[A] changing [I] discipline

　　[B] secure [J] fit

　　[C] longer [K] opting

　　[D] kindergarten [L] school

　　[E] higher [M] valuable

　　[F] lifetime [N] heavily

　　[G] deepen [O] further

　　[H] largely

　　Section B

　　Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked [A], [B], [C] and [D]. You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the center.

　　Passage One

　　Questions 57 to 61 are based on the following passage.

　　The Food and Drug Administration said on Wednesday that it is trying to track down as many as 386 piglets that may have been genetically engineered and wrongfully sold into the U.S. food supply.

　　The focus of the FDA investigation is on pigs raised by researchers at the University of Illinois in Urbana Champaign. They engineered the animals with two genes: one is a cow gene that increases milk production in the sow; the other, a synthetic gene, makes the milk easier for piglets to digest. The goal was to raise bigger pigs faster.

　　There has been no evidence that either genetically altered plants or animals actually trigger human illness, but critics warn that potential side effects remain unknown. University officials say their tests showed the piglets were not born with the altered genes, but FDA rules require even the offspring of genetically engineered animals to be destroyed so they won't get into the food supply.

　　The FDA, in a quickly arranged news conference on Wednesday prompted by inquiries by USA TODAY, said the University of Illinois would face possible sanctions and fines for selling the piglets to a livestock broker, who in turn sold them to processing plants.

　　Both the FDA and the university say the pigs that entered the market do not pose a risk to consumers. But the investigation follows action by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in December to fine a Texas company that contaminated 500,000 bushels of soybeans with corn that had been genetically altered to produce a vaccine for pigs.

　　Critics see such cases as evidence of the need for more government oversight of a burgeoning(新興的)area of scientific research. "This is a small incident, but it's incidents like this that could destroy consumer confidence and export confidence," says Stephanie Childs of the Grocery Manufacturers of America. "We already have Europe shaky on biotech. The countries to which we export are going to look at this."

　　The University of Illinois says it tested the DNA of every piglet eight times to make sure that the animal hadn't inherited the genetic engineering of its mother. Those piglets that did were put back into the study. Those that didn't were sold to the pig broker. "Any pig that was tested negative for the genes since 1999 has been sent off to market," says Charles Zukoski, vice chancellor for research.

　　But FDA deputy commissioner Lester Crawford says that under the terms of the university's agreement with the FDA, the researchers were forbidden to remove the piglets without FDA approval. "The University of Illinois failed to check with FDA to see whether or not the animals could be sold on the open market. And they were not to be used under any circumstance for food."

　　The FDA is responsible for regulating and overseeing transgenic animals because such genetic manipulation is considered an unapproved animal drug.

　　57. The 386 piglets wrongfully sold into food supply are from ________.

　　[A] Europe [B] an American research organization

　　[C] a meat processing plant [D] an animal farm

　　58. The purpose of the transgenic engineering research is to ________.

　　[A] get pigs of larger size in a shorter time

　　[B] make sows produce more milk

　　[C] make cows produce more milk

　　[D] make pigs grow more lean meat

　　59. The 4th paragraph shows that the University of Illinois ________.

　　[A] was criticized by the FDA

　　[B] is in great trouble

　　[C] is required by the FDA to call back the sold piglets

　　[D] may have to pay the penalty

　　60. The FDA declares that the wrongfully sold piglets ________.

　　[A] may have side effects on consumers [B] may be harmful to consumers

　　[C] are safe to consumers [D] may cause human illness

　　61. It can be inferred from this passage that ________.

　　[A] all the offspring have their mothers' genetic engineering

　　[B] part of the offspring have their mothers' genetic engineering

　　[C] none of the offspring have their mothers' genetic engineering

　　[D] half of the offspring have their mothers' genetic engineering

　　Passage Two

　　Questions 62 to 66 are based on the following passage.

　　A class action lawsuit has been filed against a prominent Toronto doctor by patients who allege he injected a banned substance into their faces for cosmetic purposes. The doctor had already been investigated for more than three years for using the liquid silicone, a product not authorized for use in Canada.

　　Some patients say they are now suffering health problems and think the liquid silicone may be to blame. One of those patients is Anna Barbiero. She says her Toronto dermatologist told her he was using liquid silicone to smooth out wrinkles. what she says he didn't tell her is that it isn't approved for use in Canada. "I didn't know what liquid silicone was and he just called it 'liquid gold'," Barbiero remembers. After her last treatment, Anna discovered Dr. Sheldon Pollack had been ordered to stop using the silicone two years earlier by Health Canada. Experts say silicone can migrate through the body, and cause inflammation and deformities.

　　"My upper lip is always numb and it burns," Barbiero says. Barbiero is spearheading(帶頭)a lawsuit against the doctor, who her lawyer thinks might involve up to 100 patients injected with the same material. "The fact, a physician of his stature would use an unauthorized product on a patient because he thought it was okay, is really very disturbing," says lawyer Douglas Elliott.

　　Ontario's College of Physicians and Surgeons is also investigating Dr. Pollack to see if, in fact, he continued to use the silicone after agreeing to stop and whether he wrote in patient records that he used another legal product when he used silicone. However, in a letter to the College, Dr. Pollack wrote that he had always told patients that the silicone was not approved for sale in Canada, and had warned them of the risks. And in Barbiero's case, "...at the time of her first visit, prior to her ever receiving IGLS treatment, I specifically informed her that the material was not approved for sale in Canada by the Health Protection Branch and that I did receive the material from outside the country ...I would like to emphasize that, as is evident on Ms. Barbiero's chart, I drew a specific diagram on the chart which I carefully discussed with and explained to Ms. Barbiero as I did with every other patient to explain the nature and likelihood of complications and the reasons and consequences of those possible complications."

　　Dr. Pollack declined to speak to CTV News, or to have his lawyer discuss the case. None of the allegations have been proven in court. But the case raises questions about the ability of governing bodies to monitor doctors. "There's a larger message and that is: buyer beware," says Nancy Neilsen of Cosmetic Surgery Canada, "It's incumbent(負有義務的)on consumers to do their research."