Irradiating Food

Irradiating fruits, vegetables, pork and chicken to kill insects and bacteria has been approved by the Food and Drug Administration over the past decade or so. Irradiation of other meats, such as beef and lamb, is being reviewed. Federal approval does not require that industry adopt the process, and few food processors presently offer irradiated products.

Market studies have shown that many consumers are afraid that eating irradiated foods may cause cancer, despite scientific studies that prove the safety of treated foods. Some people argue that more severe government inspection, higher food-safety standards, and more careful-preparation practices by consumers are all that is needed to ensure that food is safe. Consequently, companies currently see no need to spend millions of dollars outfitting processing plants with the equipment necessary for a process that very few shoppers are in favor of.

All supermarkets that sell irradiated food must label the food either directly on the packaging, or, in the case of bulk items like fruits and vegetables, by placing a sign nearby. There is no requirement for the labeling of irradiated food served by chain restaurants or hospitals that buy directly from distributors, nor any regulations for products that contain irradiated ingredients.

Presently, the FDA allows food to be treated with three types of radiation -- gamma rays, high-energy electrons, and X rays -- and sets limits on doses, depending on the type of food. The principle is that the dose to be used for a certain type of food should not exceed the amount that is sufficient to kill most harmful insects and bacteria present in it. Different types of food, because of their molecular compositions, may require different doses of radiation.

1. According to the passage, killing insects and bacteria present in foods by irradiating is not completely approved by the US government.

A. Right B. Wrong C. Not mentioned

2. There are quite a number of food processors which are interested in producing irritated foods.

A. Right B. Wrong C. Not mentioned

3. Some consumers are doubtful of the safety of irradiated foods and suggest a more severe government inspection be taken.

A. Right B. Wrong C. Not mentioned

4. Some companies foresee the promising future of setting up food processing factories, although they do not see the need now.

A. Right B. Wrong C. Not mentioned

5. It is required that labels placed on irradiated food or nearby bulk items such as vegetables and fruits should indicate irradiated ingredients.

A. Right B. Wrong C. Not mentioned

6. Restaurants can serve irradiated food bought directly from distributors without labeling it.

A. Right B. Wrong C. Not mentioned

7. The passage tells us that FDA approves irradiating food to some extent but irradiated food is not widely accepted.

A. Right B. Wrong C. Not mentioned

參考答案:

1. B.分析：利用句子中的特征詞Columbia University researchers 和a few months in advance作為答案線索，這樣發(fā)現(xiàn)答案相關(guān)句：While some forecasting methods had limited SUCCESS predicting the 1997 E1 Nino a few months in advance，the Columbia University researchers say their method can predict large E1 Nino events up to two years in advance.(問題句說“提前幾個月”，而原文說“最遠能提前到兩年”，因此可見問題句的內(nèi)容中有與原文不一致的地方，因此判斷該句“不正確”。)

2.A.分析：利用句子中出現(xiàn)的核心結(jié)構(gòu)EI Nino occurrences 和 sea—surface temperatures作為答案線索，這樣發(fā)現(xiàn)答案相關(guān)句：Using a computer the researchers matched sea-surface temperatures to later El Nino occurrences between 1980 and 2000 (該劃線結(jié)構(gòu)的含義基本上與問題句的內(nèi)容一致，還需要對信息1進行判斷--辨別the researchers是否就是“The Columbia University researchers”，而前文中出現(xiàn)的就是“The Columbia University researchers”，因此判斷信息1和信息2的內(nèi)容都在原文中有呼應的內(nèi)容，因此判斷該句的說法正確。)

3.C.分析：該題涉及到的內(nèi)容和前面出現(xiàn)的問題有關(guān)，注意到題干中出現(xiàn)的特征詞(the first)，因此判斷對該詞的確認是關(guān)鍵。利用該詞作為答案線索，這樣發(fā)現(xiàn)文章中沒有這個詞出現(xiàn)。因為該句是概括總結(jié)句，因此再利用句子出現(xiàn)的核心結(jié)構(gòu)sea-surface temperatures 和the past EI Nino occurrences作為答案線索，發(fā)現(xiàn)涉及這兩個結(jié)構(gòu)的句子所表達的句意都與問題句的內(nèi)容無關(guān)，因此判斷問題句的說法“沒提到”。

4. C. 分析：利用句子中出現(xiàn)的特征詞Weare作為答案線索，這樣發(fā)現(xiàn)答案相關(guān)句：but Bryan C.Weare, a meteorologist at the University of California, Davis，who was not involved in the work，said it“suggests‘E1 Nino is indeed predictable.”

“This will probably convince others to search around more for even better methods.”said Weare.He added that the new method“makes it possible to predict El Nino at 1ong lead times.” Other models also use sea-surface temperatures, but they have not looked as far back because they need other data，which is only available for recent decades，Weare said.(這些涉及到Weare的句子在內(nèi)容上都沒有講述是否Weare在預測厄爾尼諾現(xiàn)象方面作出了貢獻，也沒有提到他的貢獻是否得到了其他氣象學家的高度贊揚)

5.B.分析：利用句子中出現(xiàn)的特征詞Chinese report， in 1 99 1 and 1 997和200 million Chinese people作為答案線索，這樣發(fā)現(xiàn)答案相關(guān)句：When El Nino hit in 199 1 and 1997, 200 million people were affected by flooding in China alone, according to a 2002 United Nations report.(該句的內(nèi)容與問題句的內(nèi)容不一致。)

6. A. 分析：該問題句內(nèi)容和結(jié)構(gòu)都較簡單，句子中出現(xiàn)了一個數(shù)字(8個月)，因此猜測對于這個數(shù)字的辨別是解題的關(guān)鍵。借助eight months 和句子中的核心詞peak作為答案線索，這樣找到答案相關(guān)句： E1 Nino tends to develop between April and June and reaches its peak between December and February(借助該句含義可以推出“El Nino需要大約8個月達到峰值”)

7. C.分析：利用句子中出現(xiàn)的核心詞A special institute 和 America作為答案線索，這樣發(fā)現(xiàn)文章中根本就沒有提到“在美國建立一所特別的研究院”，因此該句為“沒提到”。

報考條件：綜合類，理工類，衛(wèi)生類考試原則上沒有嚴格的界限。職稱英語考試報名可在單位報，評職稱與戶口無關(guān)，主要看你的工作單位，所以你可以直接咨詢單位的人事部門，如果他們說可以就行，每個省規(guī)定不大一樣?！?a title="查看詳情" href="http://m.dzhx.com.cn/zc/48344834015.html" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255);">查看詳情】

報考選擇：職稱英語報考科目|級別選擇|報名條件及相關(guān)問題解答

免考規(guī)定：取得外語(從事翻譯工作人員及外語教師第二外語)專業(yè)專科及以上學歷的人員申報中、高級職稱評審……。【查看詳情】

（責任編輯：hbz）

共2頁,當前第1頁  第一頁  前一頁  下一頁