A
An international protest this week aims to demonstrate the truth about homeopathy-that there’s literally nothing in it, says Martin Robbins AT 10.23am on 30 January, more than 300 activists in the UK, Canada, Australia and the US will take part in a mass homeopathic “overdose”. Skeptics will publicly swallow an entire bottle of homeopathic pills to demonstrate to the public that homeopathic remedies, the product of a scientifically unfounded 18th-centuryritual, are simply sugar pills. Many of the skeptics will swallow 84 pills of arsenicum album, a homeopathic remedy based on arsenic which is used to treat a range of symptoms, including food poisoning and insomnia. The aim of the “10:23” campaign, led by the Merseyside Skeptics Society, based in Liverpool, UK, is to raise public awareness of just exactly what homeopathy is, and to put pressure on the UK’s leading pharmacist, Boots, to remove theremedies from sale. The campaign is called 10:23in honor of the Avogadroconstant (approximately 6 x 1023, the number of atoms or molecules in onemole of a substance), of which more later.
B
That such a protest is even necessary in 2010 is remarkable, but somehow the homeopathic industry has not only survived into the 21st century, but prospered. In the UK alone more than £40 million is spent annually on homeopathic treatments, with £4 million of this being sucked from the National Health Service budget. Yet the basis for homeopathy defies the laws of physics, and high-quality clinical trials have never been able to demonstrate that it works beyond the placebo effect.
C
The discipline is based on three “laws”; the law of similars, the law of infinite simals and the law of succession. The law of similars states that something which causes your symptoms will cure your symptoms, so that, for example, as caffeine keeps you awake, it can also be a cure for insomnia. Of course, that makes little sense, since drinking caffeine, well, keeps you awake. Next is the law of infinitesimals, which claims that diluting a substance makes it more potent. Homeopaths start by diluting one volume of their remedy arsenic oxide, in the case of arsenicumalbum-in 99 volumes of distilled water oralcohol to create a “centesimal”. They then dilute one volume of the centesimal in 99volumes of water or alcohol, and so on, up to 30 times. Application of Avogadro’s constant tells you that a dose of such a“30C” recipe is vanishingly unlikely to
contain even a single molecule of the active ingredient. The third pillar of homeopathy is the law of succession. This states-and I’m not making this up-that by tapping the liquid in a special way during the dilution process, a memory of the active ingredient is somehow imprinted on it. This explains how water is able to carry a memory of arsenic oxide, but apparently not of the contents of your local sewer network.
D
The final preparation is generally dropped onto a sugar pill which the patient swallows. Homeopaths claim that the application of these three laws results in a remedy that, even though it contains not a single molecule of the original T-T-J.— ingredient, somehow carries an “energy signature” of it that nobody can measure or detect. Unsurprisingly, when tested under rigorous scientific conditions, in randomized, controlled and double blind trials, homeopathic remedies have shown to be no better than a placebo. Of course, the placebo effect is quite powerful, but it’s a bit like justifying building a car without any wheels on the basis that you can still enjoy the comfy leather seats and play with the gear shift.
E
Even some retailers who sell the treatments have admitted there is no evidence that they work. In November, Paul Bennett, the super intendent pharmacist at Boots, appeared before the UK parliament’s Commons Science and Technology Committee’s “evidence check” on homeopathy. He was questioned by Member of Parliament Phil Willis, who asked: “Do they work beyond the placebo effect?” I have no evidence before me to suggest that they are efficacious,” Bennett replied. He defended Boots’s decision to sell homeopathic remedies on the grounds of consumer choice. “A large number of our consumers actually do believe they are efficacious, but they are licensed medicinal products and, therefore, we believe it is right to make the mavailable,” he said.
F
You might agree. You might also argue that homeopathy is harmless: if people want to part with their money for sugar pills and nobody is breaking the law, why not let them? To some extent that’s true-there’s only so much damage you can do with sugar pills short of feeding them to a diabetic or dropping a large crate of them on someone’s head. However, we believe there is a risk in perpetuating the notion that homeopathy is equivalent to modern medicine. People
may delay seeking appropriate treatment for themselves or their children.
G
We accept that we are unlikely to convince the true believers. Homeopathy has many ways to sidestep awkward questions, such as rejecting the validity of randomized controlled trials, or claiming that homeopathic remedies only work if you have symptoms of the malady they purport to cure. Our aim is to reach out to the general public with our simple message: “There is nothing in it”. Boots and other retailers are perfectly entitled to continue selling homeopathic remedies if they so wish and consumers are perfectly entitled to keep on buying them. But hopefully the 10:23 campaign will ram home our message to the public. In the 21st century, with decades of progress behind us, it is surreal that governments are prepared to spend millions of tax pounds on homeopathy. There really is nothing in it.
参考答案：
Questions 1-7
1 ix
【原文参考依据-A段首句】An international protest this week aims to demonstrate the truth about homeopathy-that there's literally nothing in it, says Martin Robbins AT 10.23 am on 30 January, more than 300 activities in the UK, Canada, Australia and the US will take part in a mass homeopathic "overdose".
2 v
【原文参考依据-B段首句】That such a protest is even necessary in 2010 is remarkable, but somehow the homeopathic industry has not only survived into the 21st century, but prospered(繁荣)(=booming).
3 i
【原文参考依据-C段首句】The discipline is based on three "laws"; the law of similars, the law of infinitesimals and the law of succession.
4 vii
【原文参考依据-D段末尾】...,homeopathic remedies have consistently been shown to be no better than a placebo. Of course, the placebo effect is quite powerful, but it's a bit like justifying building a car without any wheels on the basis that you can still enjoy the comfy leather seats and play with the gear shift.
D段line8-10“homeopathic remedies have consistently been shown to be no better than a placebo. Of course, the placebo effect is quite powerful”
5 iv 题干改为：iv The purpose of selling homeopathic remedies.
【原文参考依据-E段倒数3-4行】He defended Boots's decision to sell homeopathic remedies on the grounds of(根据，以...为理由) consumer choice.
6 viii
【原文参考依据-F段】You might also argue that homeopathy is harmless: if people want to part with their money for sugar pills and nobody is breaking the law, why not let them? To some estent that's true-there's only so much damage you can do with sugar pills short of feeding them to a diabetic or dropping a large crate of them on some's head.
7 iii
【原文参考依据-G段第二句】Homeopathy has many ways to sidestep(回避) awkward questions, such as rejecting the validity of randomized controlled trails, or claiming that homeopathic remedies only work if you have symptoms of the maladay they purport to cure.
Questions 8-14
8 TRUE
【原文参考依据-A段】The aim of the "10:23" campaign, led by Merseyside Skeptics Society, based in Liverpool, UK, is to raise public awareness of just exactly what homeopathy is, and to put pressure on the UK's leading pharmacist, Boots, to remove the remedies from sale. The campaign is called 10:23 in honor of the Avogadro constant, of which more later.
9 FALSE
【原文参考依据-B段第二句】In the UK alone more than ?40 million is spent annually on homeopathic treatments with ?4million of this being sucked from(从...中吸取) the National Health Service budget.“每年有四千多万英镑花在顺势治疗上，其中四百万英镑来源于英国国民医疗保健预算。”题干说“英国国民医疗保健预算从顺势治疗上获得利润”。两者矛盾。所以False。
10 TRUE
【原文参考依据-C段第二句】The law of similars states that something which causes your symptoms will cure your symptons, so that, for example, ascaffeinne keeps you awake, it can also be a cure for insomnia.
非常经典的出题，C段前几句;按照 顺势疗法倡导的 “以毒攻毒 similar” 理论，=》咖啡因应该是可以治疗失眠的;然而原文 C段第4句，....of course... that makes little sense (这根本站不住脚)，因为和咖啡只会让你保持清醒(不会治疗失眠)
11 TRUE
【原文参考依据-F段倒数第2句】However, we believe there is a risk inperpetuating the notion that homeopathy is equivalent to modern medicine.
12 FALSE
【原文参考依据-E段第五行】“I have no evidence before me to suggest that they are efficacious(有效的)," Bennet replied.
原文见E段第5行还是，“有没有效”，PB回答“我没有证据，我只是尊重消费者的意愿提供者种药物”，原文说明 PB也没有证据证明这个疗法有效，题干说PB说这个疗法有效，这就是矛盾。
13 FALSE
【原文参考依据-F段末句】People may delay seeking appropriate treatment for themselves or their children.
题干中的“mainly”和原文中的“may”矛盾。
14 NOT GIVEN
|Archiver|手机版|小黑屋|雅思托福英语全球网
( 闽ICP备14014910号 )
|
闽公网安备 35020302034732号
发表于 2018-11-22 09:56:54
QQ好友和群
QQ空间
腾讯微博
腾讯朋友
收藏