题目内容
不论投资的风险是高还是低，只要同样投资的期望收益相同，那么无论选择何种投资途径都是合理的。 ()
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
'The people were evacuated but there is no, they aren't underwater, but they're fight behind the dyke. And if the dyke were to go, they wouldn’t have time to get out. '
The Minnesota River is one of its several in the state of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota that has run out of its banks because of the melting snow and heavy rain during the past week. President Clinton has declared many counties in all three states fatal disaster areas and flooding is expected to continue for a few more weeks as last winter’s record snowfall continues to melt. Michael Leland VOA news Chicago."
What caused the Minnesota River to run out of its bank？
When a Scottish research team startled the world by revealing 3 months ago that it had cloned an adult sheep, President Clinton moved swiftly. Declaring that he was opposed to using this unusual animal husbandry technique to clone humans, he ordered that federal funds not he used for such an experiment, although no one had proposed to do so, and asked an independent panel of experts chaired by Princeton President Harold Shapiro to report back to the White House in 90 days with recommendations for a national policy on human cloning. That group -- the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC) has been working feverishly to put its wisdom on paper, and at a meeting on 17 May, members agreed on a near final draft of their recommendations.
NBAC will ask that Clinton’s 90-day ban on federal funds for human cloning be extended indefinitely, and possibly that it be made a law. But NBAC members are planning to word the recommendation narrowly to avoid new restrictions on research that involves the cloning of human DNA or cells-routine in molecular biology. The panel has not yet reached agree ment on a crucial question, however, whether to recommend legislation that would make it a crime for private funding to be used for human cloning.
In a draft preface to the recommendations, discussed at the 17 May meeting. Shapiro suggested that the panel had found a broad consensus that it would be "morally unacceptable to attempt to create a human child by adult nuclear cloning." Shapiro explained during the meeting that the moral doubt stems mainly from fears about the risk to the health of the child. The panel then informally accepted several general conclusions, although some details have not been settled.
NBAC plans to call for a continued ban on federal government funding for any attempt to clone body cell nuclear to ere ate a child. Because current federal law already forbids the use of federal funds to create embryos (the earliest stage of human offspring before birth) for research or to knowingly endanger an embryo’s life, NBAC will remain silent on embryo re search.
NBAC members also indicated that they will appeal to privately funded researchers and clinics not to try to clone hu mans by body cell nuclear transfer. But they were divided on whether to go further by calling for a federal law that would impose a complete ban on human cloning. Shapiro and most members favored an appeal for such legislation, but in a phone interview, he said this issue was still "up in the air".
We can learn from the first paragraph that ______.
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：Interviewer: Hello, everyone. Welcome to our programme Worldly Wise. Today our attention turns to pollution. We are lucky to have with us here our guest, Miss Catherine White, the youngest woman director of the Environmental Protection Agency. Good morning, Miss White.
Catherine: Good morning.
Interviewer: Well, Miss White, nowadays, most people believe it is the air outdoors that presents us, particularly those most sensitive to unhealthy air, with the greatest risk. But according to your group’s recent research, there seems to be something different.
Catherine: Yes, our research shows that it is not the air outdoors that takes us the risk. However, it is actually the air in side our homes, schools, and other buildings that is most harmful.
Interviewer: Really？
Catherine: Really! According to a recent report made by my colleague, 50% of all illnesses is aggravated or caused by polluted indoor air. The indoor air is anywhere from 2 to 10 times more hazardous than the outdoor air. And the indoor air quality epidemic has become the nation’s number one environmental health problem.
Interviewer: Why is such a big problem not noticed before？
Catherine: Because it was not as serious as today. As a result of the energy crisis of the 1970s, with energy-efficiency in mind, today's homes and buildings are built air-tight. Their air-tight construction keeps airborne pollutants trapped inside, and nature’s air-cleansing agents outside. Statistics for asthma problems began rising sharply around the same time that homes and buildings began to be built his way. In fact, a recent study found that the allergen level in super-insulated homes is 200% higher than it is in ordinary homes.
Interviewer: Besides the insulation of homes, is there anything else that worsens the indoor air？
Catherine: Yes, carpets, molds, mildews, fungi, dust mites, and many many others. A baby crawling on the floor in hales the equivalent of 4 cigarettes a day!
Interviewer: But most people spend most of their time inside.
Catherine: Yeah. Some are over 90%. In this case, the indoor air is going to affect our health far more than the outdoor air. Virtually everyone is affected, especially asthmatics and others who are particularly sensitive to allergens and dirty particles in the air. Keep in mind that no home or building is immune to the indoor air quality epidemic. 6 out of 10 homes and buildings are "sick".
Interviewer: Sick？ Do you mean the air in the house is in bad quality？
Catherine: Not only bad, but it is hazardous to your health. And even the Environmental Protection Agency’s very own headquarters, constructed a few years ago, was determined to be "sick". Many EPA employees could not work inside the building without becoming sick. If the headquarters of the EPA can fall victim to the indoor air quality epidemic, the very government agency that is charged with finding solutions to this problem, then any home or building can be afflicted. In fact, every home and building is affected by the indoor air quality epidemic to one degree or another, regardless of how clean it may appear.
Interviewer: But if my house looks really clean, how did it become that way？
Catherine: Did you use aerosols, floor or furniture polish, bleach, bathroom cleaners, etc. ？ If so, these products give off harmful chemical vapors into the air. Most homes or buildings also have carpets, painted walls, chemically treated furnishings, dust, insects, moist or damp things, food, people, and...
Interviewer: People？!
Catherine: Yes, humans shed more than just about any other animal, but our skin flakes are
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 a bout alcohol and strokes, the authors said. The new study helps settle the question and is the first to find blacks and His panics 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 blood dots 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 daily were only half as likely to have suffered dot-type 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 ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付