s="" dance="" instructor,="" thought="" she="" has="" a="" stomach="" virus.="" the="" aches="" and="" cramping="" were="" tolerable="" that="" first="" day,="" finished="" her="" classes.="" then="" diarrhea="" turned="" bloody.="" kidneys="" shut="" down.="" seizures="" knocked="" unconscious.="" convulsions="" grew="" so="" relentless="" doctors="" had="" to="" put="" in="" coma="" for="" nine="" weeks.="" when="" emerged,="" could="" no="" longer="" walk.="" affliction="" ravaged="" nervous="" system="" left="" paralyzed="" from="" waist="" down.Ms. Smith was found to have a severe form of food-borne illness causes by E. coli, which Minnesota officials traced to the hamburger that her mother had grilled for their Sunday family party. In the simplest terms, she ran out of luck in a food-safety game of chance whose rules and risks are not widely known.Meat companies and grocers have been barred from selling ground beef tainted by the virulent strain of E. coli known as O157: H7 since 1994. Yet tens of thousands of people are still sickened annually by this pathogen, with hamburgers being the biggest culprit. Ground beef has been blamed for 16 outbreaks in the last three years alone. This summer, contamination led to the recall of beef from nearly 3 000 grocers in 41 states.Ms. Smith's reaction to the virulent strain of E. coli was extreme, but tracing the story of her burger shows that neither the system meant to make the meat safe, nor the meat itself, is what consumers have been led to believe.Ground beef is usually not simply a chunk of meat run through a grinder. Instead, a single portion of hamburger meat is often an amalgam of various grades of meat from different parts of cows and even from different slaughterhouses. This makes the costs 25% less than it would have for cuts of whole meat. These cuts of meat are particularly vulnerable to E. coli contamination, food experts and officials say. Despite this, there is no federal requirement for grinders to test their ingredients for the pathogen.Those ingredients include cuts from areas of the cow that are more likely to have had contact with feces, which carries E. coli, industry research shows. Yet most meat companies rely on their suppliers to check for the bacteria and do their own testing only after the ingredients are ground together.Unwritten agreements between some companies appear to stand in the way of ingredient testing. Many big slaughterhouses will sell only to grinders who agree not to test their shipments for E. coli for fear of a recall of ingredients they sold to others.“ Ground beef is not a completely safe product," said Dr. Jeffrey Bender, a food safety expert at the University of Minnesota who helped develop systems for tracing E. coli. contamination. He said that while outbreaks had been on the decline, “unfortunately it looks like we are going a bit in the opposite direction. ”1.What is the main idea of this passage?2.We can learn from the passage that （ ）.3.The reason behind the way ground beef produced is （ ）.4.We can infer that many big slaughterhouses （ ）.5.As Bender implies at the end of the passage,（ ）.'>
Stephanie Smith, a children's dance instructor, thought she has a stomach virus. The aches and cramping were tolerable that first day, and she finished her classes. Then her diarrhea turned bloody. Her kidneys shut down. Seizures knocked her unconscious. The convulsions grew so relentless that doctors had to put her in a coma for nine weeks. When she emerged, she could no longer walk. The affliction had ravaged her nervous system and left her paralyzed from the waist down.Ms. Smith was found to have a severe form of food-borne illness causes by E. coli, which Minnesota officials traced to the hamburger that her mother had grilled for their Sunday family party. In the simplest terms, she ran out of luck in a food-safety game of chance whose rules and risks are not widely known.Meat companies and grocers have been barred from selling ground beef tainted by the virulent strain of E. coli known as O157: H7 since 1994. Yet tens of
相关问题推荐
As the defining epidemic of a modern age notable for overconsumption and excess, obesity is hard to beat. The increased availability of high-fat, high sugar foods, along with more sedentary lifestyles, has helped push the number of obese people worldwide to beyond 400 million, and the number of overweight to more than 1.6 billion. By 2015, those figures are likely to grow to 700 million and 2.3 billion respectively, according to the World Health Organization. Given the health implications—increased risk of heart disease, stroke, diabetes and some cancers—anything that helps people avoid piling on the pounds must be a good thing, right?Those who agree will no doubt welcome the growing success of researchers striving to develop “diet pills” that provide a technical fix for those incapable of losing weight at any other way. Last week a study published in The Lancet showed that tesofensine, which works by inducing a sense of fullness, is twice as effective as any other drug at enabling patients to lose weight.There is no question that advances such as this are good news for those with a strong genetic predisposition to obesity. But for the rest of us it is dangerous to see treatment as a more effective solution than prevention. There are several reasons for this. For a start, the traditional ways of maintaining a safe weight, such as limiting what you eat, increase consumption of fruit and vegetables and taking more exercise, are beneficial for our health in many ways.Second, overindulgence in fatty foods has implications for the entire planet. Consider the deleterious environmental effects of the rising demand for meat. As demonstrated in our special issue on economic growth, technological fixes will not compensate for excessive consumption.Third, interfering with the brain circuits that control the desire for food can have an impact on other aspects of a person's personality and their mental and physical health.We need two approaches: more research into the genetics of obesity to understand why some people are more susceptible, and greater efforts to help people avoid eating their way to an early death. Cynics will say we’ve tried education and it hasn’t worked. That is defeatist: getting people to change their behavior takes time and effort, held back as we are by our biological tendency to eat more than we need, and by the food industry ’ s ruthless opportunism in exploiting that.Drugs will be the saving of a few—as a last resort. But the global obesity problem is one of lifestyle, and the solution must be too.1.In the first paragraph all the figures surrounding obesity reflect （ ）.2.When it comes to the recently reported diet pills, the author would say that （ ）.3.Which of the following can be referred to as the environmental perspective of the author’s argument?4.The author argues that we make greater efforts to help people fight against （ ）.5.Which of the following can be the best title for the passage?
A.a close link between growing obese a
“Physician specialty, in addition to being a measure of formal training in the field, is also a proxy for clinical experience,” he says. “If s very difficult to separate out the overlapping concepts: one, that practice makes perfect; two, the effect of the educational and time investments in a clinical problem the physician is simply interested in; and three, the issue of formal training.”Differences between specialist care and generalist care, however, pale in comparison with the finding that both specialists and generalists often fail to put the latest knowledge into practice, contend both Donohoe and Clancy. A report by the U. S. General Accounting Office documented that heart attack survivors who saw cardiologists regularly were more likely to take cholesterol-lowering drugs and beta blockers—which reduce heart rate and blood pressure—than those who received care from a generalist. Even so, these life-prolonging drugs were not prescribed to many patients who appeared to be eligible for them, implying that both generalists and specialists could do better.“Maybe we are focusing too much energy on the differences between generalist and specialist care,” says Donohoe. Perhaps, he adds, “we should focus more intently on improving the quality of communication and cooperation between generalists and specialists and on developing and promoting practice guidelines that might have a much bigger effect on the overall health of Americans.”1.Which of the following questions can most probably come out of the two questions raised in the passage?2.The answers to the two questions suggest that （ ）.3.According to the passage, the better treatment of stroke and heart disease on the part of specialists （ ）.4.Both specialists and generalists, Donohoe and Clancy contend, could do a better job of （ ）.5.Donohoe is trying to shift our attention to （ ）.
'>It seems intuitive that going to a specialist physician will result in more thorough and up-to-date care for whatever ails you. In fact, many studies support this idea—but health-care researchers caution that they may not tell the whole story.The first question is whose patients are sicker? Specialists tend to treat more complicated forms of disease, but generalist—family physicians and general practitioners—are more likely to treat patients with several coexisting diseases.A second question is what counts as the most valuable treatment? Specialists are more familiar with standards of care for the diseases they treat regularly, says Harlan M. Krumholz of Yale University. On the other hand, a generalist may do a better job of coordinating a patient's care and keeping an eye on a person's overall health, says Martin T. Donohoe of the Oregon Health Sciences University in Portland.To further complicate comparisons, many generalists will consult with specialists on complicated cases ,but medical records do not always show that, says Carolyn Clancy of the Agency for Health Care Policy and Research in Rockville, Md.That said, stroke patients treated by neurologists are more likely to survive than stroke pat
Throughout his political career he has always been in the （ ）.
A.twilight B.spotlight C.streetlight D.torchlight
The author of the book has shown his remarkably keen （ ）into human nature.
A.perspective B.dimension C.insight D.reflection
Beijing Tourism Bureau has released a list of translations for 2 753 dishes and drinks to （ ）public opinions.
A.solicit B.perceive C.conceive D.investigate
