SECTION: Reading Comprehension

(50 minutes) 

Part A

Read the following texts and answer the questions which accompany them by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1.

 

Text 1

In recent years, there has been a steady assault on salt from the doctors: salt is bad for you ¾ regardless of your health. Politicians also got on board. “There is a direct relationship,” US congressman Neal Smith noted, “between the amount of sodium a person consumes and heart disease, circulatory disorders, stroke and even early death.”

Frightening, if true! But many doctors and medical researchers are now beginning to feel the salt scare has gone too far. “All this hue and cry about eating salt is unnecessary,” Dr. Dustan insists. “For most of us it probably doesn’t make much difference how much salt we eat.” Dustan’s most recent short-term study of 150 people showed that those with normal blood pressure experienced no change at all when placed on an extremely low-salt diet, or later when salt was reintroduced. Of the hypertensive subjects, however, half of those on the low-salt diet did experience a drop in blood pressure, which returned to its previous level when salt was reintroduced.

“An adequate to somewhat excessive salt intake has probably saved many more lives than it has cost in the general population,” notes Dr. John H. Laragh. “So a recommendation that the whole population should avoid salt makes no sense.”

Medical experts agree that everyone should practice reasonable “moderation” in salt consumption. For the average person, a moderate amount might run from four to ten grams a day, or roughly 1/2 to 1/3 of a teaspoon. The equivalent of one to two grams of this salt allowance would come from the natural sodium in food. The rest would be added in processing, preparation or at the table.

Those with kidney, liver or heart problems may have to limit dietary salt, if their doctor advises. But even the very vocal “low salt” exponent, Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr. admits that “we do not know whether increased sodium consumption causes hypertension.” In fact, there is growing scientific evidence that other factors may be involved: deficiencies in calcium, potassium, perhaps magnesium; obesity (much more dangerous than sodium); genetic predisposition; stress.

“It is not your enemy,” says Dr. Laragh. “Salt is the No. 1 natural component of all human tissue, and the idea that you don’t need it is wrong. Unless your doctor has proven that you have a salt-related health problem, there is no reason to give it up.”

 

51. According to some doctors and politicians, the amount of salt consumed

[A] exhibits as an aggravating factor to people in poor health.

[B] cures diseases such as stroke and circulatory disorders.

[C] correlates highly with some diseases.

[D] is irrelevant to people suffering from heart disease.

 

52. From Dr. Dustan’s study we can infer that

[A] a low-salt diet may be prescribed for some people.

[B] the amount of salt intake has nothing to do with one’s blood pressure.

[C] the reduction of salt intake can cure a hypertensive patient.

[D] an extremely low-salt diet makes no difference to anyone.

 

53. In the third paragraph, Dr. Laragh implies that

[A] people should not be afraid of taking excessive salt.

[B] doctors should not advise people to avoid salt.

[C] an adequate to excessive salt intake is recommended for people in

    disease.

[D] excessive salt intake has claimed some victims in the general population.

 

54. The phrase “vocal ... exponent” (line 2, para. 4) most probably refers to

[A] eloquent doctor.

[B] articulate opponent.

[C] loud speaker.

[D] strong advocate.

 

55. What is the main message of this text?

[A] That the salt scare is not justified.

[B] That the cause of hypertension is now understood.

[C] That the moderate use of salt is recommended.

[D] That salt consumption is to be promoted.

 

Text 2

Few people doubt the fundamental importance of mothers in child-rearing, but what do fathers do? Much of what they contribute is simply the result of being a second adult in the home. Bringing up children is demanding, stressful and exhausting. Two adults can support and make up for each other’s deficiencies and build on each other’s strengths.

Fathers also bring an array of unique qualities. Some are familiar: protector and role model. Teen-age boys without fathers are notoriously prone to trouble. The pathway to adulthood for daughters is somewhat easier, but they must still learn from their fathers, in ways they cannot from their mothers, how to relate to men. They learn from their fathers about heterosexual trust, intimacy and difference. They learn to appreciate their own femininity from the one male who is most special in their lives. Most important, through loving and being loved by their fathers, they learn that they are love-worthy.

Current research gives much deeper¾and more surprising¾insight into the father’s role in child-rearing. One significantly overlooked dimension of fathering is play. From their children’s birth through adolescence, fathers tend to emphasise play more than caretaking. The father’s style of play is likely to be both physically stimulating and exciting. With older children it involves more teamwork, requiring competitive testing of physical and mental skills. It frequently resembles a teaching relationship: come on, let me show you how. Mothers play more at the child’s level. They seem willing to let the child direct play.

Kids, at least in the early years, seem to prefer to play with daddy. In one study of 2 -year-olds who were given a choice, more than two-thirds chose to play with their father.

The way fathers play has effects on everything from the management of emotions to intelligence and academic achievement. It is particularly important in promoting self-control. According to one expert, “children who roughhouse with their fathers quickly learn that biting, kicking and other forms of physical violence are not acceptable.” They learn when to “shut it down.”

At play and in other realms, fathers tend to stress competition, challenge, initiative, risk-taking and independence. Mothers, as caretakers, stress emotional security and personal safety. On the playground fathers often try to get the child to swing ever higher, while mother are cautious, worrying about an accident.

We know, too, that fathers’ involvement seems to be linked to improved verbal and problem-solving skills and higher academic achievement. Several studies found that along with paternal strictness, the amount of time fathers spent reading with them was a strong predictor of their daughters’ verbal ability.

For sons the results have been equally striking. Studies uncovered a strong relationship between fathers’ involvement and the mathematical abilities of their sons. Other studies found a relationship between paternal nurturing and boys’ verbal intelligence.

 

56. The first paragraph points out that one of the advantages of a family with both

        parents is

[A] husband and wife can share housework.

[B] two adults are always better than one.

[C] the fundamental importance of mothers can be fully recognised.

[D] husband and wife can compensate for each other’s shortcomings.

 

57. According to paragraph 3, one significant difference between the father’s and

        mother’s role in child-rearing is

[A] the style of play encouraged.

[B] the amount of time available.

[C] the strength of emotional ties.

[D] the emphasis of intellectual development.

 

58. Which of the following statements is true?

[A] Mothers tend to stress personal safety less than fathers.

[B] Boys are likely to benefit more from their fathers’ caring.

[C] Girls learn to read more quickly with the help of their fathers.

[D] Fathers tend to encourage creativeness and independence.

 

59. Studies investigating fathers’ involvement in child-rearing show that

[A] this improves kids’ mathematical and verbal abilities.

[B] the more time spent with kids, the better they speak.

[C] the more strict the fathers are, the cleverer the kids.

[D] girls usually do better than boys academically.

 

60. The writer’s main point in writing this article is

[A] to warn society of increasing social problems.

[B] to emphasise the father’s role in the family.

[C] to discuss the responsibilities of fathers.

[D] to show sympathy for one-parent families.

  

Text  3

World leaders met recently at United Nations headquarters in New York City to discuss the environmental issues raised at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. The heads of state were supposed to decide what further steps should be taken to halt the decline of Earth’s life-support systems. In fact, this meeting had much the flavour of the original Earth Summit. To wit: empty promises, hollow rhetoric, bickering between rich and poor, and irrelevant initiatives. Think U.S. Congress in slow motion.

Almost obscured by this torpor is the fact that there has been some remarkable progress over the past five years ¾ real changes in the attitude of ordinary people in the Third World toward family size and a dawning realisation that environmental degradation and their own well-being are intimately, and inversely, linked. Almost none of this, however, has anything to do with what the bureaucrats accomplished in Rio.

Or didn’t accomplish. One item on the agenda at Rio, for example, was a renewed effort to save tropical forests. (A previous U.N.-sponsored initiative had fallen apart when it became clear that it actually hastened deforestation.) After Rio, a U.N. working group came up with more than 100 recommendations that have so far gone nowhere. One proposed forestry pact would do little more than immunise wood-exporting nations against trade sanctions.

An effort to draft an agreement on what to do about the climate changes caused by CO₂ and other greenhouse gases has fared even worse. Blocked by the Bush Administration from setting mandatory limits, the U.N. in 1992 called on nations to voluntarily reduce emissions to 1990 levels. Several years later, it’s as if Rio had never happened. A new climate treaty is scheduled  to be signed this December in Kyoto, Japan, but governments still cannot agree on limits. Meanwhile, the U.S. produces 7% more CO₂  than it did in 1990, and emissions in the developing world have risen even more sharply. No one would confuse the “Rio process” with progress.

While governments have dithered at a pace that could make drifting continents impatient, people have acted. Birth-rates are dropping faster than expected, not because of Rio but because poor people are deciding on their own to limit family size. Another positive development has been a growing environmental consciousness among the poor. From slum dwellers in Karachi, Pakistan, to colonists in Rondonia, Brazil, urban poor and rural peasants alike seem to realise that they pay the biggest price for pollution and deforestation. There is cause for hope as well in the growing recognition among business people that it is not in their long-term interest to fight environmental reforms. John Browne, chief executive of British Petroleum , boldly asserted in a major speech in May that the threat of climate change could no longer be ignored.

 

61. The writer’s general attitude towards the world leaders meeting at the U.N. is

[A] supportive.

[B] impartial.

[C] critical.

[D] optimistic.

 

62. What does the author say about the ordinary people in the Third World

    countries?

[A] They are beginning to realise the importance of environmental

protection.

[B] They believe that many children are necessary for prosperity.

[C] They are reluctant to accept advice from the government.

[D] They think that earning a living is more important than nature

conservation.

 

63. What did the U.N. call on nations to do about CO₂ and other greenhouse gases in 1992?

[A] To sign a new climate treaty at Rio.

[B] To draft an agreement among U.N. nations.

[C] To force the United States to reduce its emissions.

[D] To cut the release of CO₂  and other gases.

 

64. The word “deforestation” in paragraph 3 means

[A] forest damage caused by pollution.

[B] moving population from forest to cities.

[C] the threat of climate change.

[D] cutting large areas of trees.

 

65. Which of the following best summarises the text?

[A] As the U. N. hesitates, the poor take action.

[B] Progress in environmental protection has been made since the Rio

Summit.

[C] Climate changes can no longer be ignored.

[D] The decline of earth’s life-support systems has been halted.