Ques:Read the following article and select the best answer. Article: What we eat, when we eat or how we eat is usually considered to be an everyday eating habit. Good eating habits are very important for our health. Most of us would rather eat sweets and ice-cream than meat and rice. Sweets and ice-cream are not bad for the stomach if we eat them at the end of a meal. But we should also know that if we eat them before a meal, they will spoil our appetite . It is a good habit for us to eat our meal at the same time each day. When we feel hungry, it is a sign that our body needs a good supply. When we feel angry or excited, we may not want to eat. A long time ago, in England some judges used to decide whether a man was telling the truth by giving him some dry bread. If he could not swallow the bread, it was a sign that he wasn't telling the truth. He was telling lies. Although this seems very strange and rather foolish, it is indeed an excellent way of finding out the truth. A man who is worrying about something has difficulty in swallowing anything dry. Because he is worrying, he loses his appetite and does not want to eat. Question: Why do we have to develop good eating habits? Because _ . - we want to eat more - we want to enjoy our meals - we want to be healthy and strong - we want to save time

Ans:we want to be healthy and strong
-----
Ques:Read the following article and select the best answer. Article: A new study says electronic toys are not helping babies learn. "Even if companies are marketing them as educational, they're not teaching the babies anything at this time," said Anna Sosa the study's author. Researchers listened to audio recordings of parents playing with their babies aged 10 months to 16 months. The researchers compared the experiences when the children played with electronic toys, traditional toys such as blocks, or when the children looked at books. What they found is that parents talked less with their babies when the babies played with electronic toys. Why is this important? Research shows that how quickly children develop language is often based on what they hear from parents. When the infants played with electronic toys, parents said little to their children. But with traditional toys, such as blocks, parents shared the names and descriptions of the animals, colors and shapes as their children played. There was even more information given by parents as their babies looked at the pictures in books. Of course, there is no need for parents to throw out electronic toys, but they should look at their infants' play with such toys as entertainment, not a learning experience. Toy Industry Association spokeswoman Adrienne Appell responded to the study. She said it is important that parents make time to play with their children. "Playing is a way that kids can learn so much, not only cognitive skills, but social and developmental skills," she said. She added that play should be balanced, including time for just "make believe" activities, as well as traditional and electronic toys. Question: We can learn from the text that babies in the research _ . - interact less with their parents when playing with electronic toys - liked traditional toys better than electronic toys - talked little with their parents when playing with electronic toys - listened to audio recordings of their parents

Ans:interact less with their parents when playing with electronic toys
-----
Ques:Read the following article and select the best answer. Article: Unlike chemists and physicists, who usually do their experiments using machines, biologists and medical researchers have to use living things like rats. But there are three Nobel prize-winning scientists who actually chose to experiment on themselves - all in the name of science, reported The Telegraph. 1. Werner Forssmann (Nobel prize winner in 1956) Forssmann was a German scientist. He studied how to put a pipe inside the heart to measure the pressure inside and decide whether a patient needs surgery. Experiments had been done on horses before, so he wanted to try with human patients. But it was not permitted because the experiment was considered too dangerous. Not giving up, Forssmann decided to experiment on himself. He anaesthetized his own arm and made a cut, putting the pipe 30 centimeters into his vein. He then climbed two floors to the X-ray room before pushing the pipe all the way into his heart. 2. Barry Marshall (Nobel prize winner in 2005) Most doctors in the mid-20th century believed that _ was down to stress, spicy food or an unusually large amount of stomach acid. But in 1979 an Australian scientist named Robin Warren found that the disease might be related to a bacteria called Helicobacter pylori. So he teamed up with his colleague, Barry Marshall, to continue the study. When their request to experiment on patients was denied, Marshall bravely drank some of the bacteria. Five days later, he lost his appetite and soon was vomiting each morning - he indeed had gastritis. 3. Ralph Steinman (Nobel prize winner in 2011) This Canadian scientist discovered a new type of immune system cell called the dendritic cell. He believed that it had the ability to fight against cancer. Steinman knew he couldn't yet use his method to treat patients. So in 2007, when doctors told him that he had cancer and that it was unlikely for him to live longer than a year, he saw an opportunity. With the help of his colleagues, he gave himself three different vaccines based on his research and a total of eight... Question: What's the main purpose of the article? - To introduce a few Nobel prize winners who did experiments on themselves. - To list difficulties that scientists went through in order to make important discoveries. - To explain why some scientists chose to experiment on themselves. - To introduce some dangerous experiments that Nobel prize winners did on themselves.

Ans:To introduce a few Nobel prize winners who did experiments on themselves.
-----
Ques:Read the following article and select the best answer. Article: It is curious that our own faults should seem so much less heinous than the faults of others. I suppose the reason is that we know all the conditions that have caused them and so manage to excuse in ourselves what we can't excuse in others. We turn our attention away from our own mistakes, and when we are forced by unexpected events to consider them, find it easy to accept them. For all I know we are right to do this; They are part of us and we must accept the good and bad in ourselves together. But when we come to judge others, it is not by ourselves as we really are that we judge them, but by an image that we have formed ourselves .To take a little instance: how scornful we are when we catch someone out telling a lie ; but who can say that he has never told not one, but a hundred? There is not much to choose between men .They are all a mix-up of greatness and littleness, of kindness and unkindness, of goodness and badness. Some have more strength of character ,or more opportunity ,and so in one direction or another give their instincts( ) freer play ,but potentially they are the same. For my part, I don't think I am any better or any worse than most people, but I know that if I set down every action in my life and every thought that has crossed my mind, the world would consider me a monster. The knowledge that these thoughts are common to all men should inspire one with tolerance to oneself as well as to others. If they enable us to look upon our fellows, even the most great and respectable, with humor, and if they lead us to take ourselves not too seriously, it is well. Question: What is the reason that we always forgive our own faults? - We understand how the faults happen. - Everyone else will accept our faults. - We are good at finding other's faults. - Others don't know our faults.

Ans:
We understand how the faults happen.
-----