Won’t new anti―aging techniques keep us alive for centuries? Any cure.says Miller.for aging would probably keep most of HS living until about 120．Researchers are working on treatments that make the life span of mice longer by 50 percent at most．So.if the averagehuman life span is about 80 years.says Miller.“adding another 50 percent would get you to 120． So what can we learn from this little disagreement among the researchers? That life span is flexible.but there is a limit.says George Martin of the University of Washington．“We can get flies to live 50 percent longer． he says．“But a fly’s never going to live 150 years. Of course.if you became a new species.one that ages at a slower speed.that would be a different story.he adds． Does Martin really believe that humans could evolvetheir way to longer life?“It’s pretty cool to think about． He says with a smile． 【查看更多】

 

題目列表(包括答案和解析)

閱讀理解。

                                                             How Long Can People Live?
       She took up skating at age 85, made her first movie appearance at age 114, and held a concert in the
neighborhood on her 121st birthday.
        When it comes to long life, Jeanne Calment is the world's recordholder. She lived to the ripe old age
of 122. So is 122 the upper limit to the human life span (壽命)? If scientists come up with some sort of pill
or diet that would slow aging, could we possibly make it to 150-or beyond?
        Researchers don't entirely agree on the answers. "Calment lived to 122, so it wouldn't surprise me if
someone alive today reaches 130 or 135," says Jerry Shay at the University of Texas.
        Steve Austad at the University of Texas agrees. "People can live much longer than we think," he says.
"Experts used to say that humans couldn't live past 110. When Calment blew past that age, they raised the
number to 120. So why can't we go higher?"
        The trouble with guessing how old people can live to be is that it's all just guessing. "Anyone can make
up a number," says Rich Miller at the University of Michigan. "Usually the scientist who picks the highest
number gets his name in Time magazine."
       Won't new anti - aging techniques keep us alive for centuries? Any cure, says Miller, for aging would
probably keep most of us kicking until about 120. Researchers are working on treatments that lengthen the
life span of mice by 50 percent at most. So, if the average human life span is about 80 year, says Miller,
"adding another 50 percent would get you to 120." 
       So what can we conclude from this little disagreement among the researchers? That life span is flexible
(有彈性的), but there is a limit, says George Martin of the University of Washington. "We can get flies to
live 50 percent longer," he says. "But a fly's never going to live 150 years." Of course, if you became a new
species (物種), one that ages at a lower speed, that would be a different story, he adds. 
       Does Martin really believe that humans could evolve (進(jìn)化) their way to longer life? "It's pretty cool to
think about," he says with a smile.

1. What does the story of Jeanne Calment prove (證明) to us?
[     ]
A. People can live to 122.
B. Old people are creative.
C. Women are sporty at 85.
D. Women live longer than men.
2. According to Steve Austad at the University of Texas, _______.
[     ]
A. the average human life span could be 110
B. scientists cannot find ways to slow aging
C. few people can expect to live to over 150
D. researchers are not sure how long people can live
3. What can we infer (推斷) from the last three paragraphs?
[     ]
A. Most of us could be good at sports even at 120.
B. The average human life span cannot be doubled.
C. Scientists believe mice are aging at a slower speed than before.
D. New techniques could be used to change flies into a new species.

查看答案和解析>>

閱讀理解。
     Jeanne Calment took up skating at age 85, made her first movie appearance at age 114, and held a concert
in the neighborhood on her 121st birthday.
     When it comes to long life, Jeanne Calment is the world' s recordholder. She lived to the ripe old age of
122. So is 122 the upper limit (限制) to the human life span (壽命)? If scientists come up with some sort of
pill or diet that would slow aging, could we possibly make it to 150-or beyond?
     Researchers don't entirely agree on the answers."Calment lived to 122, so it wouldn't surprise me if
someone alive today reaches 130 or 135," says Jerry Shay at the University of Texas. 
     Steve Austad at the University of Texas agrees. "People can live longer than we think," he says. "Experts
used to say that humans couldn't live past 110. When Calment blew past that age, they raised the number to
120. So why can't we go higher?"
     The trouble with guessing how old people can live to be is that it' s all just guessing."Anyone can make up
a number," says Rich Miller at the University of Michigan. " Usually the scientist who picks the highest number
gets his name in Time magazine.
     Won't new anti-aging techniques keep us alive for centuries? Any cure, says Miller, for aging would
probably keep most of us living until about 120. Researchers are working on treatments that make the life
span of mice longer by 50 percent at most. So, if the average (平均) human life span is about 80 years, says
Miller, " adding another 50 percent would get you to 120."
     So what can we leam from this little disagreement among the researchers? That life span is flexible (有彈
性的), but there is a limit, says George Martin of the University of Washington. "We can get flies to live 50
percent longer," he says. " But a fly's never going to live 150 years." Of course, if you became a new species
(物種), one that ages at a slower speed, that would be a different story, he adds.
     Does Martin really believe that humans could evolve (進(jìn)化) their way to longer life?"It' s pretty cool to
think about." He says with a smile.
1. What does the story of Jeanne Calment prove to us?
A. People can live to 122.
B. Old people are creative.
C. Women are sporty at 85.
D. Women live longer than men.
2. According to Steve Austad at the University of Texas, ________.
A. the average human life span could be 110
B. scientists cannot find ways to slow aging
C. few people can expect to live to over 150
D. experts aren't sure how long one can live
3. Who thinks that a scientist will become famous if he makes the wildest guess at longevity?
A. Jerry Shay.
B. Steve Austad.
C. Rich Miller.
D. Ceorge Martin.
4. What can we infer from the last three paragraphs?
A. Most of us could be good at sports even at 120.
B. The average human life span cannot be doubled.
C. Scientists believe mice are aging at a slower speed than before.
D. New techniques could be used to change flies into a new species.

查看答案和解析>>


I love my iPhone---it’s my little connection to the larger world that can go anywhere with me. I also love my computer, as it stores all of my writing and thoughts. Though I love these devices(裝置) of technology, I know that there are times when I need to move away from them and truly communicate with others.
I teach history in a high school. My goals for the class include a full discussion of historical themes(主題) and ideas. Because I want students to thoroughly study the material and share their ideas with each other in the classroom. I have a rule---no computers, iPads, phones, etc. When students were told my rule before class, some of them were not happy at all.
Most students think that my reasons for this rule include unpleasant experiences in the past with students misusing technology. There’s a bit of truth to that. Some students believe that I am anti-technology. There’s no truth in that at all. I love technology and try to keep up with it so I can relate to my students.
The real reason why I ask students to leave technology at the door is that I think there are very few places in which we can have deep conversations. Interruptions(打斷) by technology often break concentration and allow for too much dependence on outside information for ideas. I want students to dig deep within themselves for ideas. I want them to push each other to think differently and to make connections between the course material and the class discussion.
I’ve been teaching my history class in this way for many years and students realize that with deep conversation, they learn at a level that helps them keep the course material beyond the classroom.
I’m not saying that I won’t ever change my mind about technology use in my history class, but until I hear a really good reason for the change. A few hours of technology-free dialogue is just too sweet to give up.
【小題1】What’s the second paragraph mainly about?

A．The reasons why students should use computers or iPads in class.
B．The advantages of using cell phones and computers in the classroom.
C．What the writer is trying to do and what rule has been made in class.
D．A new learning style that the teacher enjoys using in history class.
【小題2】According to the writer, the use of technology in the classroom may _____.
A．improve teaching and offer more help
B．a(chǎn)llow students to get on well with each other
C．help students concentrate on what they learn
D．keep students from making deep conversations
【小題3】What can we infer from the passage?
A．The teacher will carry on the success in the future.
B．The teacher will have to cancel the rule in class.
C．Some students will be punished according to the rule.
D．More and more students will be absent in history class.

查看答案和解析>>


I love my iPhone---it’s my little connection to the larger world that can go anywhere with me. I also love my computer, as it stores all of my writing and thoughts. Though I love these devices(裝置) of technology, I know that there are times when I need to move away from them and truly communicate with others.
I teach history in a high school. My goals for the class include a full discussion of historical themes(主題) and ideas. Because I want students to thoroughly study the material and share their ideas with each other in the classroom. I have a rule---no computers, iPads, phones, etc. When students were told my rule before class, some of them were not happy at all.
Most students think that my reasons for this rule include unpleasant experiences in the past with students misusing technology. There’s a bit of truth to that. Some students believe that I am anti-technology. There’s no truth in that at all. I love technology and try to keep up with it so I can relate to my students.
The real reason why I ask students to leave technology at the door is that I think there are very few places in which we can have deep conversations. Interruptions(打斷) by technology often break concentration and allow for too much dependence on outside information for ideas. I want students to dig deep within themselves for ideas. I want them to push each other to think differently and to make connections between the course material and the class discussion.
I’ve been teaching my history class in this way for many years and students realize that with deep conversation, they learn at a level that helps them keep the course material beyond the classroom.
I’m not saying that I won’t ever change my mind about technology use in my history class, but until I hear a really good reason for the change. A few hours of technology-free dialogue is just too sweet to give up.
【小題1】What’s the second paragraph mainly about?
A．The reasons why students should use computers or iPads in class.
B．The advantages of using cell phones and computers in the classroom.
C．What the writer is trying to do and what rule has been made in class.
D．A new learning style that the teacher enjoys using in history class.
【小題2】According to the writer, the use of technology in the classroom may _____.
A．improve teaching and offer more help
B．a(chǎn)llow students to get on well with each other
C．help students concentrate on what they learn
D．keep students from making deep conversations
【小題3】What can we infer from the passage?
A．The teacher will carry on the success in the future.
B．The teacher will have to cancel the rule in class.
C．Some students will be punished according to the rule.
D．More and more students will be absent in history class.

查看答案和解析>>

I love my iPhone---it’s my little connection to the larger world that can go anywhere with me. I also love my computer, as it stores all of my writing and thoughts. Though I love these devices(裝置) of technology, I know that there are times when I need to move away from them and truly communicate with others.
I teach history in a high school. My goals for the class include a full discussion of historical themes(主題) and ideas. Because I want students to thoroughly study the material and share their ideas with each other in the classroom. I have a rule---no computers, iPads, phones, etc. When students were told my rule before class, some of them were not happy at all.
Most students think that my reasons for this rule include unpleasant experiences in the past with students misusing technology. There’s a bit of truth to that. Some students believe that I am anti-technology. There’s no truth in that at all. I love technology and try to keep up with it so I can relate to my students.
The real reason why I ask students to leave technology at the door is that I think there are very few places in which we can have deep conversations. Interruptions(打斷) by technology often break concentration and allow for too much dependence on outside information for ideas. I want students to dig deep within themselves for ideas. I want them to push each other to think differently and to make connections between the course material and the class discussion.
I’ve been teaching my history class in this way for many years and students realize that with deep conversation, they learn at a level that helps them keep the course material beyond the classroom.
I’m not saying that I won’t ever change my mind about technology use in my history class, but until I hear a really good reason for the change. A few hours of technology-free dialogue is just too sweet to give up.

  1. 1.

    What’s the second paragraph mainly about?

    1. A.
      The reasons why students should use computers or iPads in class.
    2. B.
      The advantages of using cell phones and computers in the classroom.
    3. C.
      What the writer is trying to do and what rule has been made in class.
    4. D.
      A new learning style that the teacher enjoys using in history class.
  2. 2.

    According to the writer, the use of technology in the classroom may _____.

    1. A.
      improve teaching and offer more help
    2. B.
      allow students to get on well with each other
    3. C.
      help students concentrate on what they learn
    4. D.
      keep students from making deep conversations
  3. 3.

    What can we infer from the passage?

    1. A.
      The teacher will carry on the success in the future.
    2. B.
      The teacher will have to cancel the rule in class.
    3. C.
      Some students will be punished according to the rule.
    4. D.
      More and more students will be absent in history class.

查看答案和解析>>


同步練習(xí)冊答案