1 . California will be the first state to ban the sale and manufacture of new fur products.
California’s fur law was one of several bills designed to prevent cruelty to animals. “California is a leader when it comes to animal protection and today that leadership includes banning the sale of fur, ” said Governor Newsom in a news report. “
Many retailers are also ending fur sales. In mid-October, Macy’s (American’s department store) announced it will stop fur from all its stores by the end of 2020. The stores will also close all fur vaults and salons. Other fashion brands such as Prada, Gucci, Michael Kors and Burberry have taken similar steps in recent years.
| A．But we are doing more than that. |
| B．California is taking the lead in protecting animals. |
| C．Similar laws have been carried out globally already. |
| D．And that in turn will leave many people unemployed. |
| E．Two other California cities had already banned fur sales. |
| F．Not surprisingly, the ban is welcomed by animal rights activists. |
| G．The ban applies to clothing, shoes, handbags and other things that contain fur. |
2 . Traveling by subway can sometimes be quite an adventure, especially during rush hour. There are the times when you have to avoid cups of coffee that could spill (溅) on you. The smells of some passengers’ food are very strong, too. According to the Beijing subway passenger regulations, which went into effect on May 15th, passengers except babies and the sick are no longer allowed to eat or drink on the subway. Violators (违反者) who do not stop after being asked to will be asked to get off. The violation will also be recorded in the violators’ credit record.
Some support the rule. The reason is that the smell of food and drink can annoy other passengers. “The smell of food fills the carriage, causing people discomfort, especially in the hot summer, Besides, eating on the subway produces rubbish. And on subway trains, people often spill their drinks,” said Zheng Yiou, 17, a student from Hefei.
However, others question this rule. “Some citizens live so far from their work places that they have limited time to have breakfast before they go to work. Eating while they travel saves them time and decreases the chance that they will be late for work,” He Songlin, a 17-year-old student from Chengdu said, “And some people, like those with low- blood sugar levels, get sick if they can’t eat when they must.”
Other Chinese cities like Nanjing and Chengdu have similar regulations. Some foreign cities also ban eating and drinking on the subway. For example, eating and drinking have long been banned on the subway in Washington DC. Singapore fines people who eat or drink on the subway up to 500 Singapore dollars, which is RMB 2,417 yuan.
Chen Yanyan, a professor from Beijing University of Technology, believed we should consider the need of some people to eat or drink on the subway. “Commuters (上班族) and travelers are sometimes too busy to eat. Maybe we could learn from Tokyo, where there are many subway stations equipped with services, allowing passengers to eat and drink,” she said.
1. In which city was subway passenger regulations carried out on May 15th?| A．Chengdu. | B．Nanjing. |
| C．Washington DC. | D．Beijing. |
| A．Eating on the subway. | B．Drinking on the subway. |
| C．Being fined up to 2417 yuan. | D．Being asked to get off the train. |
| A．Worried. | B．Sympathetic. |
| C．Doubtful. | D．Uninterested |
| A．Food and Drink Banned on Subway. |
| B．The Adventure of Subway Traveling |
| C．Ways to Eat and Drink on Subway. |
| D．The Services on Subway Stations |
3 . The Supreme Court’s decisions on physician-assisted suicide carry important implications for how medicine seeds to relieve dying patients of pain and suffering.
Although it ruled that there is no constitutional right to physician-assisted suicide, the Court in effect supported the medical principle of “double effects”, a centuries-old moral principle holding that an action having two effects----a good one that is intended and a harmful one that is foreseen---is permissible if the actor intends only the good effect.
Doctors have used that principle in recent years to justify using high doses of morphine to control terminally ill patients’ pain, even though increasing dosages will eventually kill the patient.
Nancy Dubler, director of Montefiore Medical Center, contends that the principle will shield doctors who "until now have very, very strongly insisted that they could not give patients sufficient medication to control their pain if that might hasten death."
George Annas, chair of the health law department at Boston University, maintains that, as long as a doctor prescribes a drug for a legitimate medical purpose, the doctor has done nothing illegal even if the patient uses the drug to hasten death. "It's like surgery, " he says. “We don't call those deaths homicides because the doctors didn't intend to kill their patients, although they risked their death. If you're a physician, you can risk your patient's suicide as long as you don't intend their suicide."
On another level, many in the medical community acknowledge that the assisted-suicide debate has been fueled in part by the despair of patients for whom modern medicine has prolonged the physical agony of dying.
Just three weeks before the Court's ruling on physician-assisted suicide, the National Academy of Science (NAS) released a two-volume report, Approaching Death: Improving Care at the End of Life. It identifies the undertreatment of pain and the aggressive use of "ineffectual and forced medical procedures that may prolong and even dishonor the period of dying" as the twin problems of end-of-life care.
The profession is taking steps to require young doctors to train in hospices, to test knowledge of aggressive pain management therapies, to develop a Medicare billing code for hospital-based care, and to develop new standards for assessing and treating pain at the end of life.
Annas says lawyers can play a key role in insisting that these well-meaning medical initiatives translate into better care. “Large numbers of physicians seem unconcerned with the pain their patients are needlessly and predictably suffering,” to the extent that it constitutes “systematic patient abuse.” He says medical licensing boards “must make it clear ... that painful deaths are presumptively ones that are incompetently managed and should result in license suspension.”
1. From the first three paragraphs, we learn that_____________| A．doctors used to increase drug dosages to control their patients' pain. |
| B．it is still illegal for doctors to help the dying end their lives. |
| C．the Supreme Court strongly opposes physician-assisted suicide. |
| D．patients have no constitutional right to commit suicide. |
| A．Doctors will be held guilty if they risk their patients' death. |
| B．Modern medicine has assisted terminally ill patients in painless recovery. |
| C．The Court ruled that high-dosage pain-relieving medication can be prescribed. |
| D．A doctor's medication is no longer justified by his intentions. |
| A．Bold. | B．Harmful. | C．Careless. | D．Desperate. |
| A．manage their patients incompetently |
| B．give patients more medicine than needed |
| C．reduce drug dosages for their patients |
| D．prolong the needless suffering of the patients |
