2003年Text 4
It is said that in England death is pressing, in Canada inevitable and in California optional Small wonder. Americans' life expectancy has nearly doubled over the past century. Failing hips can be replaced, clinical depression controlled, cataracts removed in a 30-minuts surgical procedure. Such advances offer the aging population a quality of life that was unimaginable when I entered medicine 50 years ago. But not even a great health-care system can cure death-and our failure to confront that reality now threatens this greatness of ours.
Death is normal; we are genetically programmed to disintegrate and perish, even under ideal conditions. We all understand that at some level, yet as medical consumers we treat death as a problem to be solve[D] Shielded by third-party payers from the cost of our care, we demand everything that can possibly be done for us, even if it's useless. The most obvious example is late-stage cancer care. Physicians-frustrated by their inability to cure the disease and fearing loss of hope in the patient-too often offer aggressive treatment far beyond what is scientifically justified.
In1950, the U.S. spent .7 billion on health care. In 2002, the cost will be billion. Anyone can see this trend is unsustainable. Yet few seem willing to try to reverse it. Some scholars conclude that a government with finite resources should simply stop paying for medical care that sustains life beyond a certain age-----say 83 or so. Former Colorado governor Richard Lamm has been quoted as saying that the old and infirm "have a duty todie and get out of the way", so that younger, healthier people can realize their potential.
I would not go that far. Energetic people now routinely work through their 60s and beyond, and remain dazzlingly productive. At 78, Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone jokingly claims to be 53.Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is in her 70s, and former Surgeon General Everett Koop chairs an Internet start-up in his 80s.These leaders are living proof that prevention works and that we can manage the health problems that come naturally with age. As a mere 68-year-old, I wish to age as productively as they have.
Yet there are limits to what a society can spend in this pursuit. Ask a physician, I know the most costly and dramatic measures may be ineffective and painful. I also know that people in Japan and Sweden, countries that spend far less on medical care, have achieved longer, healthier lives than we have. As a nation, we may be overfunding the quest for unlikely cures while underfunding research on humbler therapies that could improve people's lives.
60. The text intends to express the idea that
[A] medicine will further prolong people's lives.
[B] life beyond a certain limit is not worth living.
[C] death should be accepted as a fact of life.
[D] excessive demands increase the cost of health care
[答案] C
[解題思路]
文章第二段的前兩句話都直接指出"Death is normal; we are genetically programmed to disintegrate and perish, even under ideal conditions. We all understand that at some level, yet as medical consumers we treat death as a problem to be solved"（死亡是正常的；我們的基因決定我們即使在最理想的環(huán)境里也會(huì)解體和滅亡。我們所有人在某種程度上都懂得這一點(diǎn)，但是作為醫(yī)療消費(fèi)者，我們常常將死亡視為一個(gè)可以解決的問(wèn)題）。全文從頭至尾也在傳遞這樣的信息，即我們應(yīng)該努力提高自己的健康狀況和生活質(zhì)量，而不要無(wú)謂地把精力都放在避免死亡上。相反，我們應(yīng)該正視并接受死亡這一事實(shí)，因此C為正確答案。A選項(xiàng)的觀點(diǎn)是作者所反對(duì)的，B選項(xiàng)的表述過(guò)于極端，而D選項(xiàng)只是文章中的一個(gè)小細(xì)節(jié)，并不代表了中心思想。
[題目譯文]
本文意在表達(dá)的觀點(diǎn)是 。
[A] 醫(yī)學(xué)將延長(zhǎng)人們的壽命
[B] 生命超過(guò)一定的限度就不值得繼續(xù)活下去
[C] 死亡應(yīng)該作為生命的一種事實(shí)而被接受
[D] 過(guò)分的要求增加了保健方面的支出
