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-minute 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 solved. 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.

In 1950, the U.S. spent ＄12.7 billion on health care. In 2002, the cost will be ＄1，540 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 to die 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 C. 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.

1. What is implied in the first sentence?
[A] Americans are better prepared for death than other people.
[B] Americans enjoy a higher life quality than ever before.
[C] Americans are over-confident of their medical technology.
[D] Americans take a vain pride in their long life expectancy.

2. The author uses the example of cancer patients to show that
[A] medical resources are often wasted.
[B] doctors are helpless against fatal diseases.
[C] some treatments are too aggressive.
[D] medical costs are becoming unaffordable.

3. The author’s attitude to ward Richard Lamm’s remark is one of
[A] strong disapproval.
[B] reserved consent.
[C] slight contempt.
[D] enthusiastic support.

4. In contras to the U.S. ,Japan and Sweden are funding their medical care
[A] more flexibly.
[B] more extravagantly.
[C] more cautiously.
[D] more reasonably.

5. 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.

1. What is implied in the first sentence? 第一句话暗示什么？[A] Americans are better prepared for death than other people. 美国人对于死亡的准备超过其他人。
[B] Americans enjoy a higher life quality than ever before. 美国人比先前享受更高的生活质量。
[C] Americans are over-confident of their medical technology. 　美国人对他们的医学技术过于自信。
[D] Americans take a vain pride in their long life expectancy. 美国人对于他们的长寿有一种虚荣的自豪感。
【答案】 C
【考点】 推断题。
【分析】 该题问的是篇首第一句的含义。这句话说的是“据说，在英国死亡是迫在眉睫的，在加拿大死亡是不可避免的，在加利福尼亚死亡是可以选择的。”从这句话中，我们可以看出美国人自认为美国拥有先进医疗技术，死亡是可以控制的。所以[C]项是正确的。[A]项毫无道理，因为从文章中可以看出美国人还是害怕死亡的。[B]项是将美国人的现状与过去相比，与本句无关。[D]项说的是美国人对于他们的长寿有一种虚荣的自豪感，也是不正确的，因为分析第一段就发现，作者谈论的，或者说作者自己进行解释的是美国人对医疗技术的自信，所以[D]不正确。

　2. The author uses the example of cancer patients to show that 作者用癌症病人的例子来说明
[A] medical resources are often wasted. 医疗资源常常被浪费。
[B] doctors are helpless against fatal diseases. 医生对于致命的疾病也无计可施。
[C] some treatments are too aggressive. 有一些治疗过去大胆。
[D] medical costs are becoming unaffordable. 医疗费用越来越支付不起。
【答案】 A
【考点】 作者意图题。
【分析】 在第二段中，作者用晚期癌症患者为例，指出医生们往往采取一些激进的缺乏科学根据的治疗方法。结合文章来看，我们发现它的作用是为了说明人们通常浪费了医疗资源，过度地投入在已经没有用处的的事情上。因此我们可以推断出作者的意图，即不应该浪费医疗资源在那些无可救药的人身上。[B]、[C]选项都不能表达作者意图。文中提及第三方支付人支付很多费用，因此[D]项内容是错误的。

3. The author’s attitude toward Richard Lamm’s remark is one of 作者对待Richard Lamm所说的话的态度是
[A] strong disapproval. 强烈反对。
[B] reserved consent. 有保留的赞同。
[C] slight contempt. 略有蔑视。
[D] enthusiastic support. 热烈支持。
【答案】 B
【考点】 作者态度题。
【分析】 通过关键词“Lamm”可以定位到第三段“Lamm”所说的话，“老年人有义务死亡，以免挡住道路”。在第四段，作者对于“Lamm”的观点发表了看法，“I would not go that far.”(我不会走那么远。)接着，作者举出了许多例子，说明老年人可以活得很有价值。这很容易让人认为作者是反对“Lamm”的观点的。但是接下来的一段中，作者从另外一个角度发表了自己的看法。作者说，“最昂贵和最引人注目的医疗手段未必就是高效率的和无疼痛的”。作者举例日本和瑞士，老年医疗开支不高，但是寿命更长，更加健康。作者说“我们在那些无药可救的疾病方面，也许投入过大，但是在那些事关人民生活质量的研究上投入过低”。所以选[B]，作者对“Lamm”的观点基本同意，但有所保留。

4. In contrast to the U.S., Japan and Sweden are funding their medical care 与美国相比，日本和瑞典对医疗的资金投入的方式
[A] more flexibly. 更灵活。 [B] more extravagantly. 更奢侈。
[C] more cautiously. 更谨慎。 [D] more reasonably. 更合理。
【答案】 D
【考点】 推断题。
【分析】 定位到最后一段，作者举例说明了“虽然日本和瑞典在医疗保健上的花费比美国少，但寿命却比美国人长，身体也更健康”。接着作者提到“我们也许在那些无药可救的疾病方面，也许投入过大，但是在那些事关人民生活的研究上投入过低”。因此我们可以推断出，日本和瑞典在医疗保健上的投资比美国“更加合理”，因此选择[D]项，其它选项不能表达出这个意思。

5. The text intends to express the idea that 本文试图表达的观点是
[A] medicine will further prolong people’s lives. 　医学将进一步延长人们的生命。
[B] life beyond a certain limit is not worth living. 超过了一定的(年龄)限度，生命就不值得延续。
[C] death should be accepted as a fact of life. 死亡应该被当成一种生命的事实来接受。
[D] excessive demands increase the cost of health care. 过多的要求增加了医疗的成本。
【答案】 C
【考点】 文章主旨题。
【分析】 本题要求考生判断文章主旨。这个时候需要通篇浏览。文章第一段说，“即使有一个伟大的医疗卫生体系，死亡也无法战胜，但是如果我们不能面对这样一个事实，就会影响到我们国家的伟大”。第二段又说，“死亡是正常的，但是我们却试图使用一切可能的方法来延缓自己的生命”。第三段作者提出“医疗资源不应该用在一些已经没有挽救意义的人身上”。第四段提到作者承认老年生活可能也是很有价值的。但是第五段作者提出“日本人”和“瑞典人”的例子，指出“生活的质量，寿命的长短，靠的不仅仅是医疗，还有其它办法”。既然如此，不如将有限的资源用于需要的地方上去。因此文章的中心思想应该是[C]选项。[A]项与作者观点相反。[B]项也不正确，因为作者已经提到老年人的晚年也同样可以很有价值，但是只是作者不同意将过多的医疗资源浪费在没有价值地延缓生命上。[D]项是事实，但却不是文章主要表达的思想。