1 . Mental illness and disability were family problems for English people living between 1660 and 1800. Most women and men who suffered from mental illness were not institutionalized as this was the period before the extensive building of mental hospitals. Instead, they were housed at home, and cared for by other family members.
Now a new study by Cambridge historian Dr. Elizabeth Foyster will reveal the impact on families of caring for mentally ill and disabled relatives.
Much has been written about the insane themselves but few studies have considered mental illness from the perspective of the carers. The lifetime burden of caring for those individuals whose mental development did not progress beyond childhood, and who contemporaries labeled as ‘idiots’ or ‘fools’, has been little explored by historians. Foyster’s research, which has been funded by the Leverhulme Trust, will carefully examine the emotional and economic consequences for families at a time when the Poor Law bound them to look after their mentally ill and disabled family members.
By asking key questions about the impact of ‘care in the community’ in the 18th century, Foyster hopes that her research will bridge social and medical history. Specifically, she aims to provide an historical perspective for contemporary debates such as how resources can be stretched to provide for children with learning difficulties and an aging population.
“The stresses and strains of family were worsened by high infant mortality and low life expectancy, and many individuals were pushed towards mental breakdown,” she explained. “Moreover, inherited conditions, senility(高龄) and what today would be described as ‘special needs’ could put great emotional demands on family members who had primary responsibility for their sick or disabled relatives.”
The research will shed light upon how caring for the mentally ill and disabled raised difficult issues for families about the limits of intergenerational responsibility, and whether family ties were weakened or strengthened by the experience. The questions of how far shame was attached to having insanity or idiocy within a family, and at what point families began to seek outside help, will also be addressed.
“The family must have seemed an inescapable feature of daily life between 1660 and 1800,” said Foyster. “Although there were those who were abandoned and rejected, for the majority, mental disability was accommodated within the family unit. I aim to get to the heart of what this really meant for people’s lives.”
1. Which is NOT the reason why those mentally ill and disabled were not institutionalized from 1660 to 1800?| A．Mental illness and disability were family problems then. |
| B．The extensive building of mental hospitals didn’t start yet. |
| C．They were abandoned by the government and the family. |
| D．The family would be found guilty if they didn’t care for them. |
| A．Because it can provide some food for thought for some current social issues. |
| B．Because the stresses and strains of family life have driven many people crazy. |
| C．Because she’s looking for ways to communicate with the sick or disabled people. |
| D．Because the limits of intergenerational responsibility in such families, interest her. |
| A．How should resources today be stretched to provide for an aging population? |
| B．How did caring for the sick and disabled affect the family’s earning power? |
| C．How shameful did a family feel when their insane or disabled relatives were found out? |
| D．At what point did those families have to begin to look for outside help? |
| A．reveal the impact on families of caring for mentally ill and disabled relatives |
| B．provide an historical perspective to contemporary debates |
| C．shed light upon whether family ties were weakened or strengthened |
| D．introduce a new historical study carried out by a Cambridge historian |
2 . Babies made from three people approved in UK
Babies made from two women and one man have been approved by the UK’s fertility regulator. The historic and controversial move is to prevent children from being born with deadly genetic diseases.
Doctors in Newcastle — who developed the advanced form of In Vitro Fertilization or IVF (人工授精) — are expected to be the first to offer the procedure and have already appealed for donor eggs. The first such child could be born, at the earliest, by the end of 2017.
Some families have lost multiple children to incurable mitochondrial (线粒体的) diseases, which can leave people with insufficient energy to keep their heart beating.
The diseases are passed down from only the mother, so a technique using a donor egg as well as the mother’s egg and father’s sperm has been developed.
The resulting child has a tiny amount of their DNA from the donor, but the procedure is legal and reviews say it is ethical (伦理的) and scientifically ready.
“It is a decision of historic importance,” said Sally Cheshire, chairwoman of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA). “I’m sure patients will be really pleased by what we’ve decided today.”
But some scientists have questioned the ethics of the technique, saying it could open the door to genetically-modified(转基因) ‘designer’ babies.
The HFEA must approve every clinic and every patient before the procedure can take place. Three-person babies have been allowed only in cases where the risk of a child developing mitochondrial disease is very high.
Prof Mary Herbert, from the Newcastle Fertility Centre, said, “It is enormously pleasing that our many years of research in this area can finally be applied to help families affected by these devastating diseases”.
“Now that we are moving forward towards clinical treatments, we will also need donors to donate eggs for use in treatment to prevent affected women transmitting disease to their children.”
Prof Sir Doug Turnbull, the director of the Welcome Centre for Mitochondrial Research at Newcastle University, said, “We are delighted by today’s decision. We will also provide long-term follow up of any children born.”
NHS England has agreed to fund the treatment costs of the first trial of three-person IVF for those women who meet the HFEA criteria, as long as they agree to long-term follow up of their children after they are born.
1. Why is it historically important to approve babies made from three people?| A．It helps couples who lose the ability to give birth to a baby. |
| B．It marks a foundation stone to change babies’ appearances before birth. |
| C．It stops deadly genetic diseases passing down to newly-born babies. |
| D．It turns out to be an advanced form of In Vitro Fertilization. |
| A．They pass down on to babies from their parents. |
| B．They prevent people’s heart from functioning normally. |
| C．Some children infected can be cured with proper treatment. |
| D．Babies can be infected with them through a donor’s egg. |
| A．Only when the baby to be born needs it to survive. |
| B．Only when the patient gets financially prepared. |
| C．Only when the clinic gets scientifically ready. |
| D．Only when the technique is ethnically accepted. |
| A．Supportive | B．Indifferent | C．Worried | D．Objective |
3 . Modern lifestyles are generally quite different from those of our hunter-gatherer ancestors, a fact that some claim as the cause of the current rise in global obesity, but new results published July 25 in the open access journal PLOS ONE find that there is no difference between the energy expenditure(耗费) of modern hunter-gatherers and Westerners, casting doubt on this theory.
The research team behind the study, led by Herman Pontzer of Hunter College in New York City, along with David Raichlen of the University of Arizona and Brian M. Wood of Stanford measured daily energy expenditure among the Hadza, a population of traditional hunter-gatherers living in the open Savannah of northern Tanzania. Despite spending their days hiking long distances to seek for wild plants and game, the Hadza burned no more calories each day than adults in the U.S. and Europe. The team ran several analyses accounting for the effects of body weight, body fat percentage, age, and gender. In all analyses, daily energy expenditure among the Hadza hunter-gatherers was indistinguishable(难以区分的) from that of Westerners. The study was the first to measure energy expenditure in hunter-gatherers directly; previous studies had relied entirely on estimates.
These findings overturn the long-held assumption that our hunter-gatherer ancestors expended more energy than modern populations, and challenge the view that obesity in Western populations results from decreased energy expenditure. Instead, the similarity in daily energy expenditure across a broad range of lifestyles suggests that habitual metabolic(新陈代谢的) rates are relatively constant among human populations. This in turn supports the view that the current rise in obesity is due to increased food consumption, not decreased energy expenditure. It means we have more to learn about human physiology(生理学) and health, particularly in non-Western settings.
"These results highlight the complexity of energy expenditure. It's not simply a function of physical activity," says Pontzer.” Our metabolic rates may be more a reflection of our shared evolutionary past than our diverse modern lifestyles."
1. According to the new research, hunter-gatherers consume _________.| A．the same energy as Westerners | B．more energy than Westerners |
| C．less energy than Westerners | D．the same food as Westerners |
| A．By comparing hiking distances. | B．By identifying wild plants and game. |
| C．By estimating daily energy expenditure. | D．By measuring daily energy expenditure. |
| A．the rise in obesity is due to increased food consumption |
| B．decreased energy expenditure makes Westerners fat |
| C．daily energy expenditure stays the same in history |
| D．humans’ habitual metabolic rates are unchanged |
| A．Our physiology activity. | B．Our energy expenditure. |
| C．Our metabolic rates. | D．Our modern lifestyle. |
4 . I was holding her hand when the man in the white coat came in.
My mother couldn’t walk, talk or swallow after her stroke, but nursing her was not
A young nurse stopped me just before the doctor appeared: “You know, I
So, I couldn’t help questioning the doctor’s
| A．Looking up | B．Holding up | C．Setting up | D．Drawing up |
| A．immediately | B．occasionally | C．eventually | D．recently |
| A．stealing | B．marching | C．rushing | D．storming |
| A．Therefore | B．Moreover | C．However | D．Otherwise |
| A．vices | B．strengths | C．sacrifices | D．disabilities |
| A．whole | B．peak | C．future | D．end |
| A．unbearable | B．moveable | C．unconscious | D．comfortable |
| A．relieved | B．excited | C．disappointed | D．ashamed |
| A．tiring | B．easy | C．casual | D．pleasant |
| A．nodded | B．hung | C．shook | D．lifted |
| A．reach | B．words | C．belief | D．hope |
| A．relate | B．owe | C．lose | D．submit |
| A．forced | B．encouraged | C．intended | D．ordered |
| A．at the mercy of | B．at a loss for | C．in favor of | D．in charge of |
| A．framework | B．instruction | C．warning | D．measure |
| A．precise | B．rough | C．arithmetic | D．economic |
| A．conclusion | B．agreement | C．consensus | D．answer |
| A．transmitted | B．transferred | C．transformed | D．transported |
| A．admitted | B．reduced | C．sentenced | D．committed |
| A．included | B．robbed | C．excluded | D．confirmed |
