试题库在线考试题库-历年真题模拟试题及答案-考博英语在线试题测试中心-希赛网

武汉大学

Defenders of special protective labor legislation for women often maintain that eliminating such laws would destroy the fruits of a century long struggle for the protection of women workers. Even a brief examination of the historic practice of courts and employers would show that the fruit of such laws has been bitter: they are, in practice, more of a curse than a blessing.Sex-defined protective laws have often been based on stereotypical assumptions concerning women’s needs and abilities and employers have frequently used them as legal excuses for discriminating against women. After World War II, for instance, businesses and government sought to persuade women to vacate jobs in factories, thus making room in the labor force for returning veterans. The revival or passage of state laws limiting the daily or weekly work hours of women conveniently accomplished this. Employers had only to declare that overtime hours were a necessary condition of employment or promotion in their factory, and women could be quite legally fired, refused jobs, or kept at low wage levels, all in the name of “protecting” their health. By validating such laws when they are challenged by lawsuits, the courts have conspired over the years in establishing different less advantageous employment terms for women’s competitiveness on the job market. At the same time, even the most well-intentioned lawmakers, courts and employers have often been blind to the real needs of women. The lawmakers and the courts continue to permit employers to offer employee health insurance plans that cover all known human medical disabilities except those relating to pregnancy and childbirth.Finally, labor laws protecting only special groups are often ineffective at protecting the workers who are actually in the workplace. Some chemicals, for example, pose reproductive risks for women of childbearing years; manufacturers using the chemicals comply with laws protecting women against these hazards by refusing to hire them. Thus the sex-defined legislation protects the hypothetical female worker, but has no effect whatever on the safety of any actual employee. The health risks to male employees in such industries can’t be negligible, since chemicals toxic enough to cause birth defects in fetuses in women are presumably harmful to the human metabolism. Protective laws aimed at changing production materials or techniques in order to reduce such hazards would benefit all employees without discriminating against any.In sum, protective labor laws for women are discriminatory and do not meet their intended purpose. Legislators should recognize that women are in the work force to stay and that their needs—good health care, a decent wage, and a safe workplace—are the needs of all workers. Laws that ignore these facts violate women’s rights for equal protection in employment.9. According to the author, which is most helpful in deciding the value of special protective labor legislation for women?10. Special labor laws protecting women workers tend to（）.11. It can be inferred that many employee health insurance plans（）.12. A shortcoming of protective labor laws that single out a particular group of workers for protection is（）.

Amid the nationwide furor over the Senate draft health-care bill, a public-health victory has gone mostly unnoticed. According to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the estimated number of middle and high school students who are tobacco users dropped from 4.7 million in 2015 to 3.9 million in 2016. This was largely driven by a reduction in the number of teenagers using e-cigarettes, which are less harmful than regular cigarettes but still contain nicotine. The downturn is a success for advocates and officials who have worked to curb teen tobacco use — but it should not be heralded as the end of the road.Teenage smoking has long been one of the most serious public health issues. Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the United States, and 9 in 10 American smokers had their first taste of tobacco before the age of 18, although policies to curb teen smoking showed signs of success for a time, youth tobacco rates remained stagnant between 2011 and 2015. During this period, the use of e-cigarettes among high school students increased by a staggering 900 percent.With these statistics in mind, the recent decline in teen tobacco and e-cigarette use is an encouraging signal that interventions may be working. It is difficult to determine causation, but experts have attributed the drop to a range of federal, state and local policies designed to dissuade young adults from using tobacco, such as increasing tobacco taxes and expanding antismoking ordinances to include e-cigarettes and other new products. States have run targeted media campaigns that work alongside federal efforts, such as the Food and Drug Administration’s “Real Cost” campaign and the CDC’s “Tips from Former Smokers”. The CDC report suggests that at least some of these strategies have been effective.But the report also highlights challenges that lie ahead. Millions of teenagers across the country are still using tobacco in some form, and the introduction of new tobacco products could drive up rates. There are also significant disparities among states and communities: Rural, low-income, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender youth are particularly at risk due to targeted marketing and policy variation between different jurisdictions. This makes federal regulation by the FDA all the more important.The FDA, however, has delayed the enforcement of new regulations on e-cigarettes and cigars. Delays are commonplace in new administrations, but it is important that the agency take up these stricter standards after the three-month postponement. It would be a pity if these long-awaited signs of progress were undercut because the FDA declined to do its job.5. According to a report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, teenage smoking（）.6. Which of the following is true of the reason for the drop of teenage smoking?7. Who should shoulder more responsibility for curbing teen smoking in the author’s eye?8. Which of the following could best summarize the text?

How best to solve the pollution problems of a city sunk so deep within sulfurous clouds that it was described as hell on earth? Simply answered: Relocate all urban smoke-creating industry and encircle the metropolis of London with sweetly scented flowers and elegant hedges.In fact, as Christine L. Corton, a Cambridge scholar, reveals in her new book, London Fog, this fragrant anti-smoke scheme was the brainchild of John Evelyn, the 17th-century diarist. King Charles II was said to be much pleased with Evelyn’s idea, and a bill against the smoky nuisance was duly drafted. Then nothing was done. Nobody at the time, and nobody right up to the middle of the 20th-century, was willing to put public health above business interests.And yet it’s a surprise to discover how beloved a feature of London life these multicolored fogs became. A painter, Claude Monet, fleeing besieged Paris in 1870, fell in love with London’s vaporous, mutating clouds. He looked upon the familiar mist as his reliable collaborator. Visitors from abroad may have delighted in the fog, but homegrown artists lit candles and vainly scrubbed the grime from their gloom-filled studio windows. “Give us light!” Frederic Leighton pleaded to the guests at a Lord Mayor’s banquet in 1882, begging them to have pity on the poor painter.The more serious side of Corton’s book documents how business has taken precedence over humanity where London’s history of pollution is concerned. A prevailing westerly wind meant that those dwelling to the east were always at most risk. Those who could afford it lived elsewhere. The east was abandoned to the underclass. Lord Palmerston spoke up for choking East Enders in the 1850s, pointing a finger at the interests of the furnace owners. A bill was passed, but there was little change. Eventually, another connection was established: between London’s perpetual veil of smog and its citizens’ cozily smoldering grates. Sadly, popular World War I songs didn’t do much to encourage the adoption of smokeless fuel.It wasn’t until what came to be known as the “Great Killer Fog” of 1952 that the casualty rate became impossible to ignore and the British press finally took up the cause. It was left to a Member of Parliament to steer the Clean Air Act into law in 1956. Within a few years, even as the war against pollution was still in its infancy, the dreaded fog began to fade.1. Which of the following can be inferred from Paragraph 2?2. The word “grime” (Para. 3) is closest in meaning to（）.3. Which would be most heavily affected by London’s pollution according to Carton’s book?4. The author mainly shows in the last paragraph that（）.

Directions: The age of information technology has taken a lot of people by surprise. While it has become a way of life for some, others know very little about it and may be unlikely to learn. Eventually we will have a polarized society and this will lead to serious social problems. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? You should use your own ideas, knowledge and experience and support your arguments with examples and relevant evidence. Write at least 200 words.

今天，阿拉木图（Alma-Ata）宣言的目标比起25年前反而离实现更为遥远了。深刻的经济不平等和社会不公正继续拒绝给许多人提供良好的健康，继续扮演全球持续性健康受益的障碍。全世界的国家间及国家内部在健康成就的步伐上和等级上仍有巨大的差异。一个可能的解释是开始于20世纪80年代作为世界银行结构性调整计划一部分的健康部门的改革还没有显示出改进不平等的结果；在某些情况下，它们反而让这些不平等更为严重了。现在我们面临健康研究中的四大挑战：道德价值、公平和美德、可持续的健康研究体系、良好的研究环境及知识的产出和应用。为了应对挑战，保健体系和健康研究体系两者应向一个学习的和解决问题的模式推进，把创新包括在运作之中，更好地掌握未来发展的机遇。没有效果明显的锦囊妙计，没有简单的解决方法，只是有许多事情要去学习。

2 / 19