use of generic drugs. That greed, it reckoned, costs taxpayers nearly C$1 billion a year.
Then on November 28th the European Commission issued the preliminary results of its year-long probe into drug giants in the European Union. The report reached a damning~, though provisional, conclusion: the drugs firms use a variety of unfair strategies to protect their expensive drugs by delaying the entry of cheaper generic opponents. Though this initial report does not carry the force of law (a final report is due early next year), it has caused much controversy. Neelie Kroes, the EU's competition commissioner, says she is ready to take legal action if the evidence allows.
One strategy the investigators criticize is the use of the "patent duster( 专利群)". A firm keen to defend its drug due to go off-patent may file dozens or hundreds of new patents, often of dubious merit, to confuse and terrify potential copycats and maintain its monopoly. An unnamed drugs firm once took out 1,300 patents across the EU on a single drug. The report also suggests that out-of-court settlements between makers of patented drags and generics firms may be a strategy used by the former to delay market entry by the latter.
According to EU officials, such misdeeds -have delayed the arrival of generic competition and the accompanying savings. On average, rite report estimates, generics arrived seven months after a patented drug lost its protection, though where the drug was a big seller the lag was four months. The report says taxpayers paid about q 3 billion more than they would have-had the generics gone on sale immediately.
But hang on a minute, Though many of the charges of bad behavior leveled at the patented-drugs industry by EU investigators may well be true, the report seems to let the generics industry off the hook(钩子) too lightly. After all, if the drugs giants stand accused, in effect, of bribing opponents to delay the launch of cheap generics, shouldn't the companies that accepted those "bribes" also share the blame?
56. Why are governments around the world seeking ways to reduce their health-care spending?
A) They consider the generic-drugs industry as a savior.
B) They are under the double pressure of aging group and financial crisis.
C) Health-care spending has accounted too large proportion.
D) Health-care spending has cost taxpayers too much income.
57. What can we learn from the report issued by the European Commission?
A) Drug firm will use just ways to protect their drags.
B) Cheaper generic drugs are easy to enter market,
C) The report has come to an ultimate conclusion.
D) The final report may lead to commissioner's legal action.
58. The investigators seriously condemned the drug firms for__________.
A) they do not let their opponents to resort to the comet
B) they use clusters of patents to protect their products
C) they bribe the cheaper generic opponents
D) trey do not pass on the savings made by use of generic drugs
59. On average, the genetics will be delayed to enter the market by __________.
A) seven months
B) three months
C) four months
D) eleven months
60. Which of the following accords with the author's view?
A) Charges on patented-drug industry are anything but true.
B) Generics industry is a sheer victim in the competition.
C) Only drug giants are to blame.
D) Exclusion of generics industry from taking responsibility is questionable.
57.D)。定位句提到，11月28日欧洲委员会发布的一个初步调查报告，下文开始对该报告进行描述，由第二段最后一句Neelie Kroes，the EU's competition commissioner，says she is ready totake legal action if the evidence allows.可推断如果证据充足，委员们会采取行动，D)符合题意。