Test 4
IT is a startling claim, but one that Congresswoman Deborah Pryce uses to good effect: the equivalent of two classrooms full of children are diagnosed with cancer every day. Mrs. Pryce lost her own 9yearold daughter to cancer in 1999. Pediatric cancer remains a littleunderstood issue in America, where the healthcare debate is consumed with the ills, pills and medical bills of the elderly.
Cancer kills more children than any other diseases in America. Although there have been tremendous gains in cancer survival rates in recent decades, the proportion of children and teens diagnosed with different forms of the disease increased by almost a third between 1975 and 2001.
Horrible though these statistics are, they are still tiny when set aside the number of adult lives lost to breast cancer and lung cancer. Advocates for more money for child cancer prefer to look at lifeyears lost. Robert Arceci, a pediatric cancer expert at Johns Hopkins, points out that in terms of total lifeyears saved, the benefit from curing pediatric cancer victims is roughly the same as curing adults with breast cancer.
All the same, breast cancer has attracted the attention of publicity, private fundraising and money from government. Childhood cancer has received less attention and cash. Pediatric cancer, a term which covers people up to 20 years old, receives onetwentieth of the federal research money doled out by the National Cancer Institute. Funding, moan pediatric researchers, has not kept pace with rising costs in the field, and NCI money for collaborative research will actually be cut by 3% this year.
There is no national pediatric cancer registry that would let researchers track child and teenage patients through their lives as they can do in the case of adult sufferers. A pilot childhoodcancer registry is in the works. Groups like Mr. Reaman’s now get cash directly from Congress. But it is plainly a problem most politicians don’t know much about.
The biggest problem could lie with 1519yearolds. Those diagnosed with cancer have not seen the same improvement in their chances as younger children and older adults have done. There are some physical explanations for this: teenagers who have passed adolescence are more vulnerable to different sorts of cancer. But Archie Bleyer, a pediatric oncologist at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Texas, has produced some data implying that lack of health insurance plays a role. Older teenagers and young adults are less likely to be covered and checked regularly.
36. The case of Mrs. Pryce is mentioned to demonstrate that
[A] children need more concern and care than the elderly.
[B] more children are suffering from cancer nowadays.
[C] students are more inclined to be diagnosed with cancer.
[D] she is so unfortunate as to lose her daughter.
37. According to Robert Arceci, child cancer patients
[A] can also survive long like adult cancer patients.
[B] suffer from a bigger probability of death after being cured.
[C] need more money to be cured than breast cancer patients.
[D] can have higher survival rates than lung cancer patients.
38. Which of the following is Not true according to the text?
[A] The government should allocate more capital to child cancer.
[B] Children cancer should gain more attention from the public.
[C] A child cancer sufferer should be registered for researchers to track.
[D] Statesmen don’t support a national pilot child cancer registry.
39. The text seems to suggest that those 1519yearolds diagnosed with cancer
[A] have a higher rate to be cured than older adults.
[B] are less likely to suffer different forms of cancer.
[C] are short of necessary medical care.
[D] are more often to be examined regularly.
40. This passage is written mainly to
[A] show the indignation against the government.
[B] pay much attention to the wellbeing of children.
[C] explore the possible causes of child cancer.
[D] arouse the public’s greater attention to child cancer.
相關(guān)推薦：
2009年考研英語考前必做三套模擬試題(一)及答案 2009年考研英語考前必做三套模擬試題(二)及答案
