久久精品视频亚洲_黄色成人在线免费_成人免费在线视频网址_91精品国产沙发_日韩国产一区三区_精品久久久av_美女扒开尿口让男人操亚洲视频网站_国产精品成人免费视频_国产成人精品久久久_久久精品国产亚洲_欧美国产日韩xxxxx_91在线免费看网站_**欧美日韩vr在线_日韩欧美一区二区在线_国产一区二区三区视频免费_中文字幕一区二区三区电影

Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more than a decade, a growing band of scientists and journalists has pointed to studies that seem to link exposure to electromagnetic fields with increased risk of leukemia and other malignancies. The implications are unsettling, to say the least, since everyone comes into contact with such fields, which are generated by everything electrical, from power lines and antennas to personal computers and micro-wave ovens. Because evidence on the subject is inconclusive and often contradictory,it has been hard to decide whether concern about the health effects of electricity is legitimate—or the worst kind of paranoia.　　Now the alarmists have gained some qualified support from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the executive summary of a new scientific review, released in draft form late last week, the EPA has put forward what amounts to the most serious government warning to date. The agency tentatively concludes that scientific evidence"suggests a casual link"between extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields—those having very long wave-lengths—and leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancer, While the report falls short of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens, it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as "a possible, but not proven, cause of cancer in humans."

　　The report is no reason to panic—or even to lost sleep. If there is a cancer risk, it is a small one. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debate within the Bush Administration, and the EPA released it over strong objections from the Pentagon and the White House. But now no one can deny that the issue must be taken seriously and that much more research is needed.

　　At the heart of the debate is a simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, tit generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects, For many years, scientists dismissed any suggestion that such forces might be harmful, primarily because they are so extraordinarily weak. The ELF magnetic field generated by a video terminal measures only a few milligauss, or about one-hundredth the strength of the earth's own magnetic field, The electric fields surrounding a power line can be as high as 10 kilovolts per meter, but the corresponding field induced in human cells will be only about 1 millivolt per meter. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.

　　How could such minuscule forces pose a health danger? The consensus used to be that they could not, and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation,like X-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body. Such "ionizing" radiations have been clearly linked to increased cancer risks and there are regulations to control emissions.

　　But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, do notprove cause and effect. Though there is a body of laboratory work showing that exposure toELF fields can have biological effects on animal tissues, a mechanism by which those effectscould lead to cancerous growths has never been found.

　　The Pentagon is for from persuaded. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, AirForce scientists charge its authors with having "biased the entire document" toward proving alink. "Our reviewers are convinced that there is no suggestion that (electromagnetic fields)present in the environment induce or promote cancer," the Air Force concludes. " It isastonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report." Then Pentagon's concernis understandable. There is hardly a unit of the modern military that does not depend on theheavy use of some kind of electronic equipment, from huge ground-based radar towers to thedefense systems built into every warship and plane.

　　1. The main idea of this passage is

　　[A]. studies on the cause of cancer

　　[B]. controversial view-points in the cause of cancer

　　[C]. the relationship between electricity and cancer.

　　[D]. different ideas about the effect of electricity on caner.

　　2. The view-point of the EPA is

　　[A]. there is casual link between electricity and cancer.

　　[B]. electricity really affects cancer.

　　[C]. controversial.

　　[D].low frequency electromagnetic field is a possible cause of cancer

　　3. Why did the Pentagon and Whit House object to the release of the report? Because

　　[A]. it may stir a great deal of debate among the Bush Administration.

　　[B]. every unit of the modern military has depended on the heavy use of some kind ofelectronic equipment.

　　[C]. the Pentagon's concern was understandable.

　　[D]. they had different arguments.

　　4. It can be inferred from physical phenomenon

　　[A]. the force of the electromagnetic field is too weak to be harmful.

　　[B]. the force of the electromagnetic field is weaker than the electric field that the cellsgenerate.

　　[C]. electromagnetic field may affect health.

　　[D]. only more powerful radiation can knock electron out of human body.

　　5. What do you think ordinary citizens may do after reading the different arguments?

　　[A].They are indifferent. [B]. They are worried very much.

　　[C]. The may exercise prudent avoidance. [C]. They are shocked.

　　Vocabulary

　　1. preposterous 反常的，十分荒謬的，乖戾的

　　2. leukemia 白血病

　　3. malignancy 惡性腫瘤

　　4. legitimate 合法的，合理的

　　5. paranoia 偏執狂，妄想狂。這里指：無根據的擔心。

　　6. lymphoma 淋巴瘤

　　7. carcinogen 致癌物

　　8. minuscule 很小的，很不重要

　　9. consensus 輿論

　　10. wallop 亂竄，猛沖，沖擊力

　　11. epidemiological 流行病學的

　　12. blistering 羅嗦的，胡扯的

　　13. critique 評論，批評

　　14. imprimatur 出版許可(官方審查后的)，批準

難句譯注　　

1. Because evidence on the subject isinconclusive and often contradictory, it has beenhard to decide whether concern about the healtheffects of electricity is legitimate—or the worst kindof paranoia.

　　[參考譯文] 由于這問題的證據還不是結論性的，而且常常是矛盾的，所以就難以斷定有關電力對身體的影響的顧慮是合乎情理，還是毫無根據的懷疑。

　　2. EPA——U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 美國環境保護署

　　3. While the report falls short (缺乏，不夠) of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens,it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as "a possible, but not proven, cause ofcancer in humans."

　　[參考譯文] 雖然報告沒有把極低頻磁場歸類為可能致癌物，但它確實指出通常60赫茲的磁場是“一種雖尚未證實，但可能導致人患癌癥的因素。”

　　4. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debatewithin the Bush Administration, and the EPA released it over strong objections from thePentagon and the White House.

　　[參考譯文] 證據爭議性仍然很大，所以報告草案在布什政府內引起巨大的爭辯，而環保署無視無角大樓和白宮的強烈反對，公布了這份報告。

　　5. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.

　　[參考譯文] 這遠比細胞所產生的電磁場低的多。

　　6. …and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation, likeX-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up thehuman body.

　　[參考譯文]　而且幾十年來，科學家專注于更為強大的輻射類別，如X光射線，其聚合的沖擊力足以把電子從組成人體的分子中撞出來。

　　7. But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, donot prove cause and effect.

　　[參考譯文] 可是流行病學的研究發現，幾組資料在數據方面有所關聯，卻沒有證實其因果關系。

　　8. a body of laboratory work 一批研究成果。

　　9. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, Air Force scientists charge its authorswith having "biased the entire document" toward proving a link.

　　[參考譯文] 在長達33頁的對環保署文件的十分尖銳的批評中，空軍方面的科學家指責，作者歪曲整個文件以證明癌癥和電磁場之間的關聯。

　　10. It is astonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report.

　　[參考譯文] 令人驚訝的是環保署竟然批準許可這份報告的出籠。

　　寫作方法與文章大意

　　文章以問答的方式，對比的寫作方法，寫出了圍繞電力是否影響健康——是否致癌因素的兩種觀點，及其觀點的依據。一種是美國環境保護署為代表的：極低頻磁場是一種可能但還未被證實的致癌因素，而且無視白宮和五角大樓反對，公布了這份報告。理由是科學證據提出了兩者之間的關聯偶然性。另一種以空軍中科學家為主的觀點：電磁場不會誘發或觸發癌癥，而且以歪曲整個文件來證明兩者之關系，批評了環保署。其理由人人皆知。因軍隊中任一單位都有點——從地面雷達到艦艇飛機防衛系統。

　　答案詳解：

　　1. D 電力對癌癥影響的不同觀點。文章一開始就提出了“電會致癌嗎?”這個問題。十多年來，一大批科學家和新聞界人士都指出：研究結果似乎表示：接觸電磁場可能會增加患白血病和其他惡性腫瘤的危險性。所以說到目前為止還難以確定電力對健康的影響究竟是理性的，還是杞人憂天。見難句注釋1。第二段公布了環保署的報告，見難句注釋3。第三段說明：即使有致癌危險也是極微的。但應予以認真對待，進行更多的研究。而第七段中空軍方面的科學家還沒有被說服(見難句注釋9)，明確提出，我們的評論員認為沒有跡象說明環境中存在的電力會誘發或促發癌癥。A. 對致癌因素的研究。 B. 致癌原因方面有爭議的觀點，這兩項根本部隊，和文內電力毫無關系。C. 電力和癌癥的關系，文中涉及的是電力究竟會不會致癌的兩種觀點，而不是兩者之關系。

　　2. A. 電和致癌有一定難以確定的關系。答案在第二段第三句，環保署目前的結論是據科學證據指出極低頻電磁場——具有長波的電磁場——和白血病，淋巴瘤及腦癌之間有著難以確定的聯系，見難句注釋3。A. 電確實致癌，不對。 C. 有爭議的。說的不夠清楚，爭議什么。 D. 低頻磁場是一個可能致癌因素。這只是論點的一面。

　　3. B. 現代軍事的任何部門都一直依賴于應用大量應用電子設備。五角大樓和白宮所以反對環保署公布報告之理由就在此。空軍方面的專家所以說環保署方面的報告“歪曲了整個文件以證明兩者之間的關系”也在此。見難句注釋4。所以文內說“角大樓的關注是可以理解的。”A. 報告會在布什政府內引起大規模的辯論，這是結果。 C. 五角大樓的關注是可以理解的，這不是原因。 D. 他們有不同的觀點。

　　4. 磁場力太弱不會產生有害作用。答案在第四段第二，三句，當電流通過電纜，產生磁場，對周圍物體產生(影響)力。許多年來，科學家把任何有關“這些力可能有害的想法”置于一邊(不予考慮)，主要是因為它們(所產生的力)非常弱。B. 磁場力比細胞產生的電磁場弱。只是明確指出的事實。 C. 磁場力對人的健康有害。不對。 D. 只有更強的輻射才能把人體中的電子擊出來。不對。

5. C. 他們會采取謹慎小心避開電器的途徑。因為他們不可能象A項那樣漠不關心。這種問題直接影響人的生命。B. 他們非常擔憂。 D. 他們感到震驚，這兩項都不可能，因為還在爭議中，唯一的途徑是盡量避開和電器接觸。