The study also found that the type of alcohol consumed -- beer, wine or liqour-- was unimportant. Any of them, or a combination, was protective, researchers reported in today's Journal of the American Medical Association. "No study has shown benefit in recommending alcohol consumption to those Who do not drink", cautioned the authors, led by Dr. Ralph L. Sacco of Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York. But the new data support the guidelines of the National Stroke Association, which say moderate drinkers may protect themselves from strokes by continuing to consume alcohol, the authors said.
The protective effect of moderate drinking against heart attacks is well established, but the data has been conflicting about alcohol and strokes, the authors said. The new study helps settle the question and is the first to find blacks and Hispanics benefit as well as whites, according to the authors. Further research is needed among other groups, such as Asian, whom past studies suggest may get no stroke protection from alcohol or may even be put at greater risk.
Among groups where the protective effect exists, its mechanism appears to differ from the protective effect against heart attacks, which occurs through boosts in levels of so-called "good" cholesterol, the authors said. They speculated alcohol may protect against stroke by acting on some other blood trait, such as the tendency of blood platelets to clump, which is key in forming the blood trait, such as the tendency of blood platelets to clump, which is key in forming the Mood clots that can cause strikes.
The researchers studied 677 New York residents who lived in the northern part of Manhattan and had strokes between July 1,1993, and June, 1997. After taking into account differences in other factors that could affect stroke risk, such as high blood pressure, the researchers estimated that subjects who consumed up to two alcoholic drinks dally were only haft as likely to have suffered clot-typo strokes as nondrinkers, Clot-type strokes account for 80 percent of all strokes, a leading cause of US deaths and disability. Stroke risk increased with heavier drinking. At seven drinks per day, risk was almost triple that of moderate drinkers.
An expert spokesman for the American Heart Association, Who was not involved in the study, said it was well-done and important information. But it shouldn't be interpreted to mean, "I can have two drinks and therefore not worry about my high blood pressure or worry about my cholesterol," said Dr. Edgar J. Kenton, an associate professor of clinical neurology at Thomas Jefferson University Medical College in Philadelphia. Instead, he said, the study provides good reason to do further research and to add alcohol to the list of modifiable risk factors for stroke.
The new study conducted by Dr. Sacco and his colleagues is unique in that ______.
A. it refutes early studies on the protective effect of moderate drinking against heart attack
B. it confirms early studies of moderate drinking against heart attacks
C. it helps to resolve the disputes over the effect of moderate drinking against stroke
D. it finds that moderate drinking can benefit people of different races equally well
查看答案
听力原文:W:What an accident! If you had been careful,things would not be as they are.
M:What do you mean,it was my fault? If it were,surely I would take all responsibility for it
Q:What does the man mean?
(16)
A. He is not to blame.
B. It was his fault.
C. He will accept 'all responsibility.
D. He will be more careful next time.
Some heartening statistics were reported last year by the Journal of the National Cancer Institute: the mortality rate for breast cancer dropped nearly five percent between 1989 and 1992, the largest decline since 1950. The numbers were even more dramatic for young women: between 1987 and 1992, the mortality rate plummeted nearly 18 percent among white women younger than 40.
But discouraging news also surfaced: the mortality rate among black women has gone up, and the number of reported breast cancer cases is rising as well. Twenty years ago a woman's lifetime risk of breast cancer was one in 12; now it's one in eight.
Nevertheless, we're on the verge of a revolution in treating this disease. Researchers now have a clear picture of how a cancer cell becomes a tumor -- and how cells break free from a tumor and glide through the bloodstream to seed a new one in another part of the body. And they better understand how the female hormone estrogen makes breast cancer cells grow. "I think we're going to get this disease licked in my lifetime, "says Dr. Susan M. Love, director of the Revlon/U. C. L. A. Breast Cancer Center in Los Angeles.
Until that time, information is a woman's most powerful tool. "A cancer diagnosis isn't an emergency." Dr. Love says. "A patient should take time to educate herself and find out what the options are. " Most of all, a woman needs to remember that breast cancer is not death sentence, and that more than half of all women who develop it will live at least 15 years after their diagnosis.
Much of today's good news centers on refining old therapies, Here's where we stand in treating breast cancer.
Surgery and Radiation. The most dramatic change in breast cancer treatment in the past 20 years is that mastectomy -- removal of the entire breast and often part of the underlying chest muscle -- is no longer considered the only safe course. The chances of survival are no greater after a mastectomy that after the less disfiguring lumpectomy -- in which just the tumor is removed and the breast is left intact -followed by radiation. "There are good reasons to choose mastectomy," says Dr. Larry Norton, chief of breast cancer medicine Manhattan's Memorial Sloan-kettring Cancer Center. "But ff you're a good candidate for lumpectomy, increasing your chances of a cure isn't one of those reasons."
For about 30 percent of women, mastectomy is the only reasonable choice -- for example, a woman with small breasts and a large tumor, or one whose tumor is disseminated throughout the breast. But concerns about which procedure to choose often have more to do with life-style. and attitudes. A lumpectomy requires radiation following surgery to kill any remaining cancer cells, which can mean outpatient visits five days a week for five to seven weeks. Scheduling could be a problem. Nancy Reagan, for instance, decided to have a mastectomy because radiation treatments would have taken too much time.
Many women, however, choose mastectomy out of fear and lack of information. Some patients are terrified of radiation and need to understand what it's really all about, says Carol Fred, a clinical social worker at U. C. L. A's Rhonda Fleming Mann Resource Center for Women with Cancer.
After a lumpectomy the machine that administers the treatment aims radioactive particles at the affected breast only. The treatments make most women tired and can sometimes leave the skin feeling sunburned. But the breast is not left radio- active.
Which statement cannot be inferred from the passage?
A. The mortality rate for breast cancer dropped.
B. The mortality rate among black women has increased.
C. The number of reported breast cancer cases is rising.
D. A woman's lifetime risk of breast cancer is rising.
SECTION B INTERVIEW
Directions: In this section you will hear everything ONCE ONLY. Listen carefully and then answer the questions that follow. Questions 1 to 5 are based on an interview. At the end of the interview you will be given 10 seconds to answer each of the following five questions.
Now listen to the interview.
听力原文:Nancy: Good evening. I'm Nancy Johnson: The guest on our radio talk this evening is Professor Wang Gongwu. Hello, Professor Wang.
Wang: Hello.
Nancy: Professor Wang. You are now professor emeritus of Australian National University, and in your long academic career, you've worn many hats as tutor, lecturer, department head, dean, professor and vice chancellor. However, as I know, you are still very fond of your university days as a student.
Wang: That's right. That was in 1949. The university I went to was a brand new university then and the only one in the country at that time. When I look back, it was an amazingly small university, and we knew everybody.
Nancy: How did the students like you, for example, study then?
Wang: We did not study very hard, because we did not have to. We didn't have all this fantastic competition that you have today.
Nancy: Emm.
Wang: We were always made to feel that getting a first degree in the arts faculty was not preparation for a profession. It was a general education. We were not under any pressure to decide on our careers. And we had such a good time. We were left very much on our own. And we were encouraged to make things happen.
Nancy: What do you see is the most striking difference in the present day education since then?
Wang: University education has changed dramatically since those days. Things are very specialized today.
Nancy: Yes, definitely so. And in your subsequent career experience as an educator, and later administrator in various institutions of higher education in Asia and elsewhere, Professor Wang, you have repeatedly noted that one has to look at the development of education in one particular country in the broad cont ext. What do you mean by that?
Wang: Well, the whole world has moved away from elite education in universities to meet the needs of mass education. And entering universities is no longer a privilege for the few. And universities today are more concerned with providing jobs for their graduates in a way that universities in our time never had to be bothered about. Therefore, the emphasis of university pro grams today is now on the practical and the utilitarian lather than on a general education or on personal development.
Nancy: Do you think that is a welcome development?
Wang: Well, I personally regret this development, but the basic bachelor's education now has to cater to people who really need a piece of paper to find a decent job.
Nancy: So you are concerned about this development.
Wang: Yes, I'm very concerned. With technical changes, many of the things that you learn are technical skills which don't require you to become very well educated. Yet if you can master those skills, you can get very good jobs. So the technical institutions are going to be increasingly popular at these expensive traditional universities.
Nancy: Professor Wang, let's look at a different issue. How do you comment on the current phenomenon that more and more universities admit students because the fees they pay?
Wang: Well, once you accept students on financial grounds, one wonders whether you have to pass them as well. But this is the development in education that we have to contend with. Yet, if we are concerned about maintaining standards, what we can do is to concentrate on improving the quality of education.
Nancy: Yes, you are right. A university is judged by the quality of education it offers. Professor Wang, let's turn to the future. What type of graduates, in your view, the universities of the future need to produce if they
A. Students worked very hard.
B. Students felt they needed a second degree.
C. Education was not career-oriented.
D. There were many specialized subjects.
听力原文:W:Which of these shoes do you like better,the brown or the black and white pair?
M:That's not an easy question to answer,since the brown pair isn't one of my favorite colors,and the style. of the other pair is too colorful for me
Q:What do we learn from the man's answer?
(18)
A. He dislikes the style. of these shoes.
B. The shoes was too large for him.
C. He never buys shoes by himself.
D. He dislikes either of the two.