Read the article and select the best answer. Article: Ever since they were first put on the market in the early 1990s, genetically modified (GM, ) foods have been increasingly developed and marketed in many countries in the world, mainly on the basis of their promise to end the worldwide food crisis. But can GM technology solve world hunger problems? Even if it would, is it the best solution? Despite what it promises, GM technology actually has not increased the production potential of any crop. In fact, studies show that the most widely grown GM crop, GM soybeans, has suffered reduced productivity. For instance, a report that analysed nearly two decades of research on major GM food crops shows that GM engineering has failed to significantly increase US crop production. Something else, however, has been on the rise, While GM seeds are expensive, GM companies tell farmers that they will make good profits by saving money on pesticides . On the contrary, US government data show that GM crops in the US have produced an overall increase in pesticide use compared to traditional crops. "The promise was that you could use less chemicals and _ production. But neither is true," said Bill Christison, President of the US National Farm Coalition. At the same time, the authors of the book World Hunger: Twelve Myths argue that there actually is more than enough food in the world and that the hunger crisis is not caused by production, but by problems in food distribution and politics. These indeed deserve our efforts and money. Meanwhile, the rise in food prices results from the increased use of crops for fuel rather than food, according to a 2008 World Bank report. As a matter of fact, scientists see better ways to feed the world. Another World Bank report concluded that GM crops have little to offer to the challenges of worldwide poverty and hunger, because better ways out are available, among which "green" farming is supposed to be the first choice. Question: GM companies promise farmers that they will benefit from _ . Options: A: practicing "green" farming B: use of less chemicals C: fair distribution of their crops D: using more crops for fuel
B

Read the article and select the best answer. Article: Adam Smith was the first person to see the importance of the division of the labor. He gave us an example of the process by which pins were made in England. One man draws out the wire, another strengthens it, a third cuts it, a fourth points it, and a fifth gives it a head. Just to make the head requires two or three different operations. The work of making pins is divided into about eighteen different operations, which in some factories are all performed by different people, though in others the same man will sometimes perform two or three of them. Ten men, Smith said, in this way, turned out twelve pounds of pins a day or about 4,800 pins a worker. But if all of them had worked separately and independently without division of labor, they certainly could not have made twenty pins in a day and not even one. There can be no doubt that division of labor is an efficient way of organizing work. Fewer people can make more pins. Adam Smith saw this, but he also took it for granted that the division of labor is itself responsible for economic growth and development and it accounts for the difference between expanding economies and those that stand still. In fact, the division of labor adds nothing new, and it only enables people to produce more of what they already have. Question: Adam Smith mentioned the number 4,800 in order to _ . Options: A: show the advantages of the old labor system B: stress how powerful the individual worker was C: show the advantages of the division of labor D: stress the importance of increasing production
C

Q: Read the article and select the best answer. Article: WASHINGTON--A baby born with the virus that causes AIDS appears to have been cured, scientists announced Sunday, describing the case of a child from Mississippi who's now 2.5 and has been off medication for about a year with no signs of infection. There's no evidence that shows that the child will remain healthy, although complex testing uncovered just traces of the virus' genetic material still lingering . If so, it would mark only the world' s second reported cure. Specialists say Sunday's announcement, at a major AIDS meeting in Atlanta, offers promising clues for efforts to remove HIV infection in children, especially in African countries where too many babies are born with the virus. "You could call this about as close to a cure," Dr. Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health, who is familiar with the findings, told The Associated Press. A doctor gave this baby faster and stronger treatment than usual, starting a three-drug mixture within 30 hours of birth. That was before tests confirmed the infant was infected and not just at risk from a mother whose HIV wasn't diagnosed until she was in labor . "I just felt like this baby was at higher-than-normal risk, and deserved our best shot," Dr. Hannah Gay, a pediatric HIV specialist at the University of Mississippi, said in an interview. That fast action apparently knocked out HIV in the baby's blood before it could form hideouts in the body. Those so-called reservoirs of dormant cells usually rapidly reinfect anyone who stops medication, said Dr. Deborah Persaud of Johns Hopkins Children's Center. Next, Persaud's team is planning a study to try to prove that, with more aggressive treatment of other high-risk babies. "Maybe we'll be able to block this reservoir seeding." Persaud said. No one should stop anti-AIDS drugs as a result of this case, Fauci warned. Question: What can we learn from the passage? Options: A: The baby was cured of its HIV before birth. B: The baby was infected with HIV after birth. C: The baby was infected with HIV from its mother. D: The virus causing AIDS was completely removed from the baby.
A: C

Read the article and select the best answer. Article: Goldie's Secret She turned up at the doorstep of my house in Cornwall. No way could I have sent her away. No way, not me anyway. Maybe someone had kicked her out of their car the night before. "We're moving house."; "No space for her any more with the baby coming." "We never really wanted her, but what could we have done? She was a present." People find all sorts of excuses for abandoning an animal. And she was one of the most beautiful dogs I had ever seen. I called her Goldie. If I had known what was going to happen I would have given her a more creative name. She was so unsettled during those first few days. She hardly ate anything and had such an air of sadness about her. There was nothing I could do to make her happy, it seemed. Heaven knows what had happened to her at her previous owner's. But eventually at the end of the first week she calmed down. Always by my side, whether we were out on one of our long walks or sitting by the fire. That's why it was such a shock when she pulled away from me one day when we were out for a walk. We were a long way from home, when she started barking and getting very restless. Eventually I couldn't hold her any longer and she raced off down the road towards a farmhouse in the distance as fast as she could. By the time I reached the farm I was very tired and upset with Goldie. But when I saw her licking the four puppies I started to feel sympathy towards them. "We didn't know what had happened to her," said the woman at the door. "I took her for a walk one day, soon after the puppies were born, and she just disappeared." "She must have tried to come back to them and got lost," added a boy from behind her. I must admit I do miss Goldie, but I've got Nugget now, and she looks just like her mother. And I've learnt a good lesson: not to judge people. Question: Goldie rushed off to a farmhouse one day because she _ . Options: A: saw her puppies B: heard familiar barking C: wanted to leave the author D: found her way to her old home
D