类型：学习教育
题目总量：200万+
软件评价：
下载版本
共享题干题【2017年真题】For more than 50 years, microbiologists in the U.S. and Europe have warned against using antibiotics to fatten up farm animals. The practice, they argue, threatens human health by turning farms into breeding grounds of drug-resistant bacteria. Farmers responded that restricting antibiotics in livestock would devastate the industry and significantly raise costs to consumers. We have empirical data that should resolve this debate. Since 1995, Denmark has enforced progressively tighter rules on the use of antibiotics in raising pigs, poultry and other livestock. In the process, it has shown that it’s possible to protect human health without hurting farmers.
Farmers in many countries use antibiotics in two key ways: (1) at full strength to treat sick animals and (2) in low doses to fatten meat-producing livestock or to prevent veterinary illnesses. Although even the proper use of antibiotics can inadvertently lead to the spread of drug-resistant bacteria, the habit of using a low or “sub-therapeutic” dose is a formula for disaster: the treatment provides just enough antibiotic to kill some but not all bacteria. The germs that survive are typically those that happen to bear genetic mutations for resisting the antibiotic. They then reproduce and exchange genes with other microbial resisters. Because bacteria are found literally everywhere, resistant strains produced in animals eventually find their way into people as well. You could hardly design a better system for guaranteeing the spread of antibiotic resistance.
The data from multiple studies over the years support the conclusion that low doses of antibiotics in animals increase the number of drug-resistant microbes in both animals and people. As Joshua M. Scharfstein, a principal deputy commissioner at the Food and Drug Administration, put it, “You actually can trace the specific bacteria around and ... find that the resistant strains in humans match the resistant strains in the animals.”And this science is what led Denmark to stop sub-therapeutic dosing of chickens，pigs and other farm animals.
Although the transition unfolded smoothly in the poultry industry, the average weight of pigs fell in the first year. But after Danish farmers started leaving piglets together with
their mothers a few weeks longer to bolster their immune systems naturally, the animals’ weights jumped back up, and the number of pigs per litter increased as well. The lesson is that improving animal husbandry making sure that stalls and cages are properly cleaned and giving animals more room or time to mature offsets the initial negative impact of limiting antibiotic use. Today Danish industry reports that productivity is higher than before. Meanwhile, reports of antibiotic resistance in Danish people are mixed, which shows as if we needed reminding that there are no quick fixes.
Of course, the way veterinary antibiotics are used is not the only cause of human drug- resistant infections. Careless use of the drugs in people also contributes to the problem. But agricultural use is still a major contributing factor. Every day brings new evidence that we are in danger of losing effective antibiotic protection against many of the most dangerous bacteria that cause human illness. The technical issues are solvable. Denmark’s example proves that it is possible to cut antibiotic use on farms without triggering financial disaster. In fact, it might provide a competitive advantage. Stronger measures to deprive drug-resistant bacteria of their agricultural breeding grounds simply make scientific，economic and common sense.
81[2单选题]The purpose of this article is to .
A.report recent advances in the use of antibiotics
B.provide empirical evidence for microbiologists
C.describe threats of antibiotics to human health
D.contribute to settle an ongoing debate on antibiotics
[答案] D
[解析]主旨题。本文第1段概述了全文大意：关于饲养家禽家畜时限制使用抗生素的争论，丹麦己通过实践证明可以限制使用抗生素。由此可选D (解决一直以来围绕抗生素的争论)。选项A、B、C都是文中提到的部分内容，但不是主要论点，故排除。
82[2单选题]Over the last 50 years, many Western scientists have been concerned about the
consequences of .
A.giving antibiotics to farm animals
B.using antibiotics to treat human diseases
C.resistance to the use of antibiotics among farmers
D.using antibiotics to speed up weight gain in farm animals
[答案] D
[解析]细节题。第1段第1句，关键词for more than 50 years与over the last 50 years属于近义表达，microbiologists in the U.S. and Europe与Western scientists对应，第 1句的谓语与题干谓语部分也对应，宾语using antibiotics to fatten up farm animals中的fat up与speed up weight gain相同。故选D (他们关注使用抗生素让农场动物增肥的后果)。
83[2单选题]What can we leam from Paragraph 2?
A.Use of antibiotics can let bacteria change their genes.
B.Drug-resistant bacteria are typically killed by antibiotics.
C.Antibiotics in animals can enter human bodies as well.
D.Antibiotics are used to prevent the spread of illnesses.
[答案] A
[解析]推断题。第2段第2句提到，低剂量抗生素只能杀死一部分细菌，而无法杀死有耐药性的细菌，因此排除B。第3句说存活下来的携带抗药性基因突变的细菌，可以自我复制，并与其他携带抗药性的细菌交换基因(从而产生耐药菌种)。由此可见，使用抗生素会让细菌改变基因，故选A。第5句说到动物体内产生的耐药菌会转嫁给人类，而非动物体内的抗生素会进入人体，故排除C。选项D (抗生素用来防止疾病的扩散)在第2段并未提及，故也排除。
84[2单选题]The tone of the final sentence in Paragraph 2 is .
A.neutral
B. threatening
C. ironic
D. reassuring
[答案] C
[解析]语气题。第2段最后一句从字面上理解的意思是，再也没有比这个更好的保证抗药性传播的体系了。其实是在暗讽食物链是将动物体内产生的抗生素耐药性传递给人类的捷径，因此作者使用了讽刺的语气，故选C。
85[2单选题]We can infer from Paragraph 3 .
A.Denmark has stopped using any antibiotics in animals
B.low dose of antibiotics has little effect on human health
C.drug-resistant bacteria in animals can spread to humans
D.humans and farm animals have similar bacteria structure
[答案] C
[解析]推断题。第3段第1句说有数据表明在动物身上使用低剂量抗生素会同时增加动物体内和人体内抗药性细菌的数量。第2句引用约书亚的结论，通过追踪“发现人体内的耐药菌种与动物体内的耐药菌种是一致的”。可以推出答案为C (动物体内耐药细菌会转嫁给人类)。需注意的是match是“相同，一致”的意思，不同于similar “类似”的意思，考生易误选D。
86[2单选题]When the Danish authorities ordered farmers to cease giving antibiotics to their farm animals,_______.
A.the farmers refused to cooperate
B.animals took longer to put on weight
C.animal productivity quickly began to rise
D.young pigs gained less weight in their first year
[答案] D
[解析]推断题。第4段第1句提到家禽业转型顺利，但是猪的平均体重在第一年有所下降，故选D。注意B (动物需要更长时间增重)容易误选，这是对第4段第2句的过度解读。
87[2单选题]What does the word “offset” underlined in Paragraph 4 mean?
A.To serve as a beginning of.
B. To render ineffectively.
C. To set a limit on.
D. To compensate for.
[答案] D
[解析]语义题。offset词出现在第4段的第3句，句子主干为“经验是……”从句中的主语是现在分词短语(畜牧业的改善)，破折号之间具体说明了改善的方法，从句的谓语就是offsets,宾语核 心词是impact,整句意为畜牧业的改善抵消了限用抗生素之初的负面影响。故选D (补偿)。
88[2单选题]The Danish government’s decision in 1995 to limit the use of antibiotics by fanners_____.
A.has produced healthier chickens but less healthy pigs
B.has caused concern about long-term productivity problems
C.has failed to lead to a drop in antibiotic resistance among people D. has significantly improved the health of both humans and animals
[答案] C
[解析]推断题。从第4段可以看出限用抗生素后家禽转型顺利，家畜转型较慢，但仍然增强了家猪的免疫力和存活率，可见家猪也很健康，排除A。第4句丹麦产业报告说生产率比以前更高，但未提及对长期生产力的关注，故应排除B。第4段最后一句提到“关于丹麦人抗生素耐药性的报道喜忧参半，提醒我们没有速效药”，即暂时未能降低人群中的抗药性。故选C。
89[2单选题]The last paragraph tells us that .
A.several factors cause human drug-resistant infections
B.people worry about the use of antibiotics in animals
C.human beings are liable to be attacked by bacteria
D.drug-resistant infections bring illnesses to humans
[答案] A
[解析]细节题。第5段第1句直接告诉大家“家畜抗生素的使用方式并不是人类耐药感染的唯一原因”，故选A。注意D容易误选，耐药感染会使人们在使用抗生素时无效，增加治愈疾病的难度，而不是直接让人生病。
90[2单选题]The author believes that .
A.Denmark’s experience can be generalized
B.measures should be taken to reduce bacteria
C.antibiotics protection is essential to animals
D.limiting the use of antibiotics has technical proof
[答案] A
[解析]观点题。第5段第6句“丹麦的例子就证明了在农场减少抗生素的使用不会引发金融灾难。”因此选择答案A (丹麦的经验可以普及)。注意考生易误选D，其实是对第5段第5句的误读，该句说到的“技术问题可以解决”是说我们可以找到对抗耐药细菌的办法，容易让人想当然地认为抗生素的限用有技术支撑。
Farmers in many countries use antibiotics in two key ways: (1) at full strength to treat sick animals and (2) in low doses to fatten meat-producing livestock or to prevent veterinary illnesses. Although even the proper use of antibiotics can inadvertently lead to the spread of drug-resistant bacteria, the habit of using a low or “sub-therapeutic” dose is a formula for disaster: the treatment provides just enough antibiotic to kill some but not all bacteria. The germs that survive are typically those that happen to bear genetic mutations for resisting the antibiotic. They then reproduce and exchange genes with other microbial resisters. Because bacteria are found literally everywhere, resistant strains produced in animals eventually find their way into people as well. You could hardly design a better system for guaranteeing the spread of antibiotic resistance.
The data from multiple studies over the years support the conclusion that low doses of antibiotics in animals increase the number of drug-resistant microbes in both animals and people. As Joshua M. Scharfstein, a principal deputy commissioner at the Food and Drug Administration, put it, “You actually can trace the specific bacteria around and ... find that the resistant strains in humans match the resistant strains in the animals.”And this science is what led Denmark to stop sub-therapeutic dosing of chickens，pigs and other farm animals.
Although the transition unfolded smoothly in the poultry industry, the average weight of pigs fell in the first year. But after Danish farmers started leaving piglets together with
their mothers a few weeks longer to bolster their immune systems naturally, the animals’ weights jumped back up, and the number of pigs per litter increased as well. The lesson is that improving animal husbandry making sure that stalls and cages are properly cleaned and giving animals more room or time to mature offsets the initial negative impact of limiting antibiotic use. Today Danish industry reports that productivity is higher than before. Meanwhile, reports of antibiotic resistance in Danish people are mixed, which shows as if we needed reminding that there are no quick fixes.
Of course, the way veterinary antibiotics are used is not the only cause of human drug- resistant infections. Careless use of the drugs in people also contributes to the problem. But agricultural use is still a major contributing factor. Every day brings new evidence that we are in danger of losing effective antibiotic protection against many of the most dangerous bacteria that cause human illness. The technical issues are solvable. Denmark’s example proves that it is possible to cut antibiotic use on farms without triggering financial disaster. In fact, it might provide a competitive advantage. Stronger measures to deprive drug-resistant bacteria of their agricultural breeding grounds simply make scientific，economic and common sense.
81[2单选题]The purpose of this article is to .
A.report recent advances in the use of antibiotics
B.provide empirical evidence for microbiologists
C.describe threats of antibiotics to human health
D.contribute to settle an ongoing debate on antibiotics
[答案] D
[解析]主旨题。本文第1段概述了全文大意：关于饲养家禽家畜时限制使用抗生素的争论，丹麦己通过实践证明可以限制使用抗生素。由此可选D (解决一直以来围绕抗生素的争论)。选项A、B、C都是文中提到的部分内容，但不是主要论点，故排除。
82[2单选题]Over the last 50 years, many Western scientists have been concerned about the
consequences of .
A.giving antibiotics to farm animals
B.using antibiotics to treat human diseases
C.resistance to the use of antibiotics among farmers
D.using antibiotics to speed up weight gain in farm animals
[答案] D
[解析]细节题。第1段第1句，关键词for more than 50 years与over the last 50 years属于近义表达，microbiologists in the U.S. and Europe与Western scientists对应，第 1句的谓语与题干谓语部分也对应，宾语using antibiotics to fatten up farm animals中的fat up与speed up weight gain相同。故选D (他们关注使用抗生素让农场动物增肥的后果)。
83[2单选题]What can we leam from Paragraph 2?
A.Use of antibiotics can let bacteria change their genes.
B.Drug-resistant bacteria are typically killed by antibiotics.
C.Antibiotics in animals can enter human bodies as well.
D.Antibiotics are used to prevent the spread of illnesses.
[答案] A
[解析]推断题。第2段第2句提到，低剂量抗生素只能杀死一部分细菌，而无法杀死有耐药性的细菌，因此排除B。第3句说存活下来的携带抗药性基因突变的细菌，可以自我复制，并与其他携带抗药性的细菌交换基因(从而产生耐药菌种)。由此可见，使用抗生素会让细菌改变基因，故选A。第5句说到动物体内产生的耐药菌会转嫁给人类，而非动物体内的抗生素会进入人体，故排除C。选项D (抗生素用来防止疾病的扩散)在第2段并未提及，故也排除。
84[2单选题]The tone of the final sentence in Paragraph 2 is .
A.neutral
B. threatening
C. ironic
D. reassuring
[答案] C
[解析]语气题。第2段最后一句从字面上理解的意思是，再也没有比这个更好的保证抗药性传播的体系了。其实是在暗讽食物链是将动物体内产生的抗生素耐药性传递给人类的捷径，因此作者使用了讽刺的语气，故选C。
85[2单选题]We can infer from Paragraph 3 .
A.Denmark has stopped using any antibiotics in animals
B.low dose of antibiotics has little effect on human health
C.drug-resistant bacteria in animals can spread to humans
D.humans and farm animals have similar bacteria structure
[答案] C
[解析]推断题。第3段第1句说有数据表明在动物身上使用低剂量抗生素会同时增加动物体内和人体内抗药性细菌的数量。第2句引用约书亚的结论，通过追踪“发现人体内的耐药菌种与动物体内的耐药菌种是一致的”。可以推出答案为C (动物体内耐药细菌会转嫁给人类)。需注意的是match是“相同，一致”的意思，不同于similar “类似”的意思，考生易误选D。
86[2单选题]When the Danish authorities ordered farmers to cease giving antibiotics to their farm animals,_______.
A.the farmers refused to cooperate
B.animals took longer to put on weight
C.animal productivity quickly began to rise
D.young pigs gained less weight in their first year
[答案] D
[解析]推断题。第4段第1句提到家禽业转型顺利，但是猪的平均体重在第一年有所下降，故选D。注意B (动物需要更长时间增重)容易误选，这是对第4段第2句的过度解读。
87[2单选题]What does the word “offset” underlined in Paragraph 4 mean?
A.To serve as a beginning of.
B. To render ineffectively.
C. To set a limit on.
D. To compensate for.
[答案] D
[解析]语义题。offset词出现在第4段的第3句，句子主干为“经验是……”从句中的主语是现在分词短语(畜牧业的改善)，破折号之间具体说明了改善的方法，从句的谓语就是offsets,宾语核 心词是impact,整句意为畜牧业的改善抵消了限用抗生素之初的负面影响。故选D (补偿)。
88[2单选题]The Danish government’s decision in 1995 to limit the use of antibiotics by fanners_____.
A.has produced healthier chickens but less healthy pigs
B.has caused concern about long-term productivity problems
C.has failed to lead to a drop in antibiotic resistance among people D. has significantly improved the health of both humans and animals
[答案] C
[解析]推断题。从第4段可以看出限用抗生素后家禽转型顺利，家畜转型较慢，但仍然增强了家猪的免疫力和存活率，可见家猪也很健康，排除A。第4句丹麦产业报告说生产率比以前更高，但未提及对长期生产力的关注，故应排除B。第4段最后一句提到“关于丹麦人抗生素耐药性的报道喜忧参半，提醒我们没有速效药”，即暂时未能降低人群中的抗药性。故选C。
89[2单选题]The last paragraph tells us that .
A.several factors cause human drug-resistant infections
B.people worry about the use of antibiotics in animals
C.human beings are liable to be attacked by bacteria
D.drug-resistant infections bring illnesses to humans
[答案] A
[解析]细节题。第5段第1句直接告诉大家“家畜抗生素的使用方式并不是人类耐药感染的唯一原因”，故选A。注意D容易误选，耐药感染会使人们在使用抗生素时无效，增加治愈疾病的难度，而不是直接让人生病。
90[2单选题]The author believes that .
A.Denmark’s experience can be generalized
B.measures should be taken to reduce bacteria
C.antibiotics protection is essential to animals
D.limiting the use of antibiotics has technical proof
[答案] A
[解析]观点题。第5段第6句“丹麦的例子就证明了在农场减少抗生素的使用不会引发金融灾难。”因此选择答案A (丹麦的经验可以普及)。注意考生易误选D，其实是对第5段第5句的误读，该句说到的“技术问题可以解决”是说我们可以找到对抗耐药细菌的办法，容易让人想当然地认为抗生素的限用有技术支撑。
相关题库
| 题库产品名称 | 试题数量 | 优惠价 | 免费体验 | 购买 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022年翻译二级《英语笔译综合能力》考试题库 | 1869题 | ￥98.00 | 免费体检 | 立即购买 |
你可能感兴趣的试题
- · After having been trapped underneath the mine for three查看答案
- · During Japan’s revolution in the 19th century,the Japanese denounced their own查看答案
- · I have redone the homework. Please review it again and return it back how I can fiirther improve it.查看答案
- · Public opinion is fickle and more so in a nation like ours where illiteracy 查看答案
- · Public opinion is fickle and more so in a nation like ours where illiteracy 查看答案
微信扫码关注焚题库
-
历年真题
历年考试真题试卷，真实检验
-
章节练习
按章节做题，系统练习不遗漏
-
考前试卷
考前2套试卷，助力抢分
-
模拟试题
海量考试试卷及答案，分数评估