英語四級長篇閱讀練習題和答案
下面是小編整理的，希望對大家有幫助。
The Heart Assoeiation’s Junk Science Diet
A.A recent Cambridge University anal ysis of 76 studies involving more than 650，000 people concluded,“The current evidence does not clearly support guidelines that low consumption of total Saturated fats.“Yet the American Heart Association***AriA.，in its most recent dietary guidelines，held fast to the idea that we must A.l eat low.fat diets for optimal heart health.It’s a stance that—at the very best—is controversiA.，and at worst is dead wrong.As a practicing cardiologist***心臟病學家***for more than three decades，I agree with the latte—it’s dead wrong.Why does the AHA cling to recommendations that fly in the face of scientific evidence?
B.What I discovered was both eye.opening and disturbin9.The AHA not only ignored A.l the other risk factors for heart disease，but it appointed someone with ties to Big Food and bizarre scientific beliefs to lead the guideline-writing paneHust the type of thing’that undermines the public’s confidence in the medical community.The AHA guidelines warrant that saturated fat make up no more than 5 to 6 percent of daily cal ories for adults because this will lower“bad”cholesterol***膽固醇***.And，for those people who need blood pressure control，the guidelines A.so suggest lowering sodium***salt***intake to no more than a teaspoon***2，300 mg***daily.Despite many other known risk factors for heart disease，salt and fat were，astonishingly,the only two considered by the AHA panel writing the guidelines.There are many other recognized risk factors the AHA ignored，including blood sugar level，low“good”cholesterol，insulin***胰島素***levels，and body weight—an of these are influenced by diet.
C.In fact，most people who have heart attacks don’t have elevations in bad cholesterol.They are much more likely to have metabolic syndrome***新陳代謝綜合徵***—a condition that puts you at high risk for diabetes and heart disease.Interestingly enough，blood triglycerides***甘油三脂***do not go up with eating fat—they go up if you eat a diet high in processed grains，starches，and sugar.Unfortunately for the proponents of high-carbohydrate***糖類***diets，high blood triglycerides are a major risk factor for heart disease.In addition.low fat/high carb diets lower protective“good”cholesterol and raise insulin.
These diets are involved in the development of diabetes.which is a powerful risk factor for developing heart disease.
Heart Cheek Program’s contribution
D.The writers of the 20 13 statin guidelines based their recommendations on studies that looked at the reduction in the risk of events like heart attacks in people treated with statinspared to people on a placebo***安慰劑***.The AHA dietary guidelines do not cite any diet studies that looked at whether following a specific diet lowered the risk of developing heart events—yet they are giving dietary advice.Why?There might be two plausible reasons.One is the AHA's moneymaking“Heart Check Program.”The second is the conflict of interest of Robert Ecke—the co-chair of the panel that wrote the guidelines.
E.Forty.five percent of these“heart heA.thy”foods—over 400 of them—are meat：92 are processed meats—which have been shown to have either neutrA. or negative effects on heart health.Even more problematic are the foods containing added sugar.The AHA recommends that women consume less
than 6 teaspoons***1 00 calories***of sugar a day and less than 9 teaspoons***1 50 caories***for men.Yet there are items that get the nod of approvA. from the Heart Check program despite being near or at the sugar limit.1ike Bruce’s Yams Candied Sweet Potatoes and HeA.thy Choice SA.isbury Steak.
F. Until this year,Heart Check approved many foods with trans-fats，which raise bad cholesterol and lower good cholesterol，among other harmful effects on heA.th，like increasing inflammation***發炎***and the laying down of calcium in arteries***動脈***.
G.Like the dietary guidelines，the AHA Heart Check Program appears to address only the effect of foods on cholesterollevel and blood pressure.Meanwhile，since the 1 970s，our yearly sugar consumption has increased quickly A.ong with the incidence of diabetes and obesity.This brings us to Dr.Robert
H.Eckel，the co-chair of the Working Group.He is a consultant for Foodminds.which specializes“in food，beverage，nutrition，health and wellness.”Foodminds works with more than 30 leading food，beverage，and nutrition to offer a“one stop shop of…consulting…to guide food and beverage companies in navigating the complexities around the upcoming FDA Nutrition Facts label overhaul.”In other words.Foodminds is a lobbying firm for“Big Food.”
Creationist’s coming
H. And then there is this：Dr.Eckel describes himself as“a scientist and professing six.day creationist and a member of the technicA. advisory board of the Institute for Creation Research…”Many scientists are religious.111is is not to question Dr.Eckel’s religious beliefs.but to question his ability to think sciemificA.ly.He believes there is scientific proof that the world was created in six days and mat evolution does not exist.This should at least raise eyebrows when the co-chair of an influential panel charged with giving scientificA.ly sound dietary advice has a financiA. conflict of interest and proselytizes for beliefs that are anti.scientific.
I.The American people should be able to trust that only impartiA. scientists write guidelines.We should be confident that those experts are not working to advance corporate interests and that they do not espouse beliefs that are well outside the scientific mainstream.An avowed creationist who consults for a food lobby hardly seems an appropriate choice to fulfill these criteria.For the last several decades，the AHA has promoted a low.fat higll.carbohydrate diet as a cornerstone of heart health.It has taken a very public position that saturated fats are a major driver of heart disease risk and the mounting tide of evidence that this is dead wrong must put it in a very uncomfortable position.And yet a fundamental requirement of science--as opposed to propaganda--is that when evidence that contradicts a hypothesis is replicated over and over again，that hypothesis must be abandoned.
J. The idea that eating high amounts of saturated fat causes hardening of the arteries—the so.called“diet-heart hypothesis—deserves to be iettisoned along with other discredited belief systems.Creationism comes to mind.Will the AHA step up to the plate?
46.It is ftm that blood triglyeerides won’t rise when you eat fat,but go up with eating other sugar and starches.
47.The processed meats are proved to be harmful more or less to our heart health.
48.Many other known risk factors for heart disease have been overlooked by the AHA panel.except for salt and fat.
49.It does not aim to query the religious faith of Dr.Eckel，but his capability to ponder scientifically.
50.At best.the idea held by AHA that we must A.l eat low.fat diets for optimA. heart heA.th is a controversiA. stance，while at worst，it is dead wrong.
51.Many foods approved by Heart Check would be harmful to our body health.
52.A hypothesis must be iettisoned when it clashes with the convincing evidence.
53.Since the 1970s.our annually sugar accommodation has rocketed A.ong with the occurrence of diabetes and obesity.
54.The view that high intake of saturated fat could result in sclerosis of artery should be discarded with other untrustful beliefs.
55.The AHA dietary guidelines do not quote any diet researches that can tell us whether a specific diet can decrease the risk of heart disease.
46.It is fun that blood triglycerides won’t rise when you eat fat.but go up with eating other sugar and starches.有趣的是，當你食用脂肪時血甘油三酯不會升高，而食用一些糖類或澱粉時就會升高。
47.Theprocessedmeatsareprovedto beharmfulmore orlessto ourhearthealth.經預處理的肉多多少少會對我們的心臟健康有負作用。
48.Many other known risk factors for heart disease have been overlooked by the AHA panel，except for salt and fat.很多其他影響心臟健康的危險因素被AHA飲食指南制定小組忽略了，但鹽分和脂肪除外。
49.It does not aim to query the religious faith of Dr.Eckel.but his capability to ponder scientifically.這並不是在質疑埃克爾博士的宗教信仰，而是他進行科學化思考的能力。
50.At best.the idea held by AHA that we must all eat low-fat diets for optimal heart heA.th is a controversial stance，while at Worst，it is dead wrong.從最好的一面來看，AHA堅持我們必須採用低脂肪飲食以達到最佳的心臟健康狀態的觀點是有爭議的，然而最壞的就是，它是大錯特錯的。
51.Many foods approved by Heart Check would be harmful to our body health.心臟檢查程式認證通過的許多食物對我們的身體是有害的。
52.A hypothesis must be jettisoned when it clashes with the convincing evidence.當一個假設與令人信服的證據衝突時，它應該果斷被摒棄。
53.Since the 1970s，Our annually sugar accommodation has rocketed along with the occurrence of diabetes and obesity.自20世紀70年代以來，糖的年供應量隨著糖尿病和肥胖症的高發迅速增加。
54.The view that high intake of saturated fat could result in sclerosis of artery should be discarded with other untrustful beliefs.攝入高含量的飽和脂肪會導致動脈硬化的觀點應該和其他不可信的觀念一同被拋棄。
55.The AHA dietary guidelines do not quote any diet researches that Can tell uswhether a specific diet Can decrease the risk ofheart disease.AHA的飲食指南並沒有引用任何飲食研究，這些研究也並未指出特定的飲食是否可以降低患心臟病的風險。
Robot Management
A. Robots have been the stuff of science fiction for so long that it is surprisingly hard to see them as the stuff of management fact. A Czech playwright, Karel Capek, gave them their name in 1920 ***from the Slavonic word for "work" ***. An American writer, Isaac Asimov, confronted them with their most memorable dilemmas.
Hollywood turned them into superheroes and supervillains. When some film critics drew up lists of Hollywood's 50 greatest good guys and 50 greatest baddies, the only character to appear on both lists was a robot, the Terminator.
B. It is time for management thinkers to catch up with science-fiction writers. Robots have been doing auxiliary jobs on production lines since the 1960s. The world already has more than lm industrial robots. There is now an acceleration in the rates at which they are becoming both cleverer and cheaper: an explosive combination.
Robots are learning to interact with the world around them. Their ability to see things is getting ever closer to that of humans, as is their capacity to ingest information and act on it. Tomorrow's robots will increasingly take on delicate, complex tasks. And instead of being imprisoned in cages to stop them colliding with people, they will be free to wander.
C. America's armed forces have blazed a trail here. They now have no fewer than 12,000 robots serving in their ranks. Peter Singer, of the Brookings Institution, a think-tank ***智囊團***, says mankind's 5,000-year monopoly on the fighting of war is breaking down. Recent additions to the battlefield include tiny "insects" that perform reconnaissance ***偵查*** missions and giant "dogs" to terrify enemies. The Pentagon is also working on the EATR, a robot that fuels itself by eating whatever biomass ***生物量*** it finds around it.
D. But the civilian world cannot be far behind. Who better to clean sewers or suck up nuclear waste than these remarkable machines? The Japanese have made surprisingly little use of robots to clear up after the recent earthquake, given their world leadership in this area. They say that they had the wrong sort of robots in the wrong places. But they have issued a global call for robotic assistance and are likely to put more robots to work shortly.
E. As robots advance into the service industries they are starting to look less like machines and more like living creatures. The Paro ***made by AIST, a Japanese research agency*** is shaped like a baby seal and responds to attention. Honda's robot, ASIMO, is humanoid and can walk, talk and respond to commands.
F.Until now executives have largely ignored robots, regarding them as an engineering rather than a management problem. This cannot go on: robots are becoming too powerful and ubiquitous ***無處不在的***. Companies may need to rethink their strategies as they gain access to these new sorts of workers. Do they really need to outsource production to China, for example, when they have clever machines that work ceaselessly without pay? They certainly need to rethink their human-resources policies--starting by questioning whether they should have departments devoted to purely human resources.
G.The first issue is how to manage the robots themselves. Asimov laid down the basic rule in 1942: no robot should harm a human. This rule has been reinforced by recent technological improvements: robots are now much more sensitive to their surroundings and can be instructed to avoid hitting people. But the Pentagon's plans make all this a bit more complicated: many of its robots will be, in essence, killing machines.
H. A second question is how to manage the homo side of homo-robo relations. Workers have always worried that new technologies will take away their livelihoods, ever since the original Luddites' fears about mechanised looms. That worry takes on a particularly intense form when the machines come with a human face: Capek's play that gave robots their name depicted a world in which they initially brought lots of benefits but eventually led to mass unemployment and discontent. Now, the arrival of increasingly humanoid automatons in workplaces, in an era of high unemployment, is bound to provoke a reaction.
I.So, companies will need to work hard to persuade workers that robots are productivity-enhancers, not just job- eating aliens. They need to show employees that the robot sitting alongside them can be more of a helpmate than a threat. Audi has been particularly successful in introducing industrial robots because the carmaker asked workers to identify areas where robots could improve performance and then gave those workers jobs overseeing the robots. Employers also need to explain that robots can help preserve manufacturing jobs in the rich world: one reason why Germany has lost fewer such jobs than Britain is that it has five times as many robots for every 10,000 workers.
J.These two principles--don't let robots hurt or frighten people--are relatively simple. Robot scientists are tackling more complicated problems as robots become more sophisticated. They are keen to avoid hierarchies ***層級*** among rescue-robots ***because the loss of the leader would render the rest redundant***. So they are using game theory to make sure the robots can communicate with each other in egalitarian ***平等*** ways. They are keen to avoid duplication between robots and their human handlers. So they are producing more complicated mathematical formulae in order that robots can constantly adjust themselves to human intentions.
This suggests that the world could be on the verge of a great management revolution: making robots behave like humans rather than the 20th century's preferred option, making humans behave like robots.
46. Tomorrow's robots will be free to move around rather than being locked up in cages so as not to hurt people.
47. It is not easy for people to regard robots as management stuff, for the later are mostly seen in science fictions.
48. Robots appear more like living creatures as they enter into the service industry.
49. According to the Pentagon's plans, many of its robots will essentially become killing machines.
50. The Japanese didn't use a lot of robots to clear up after the recent earthquake, considering their world leadership in the robot field.
51. Companies should show their workers that robots can be more of a helper rather than a threat to them.
52. The fact that more and more human-like robots are used in workplaces will surely arouse reaction in a time of high unemployment.
53. Robots, who are considered as an engineering instead of a management problem, have been largely neglected by executives.
54. Scientists are trying to enable robots to constantly adjust themselves to people's intenlions.
55. The example that Germany has lost fewer manufacturing jobs than Britain shows that robots can help preserve manufacturing jobs in the rich world.
【參考譯文】
管理機器人
A.[47]很久以來。機器人都被認為是科幻小說裡的東西，因此人們很難將它們視為管理的物件。捷克劇作家KarelCapek於1920年將它們命名為“機器人”***來源於斯拉夫語中的“工作”一詞***。在美國作家Isaac Asimov的筆下，機器人面對了令它們最為難忘的抉擇。好萊塢把機器人變成了超級英雄和超級惡魔。
在由電影評論家總結出的好萊塢50個最好角色和50個最壞角色的名單上，唯一一個同時登上兩份榜單的角色就是一個機器人——終結者。
B.現在到了管理思想家跟上科幻小說作家步伐的時候了。自20世紀60年代起機器人就在生產線上做一些輔助工作了。世界上已有超過100萬的工業機器人。現在機器人變得更聰明、更廉價的速度在不斷加快，這兩者簡直是一種爆炸性的結合。機器人正在學著與周圍的世界互動。它們看東西的能力正在變得越來越接近人類，它們獲取資訊及做出相應反應的能力也在接近人類。未來，機器人將能夠從事越來越多精細而複雜的工作。[46]機器人將不會再被關起來以防止它們與人們發生衝突，而是可以自由移 動。
C.美國軍隊已經在這方面開拓了一條道路。他們現在有不少於l2000個機器人正在服役。智囊團布魯金斯學會的PeterSinger說，5000年來只有人類參與戰爭的局面正在被打破。近來被增派到戰場的機器人包括執行偵察任務的小“昆蟲”和恫嚇敵人的大“狗”。五角大樓還在研發一種強動力自動戰術機器人，它們可以通過吞食其周邊的生物量來補給自己的能量。
D.但機器人在民用方面也沒有落後太遠。有誰能比這些神奇的裝置更適於清潔下水道或清理核廢料呢?[50]日本人在近期的一次震後清理中所用的機器人數量驚人地少，即使他們在這一領域處於世界領先地位。他們說他們在錯誤的地點選擇了錯誤的機器人類別。但是他們已經率先在全球範圍內呼籲尋求機器人的援助.而且似乎馬上就會投入更多的機器人進行作業。
E.[48]當機器人進入到服務產業時，它們開始變得不像機器，而更像生物了。日本產業技術研究院是一所研發機構，它們製作的機器人Paro形似一隻小海豹，並能對命令做出迴應。本田公司研製的機器人ASIM0具有很多人類的特徵，它能夠走路、說話以及迴應命令。
F.[53]時至今日，管理人員一直在很大程度上忽視了機器人，把它們當做工程問題而不是管理問題。這種現象不能再繼續下去了：機器人正變得功能強大且無處不在。隨著企業可以使用機器人這種新型員工，它們可能需要重新考慮自身的人力資源戰略了。例如，在擁有不計報酬、可以持續工作的智慧機器的情況下，它們是否真的需要把產品外包給中國加工?它們必然要重新考慮它們的人力資源政策——就從質疑是否應該有一個純粹管理人力資源的部門開始。
G.第一個問題是如何管理機器人本身。Asimov在1942年確立了基本原則：機器人不能傷害人類。這一原則已經通過近年來的技術改良得以加強：現在的機器人對於它們周圍的事物更加敏感，還可以遵照指示避免襲擊人類。[49]但是五角大樓的計劃使得這一切變堡更為複雜：從本質上來說，它們所製造的機器人有很多將成為殺人機器。
H.第二個問題是如何處理人與機器人的關係中人類這一方的問題。從最初的科技反對者恐懼機械織布機開始，勞動者們總是擔心新技術會搶走他們的飯碗。當機器以人類的面孔出現時，那種擔憂變得尤為強烈：capek那部給機器人取名字的戲劇中描繪了這樣一個世界：起初，機器人帶來了很多好處，最終，它們卻導致了大量的失業和不滿。[52]在現在這樣一個高失業率的時代，工作場所越來越多地使用類人機器人必然會激起反對。
I.所以，企業必須努力使工人相信機器人有助於提高產量，而不只是吞噬職位的外來者。[51]它們需要展現給員工們看：坐在他們身邊的機器人更多的是他們的幫手，而不是威脅。奧迪在引進工業機器人方面一直做得特別成功，因為這家汽車製造商讓員工去發現那些機器人可以改進工作的領域，然後將監管那些機器人的崗位提供給員工。[55]企業還需要闡明，機器人有助於保留富有國家的生產崗位：德國之所以沒有象英國一樣喪失如此之多的生產崗位，原因之一就是，在德國，每一萬名工人所對應的機器人數量是英國的5倍。
J.這兩條原則，即不要讓機器人傷害或嚇到人類，是相對簡單的。隨著機器人變得日益複雜，機器人科學家們正著手處理更復雜的問題。他們儘量不在救援機器人中分出三六九等***因為一旦沒有帶頭的機器人，其他的機器人就顯得多餘了***。所以他們利用遊戲理論來確保機器人能以平等的方式互相交流。他們盡力避免機器人與它們的人類操作者的作用重疊。[54]因此他們正在計算更多複雜的數學公式以使機器人能夠依照人類的意願不斷地進行自我調節。這表明世界即將發生一次重大的管理變革：讓機器人的行為更像人類，而不是像20世紀所傾向的那樣，使人類的行為日益向機器人靠攏。
【答案解析】
46.B
解析：題幹意為，未來的機器人將能夠自由活動，而不是被關起來以防止傷害人類。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊tomorrow’s robots、free to move around和hurt people。文中論及機器人未來發展趨勢的內容出 現在B段，該段末句提到，機器人將不會再被關起來以防止發生人機之間的衝突，它們將可以自由移動。由此可知，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為B。
47.A
解析：題於意為，人們很難想象機器人是能夠被管理的事物，因為它們一直都是出現在科幻小說中。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊not easy、management stuff和science fictions。文中A段首句提到，很久以來，機器人都被認為是科幻小說裡的東西，因此人們很難想象它們能夠被管理。由此可知，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為A。
48.E
解析：題幹意為，當機器人進入服務產業時，它們往往看起來更像生物。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊more like living creatures和enter into the service industry。文中論及機器人在服務業中表現的內容出現在E段，該段首句提到，隨著機器人進入到服務產業，它們開始變得不那麼像機器，而更像生物了。接下來的第二句和第三句用兩個例子來證明這一觀點。由此可知，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為E。
49.G
解析：題幹意為，依據五角大樓的計劃，它們所製造的很多機器人在本質上都會成為殺人機器。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊Pentagon’s plans、many of its robots和killing machines。文中G段論述了與五角大樓的計劃相關的內容，該段提到了機器人管理的基本原則，即機器人不能傷害人類，該段末句提到，但是五角大樓的計劃使得這一切變得更為複雜：從本質上來說，它們所製造的機器人有很多將成為殺人機器。由此可知，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為G。
50.D
解析：題幹意為，鑑於其在機器人領域的世界領先地位，日本在近期的一次地震後並沒有大量使用機器人來完成清理工作。注意抓住題千中的關鍵資訊Japanese、clear up after the recent earthquake和world leadershipinthe robotfield。文中論及日本使用清潔機器人的內容出現在D段，該段第三句提到，日本人在近期的一次震後清理中所用的機器人數量驚人地少，即使他們在這一領域一直處於世界領先地位。由此可見，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為D。
51.I
解析：題幹意為，企業應該向員工們展示，機器人對他們來說，更多的是起到幫手的作用，而不是威脅。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊Companies、workers和a helper ratherthan athreat。文中論及企業、員工和機器人關係的內容出現在1段，該段第二句提到，它們需要展現給員工們看：坐在他們身邊的機器人更多的是他們的幫手，而不是威脅。由此可見，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為I。
52.H
解析：題幹意為，在目前這樣一個高失業率的年代，越來越多的類人機器人被用於工作場所的事實必然會引起一些反對。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊human.1ike robots are used in workplaces和arouse reactionin atimeofhigh unemployment。文中論及高失業率以及機器人在工作場所的使用的內容出現在H段，該段末句提到，在現在這樣一個高失業率的時代，工作場所越來越多地使用類人機器人必然會激起反對。原文中的humanoid automatons對應題幹中的human—like robots。由此可見，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為H。
53.F
解析：題幹意為，管理人員在很大程度上忽視了機器人，他們把機器人當做工程問題而不是管理問題。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊anengineeringinsteadofamanagementproblem和largelyneglectedbyexecutives。
文中第F段對機器人管理問題進行論述，該段首句提到，時至今日，管理人員一直在很大程度上忽視了機器人，把它們當做工程問題而不是管理問題。由此可見，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為F。
54.J
解析：題幹意為，科學家們正在試圖使機器人可以根據人們的意願不斷地進行自我調節。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊scientists和constantly adjustthemselves。文中提及機器人可以進行自我調節的內容出現在J段，該段第六句提到科學家們正在計算更多複雜的數學公式以使機器人能夠依照人類的意願不斷地進行自我調節。由此可見，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為J。
55.I
解析：題幹意為，德國失去的生產崗位比英國要少的例子表明，機器人能夠幫助保留富裕國家的生產崗位。注意抓住題幹中的關鍵資訊Germany、Britain、fewer manufacturingjobs和help preserve manufacturingjobs。文中對比英德兩國製造業崗位的內容出現在1段，該段末句提到，企業還需要闡明機器人有助於保留富裕國家的生產崗位：德國之所以沒有像英國一樣喪失如此之多的生產崗位，原因之一就是，在德國每一萬名工人所對應的機器人數量是英國的5倍。由此可見，題幹是對原文的同義轉述，故答案為I。