Cellphones: is there a cancer link?
Could your cellphone give you cancer? Whether it could or not, some people are worrying about the possibility that phones, power lines and wi-fi could be responsible for a range of illnesses, from rashes to brain tumors.
Some say there is evidence to support the growing anxieties. David Carpenter, a professor of environmental health sciences at the university at Albany, in New York, thinks there’s a greater than 95 percent chance that power lines can cause childhood leukemia(白血病). Also there’s a greater than 90 percent chance that cellphones can cause brain tumors. “It’s apparent now that there’s a real risk,” said Carpenter.
But others believe these concerns are unjustified. Dr Martha Linet, the head of radiation epidemiology(流行病学) at the US National Cancer Institute, has looked at the same research as Carpenter but has reached a different conclusion. “I don’t support warning labels for cellphones,” said Linet. “We don’t have the evidence that there’s much danger.”
Studies so far suggest a weak connection between EMFs(电磁场) and illness — so weak that it might not exist at all. A multinational investigation of cellphones and brain cancer, in 13 countries outside the US, has been underway for several years. It’s funded in part by the European Union, in part by a cellphone industry group. The final report should come out later this year, but data so far don’t suggest a strong link between cellphone use and cancer risk.
【小题1】From the passage we can learn that some people are worried because   .

Cellphones: is there a cancer link?

Could your cellphone give you cancer? Whether it could or not, some people are worrying about the possibility that phones, power lines and wi­fi could be responsible for a range of illnesses, from rashes to brain tumors.

Some say there is evidence to support the growing anxieties. David Carpenter, a professor of environmental health sciences at the university at Albany, in New York, thinks there's a greater than 95 percent chance that power lines can cause childhood leukemia(白血病). Also there's a greater than 90 percent chance that cellphones can cause brain tumors. “It's apparent now that there's a real risk，” said Carpenter.

But others believe these concerns are unjustified. Dr Martha Linet, the head of radiation epidemiology(流行病学) at the US National Cancer Institute, has looked at the same research as Carpenter but has reached a different conclusion. “I don't support warning labels for cellphones，” said Linet. “We don't have the evidence that there's much danger.”

Studies so far suggest a weak connection between EMFs(电磁场) and illness—so weak that it might not exist at all. A multinational investigation of cellphones and brain cancer, in 13 countries outside the US, has been underway for several years. It's funded in part by the European Union, in part by a cellphone industry group. The final report should come out later this year, but data so far don't suggest a strong link between cellphone use and cancer risk.

20．From the passage we can learn that some people are worried because________．

A．they have evidence that the use of cellphones can lead to cancer

B．they make a fuss over cellphone use

C．some experts have given a warning

D．cellphones are responsible for brain tumors

21．By saying “I don't support warning labels for cellphones，” Dr Martha Linet has the idea that________．

A．the worrying is unnecessary

B．cancer­warning labels should be on cellphones

C．there is a link between cellphones and cancer

D．cellphones have nothing to do with cancer

22．The underlined word “underway” is closest in meaning to________．

A．started  B．kept on

C．gone on  D．in progress

23．Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author towards the debate?

A．Optimistic.  B．Objective.

C．Disapproving.  D．Casual.

Cellphones: is there a cancer link?
Could your cellphone give you cancer? Whether it could or not, some people are worrying about the possibility that phones, power lines and wi-fi could be responsible for a range of illnesses, from rashes to brain tumors.
Some say there is evidence to support the growing anxieties. David Carpenter, a professor of environmental health sciences at the university at Albany, in New York, thinks there’s a greater than 95 percent chance that power lines can cause childhood leukemia(白血病). Also there’s a greater than 90 percent chance that cellphones can cause brain tumors. “It’s apparent now that there’s a real risk,” said Carpenter.
But others believe these concerns are unjustified. Dr Martha Linet, the head of radiation epidemiology(流行病学) at the US National Cancer Institute, has looked at the same research as Carpenter but has reached a different conclusion. “I don’t support warning labels for cellphones,” said Linet. “We don’t have the evidence that there’s much danger.”
Studies so far suggest a weak connection between EMFs(电磁场) and illness — so weak that it might not exist at all. A multinational investigation of cellphones and brain cancer, in 13 countries outside the US, has been underway for several years. It’s funded in part by the European Union, in part by a cellphone industry group. The final report should come out later this year, but data so far don’t suggest a strong link between cellphone use and cancer risk.

1. 1.

   From the passage we can learn that some people are worried because   .

   1. A.
      they have evidence the use of cellphone can lead to cancer.
   2. B.
      they make a fuss over cellphone use.
   3. C.
      some expert has given a warning.
   4. D.
      cellphones are responsible for brain tumors.
2. 2.

   By saying “I don’t support warning labels for cellphones,” Dr Martha Linet has the idea that   .

   1. A.
      the worrying is unnecessary.
   2. B.
      cancer-warning labels should be on cellphones.
   3. C.
      there is a link between cellphones and cancer.
   4. D.
      cellphones have nothing to do with cancer.
3. 3.

   The underlined word “underway” is closest in meaning to   .

   1. A.
      started.
   2. B.
      kept on.
   3. C.
      gone on.
   4. D.
      in progress.
4. 4.

   Which of the following best describes the attitude of the author towards the debate?

   1. A.
      Optimistic.
   2. B.
      Objective.
   3. C.
      Disapproving.
   4. D.
      Casual.

At the heart of the debate over illegal immigration lies one key question: are immigrants good or bad for the economy? The American public overwhelmingly thinks they’re bad. Yet the agreement among most economists is that immigration, both legal and illegal, provides a small net boost to the economy. Immigrants provide cheap labor, lower the prices of everything from farm produce to new homes, and leave consumers with a little more money in their pockets. So why is there such a discrepancy between the perception of immigrants’ impact on the economy and the reality?

There are a number of familiar theories. Some argue that people are anxious and feel threatened by an inflow of new workers. Others highlight the stress that undocumented immigrants place on public services, like schools, hospitals, and jails. Still others emphasize the role of race, arguing that foreigners add to the nation's fears and insecurities. There’s some truth to all these explanations, but they aren’t quite sufficient.

To get a better understanding of what’s going on, consider the way immigration’s impact is felt. Though its overall effect may be positive, its costs and benefits are distributed unevenly. David Card, an economist at UC Berkeley, notes that the ones who profit most directly from immigrants’ low-cost labor are businesses and employers —meatpacking plants in Nebraska, for instance, these producers’ savings probably translate into lower prices at the grocery store, but how many consumers make that mental connection at the checkout counter? As for the drawbacks of illegal immigration, these, too, are concentrated. Native low-skilled workers suffer most from the competition of foreign labor. According to a study by George Borjas, a Harvard economist, immigration has reduced the wages of American high-school dropouts by 9%. 

Among high-skilled, better-educated employees, however, opposition was strongest in states with both high numbers of immigrants and relatively generous social services. What worried them most, in other words, was the financial burden of immigration. That conclusion was reinforced by another finding: that their opposition appeared to soften when that financial burden decreased, as occurred with welfare reform in the 1990s, which curbed immigrants’ access to certain benefits.

The irony is that for all the overexcited debate, the net effect of immigration is minimal. Even for those most acutely affected — say, low-skilled workers, or California residents — the impact isn’t all that dramatic. “The unpleasant voices have tended to dominate our perceptions,” says Daniel Tichenor, a professor at the University of Oregon. “But when all those factors are put together and the economists calculate the numbers, it ends up being a net positive, but a small one.” Too bad most people don’t realize it. 

1.What can we learn from the first paragraph?

A．Whether immigrants are good or bad for the economy has been puzzling economists.

B．The American economy used to thrive on immigration but now it’s a different story.

C．The agreement among economists is that immigration should not be encouraged.

D．The general public thinks differently from most economists on the impact of immigration.

2.What is the chief concern of native high-skilled, better-educated employees about the inflow of immigrants?

A．It may change the existing social structure.

B．It may pose a threat to their economic status.

C．It may decrease .their financial burden.

D．It may place a great pressure on the state budget.

3.What is the irony about the debate over immigration?

A．Even economists can’t reach an agreement about its impact.

B．Those who are opposed to it turn out to benefit most from it.

C．People are making too big a fuss about something of small impact.

D．There is no essential difference between seemingly opposite opinions.

4.Which of the following might be the best title of the passage?

A．A debate about whether to immigrate.

B．A debate about the impact of illegal immigrants.

C．The great impact of immigrants on the economy.

D．Opposition to illegal immigration.

Alia Sabur, from Northport, N. Y., US, went to college at age 10. And four years later, Sabur became a bachelor of science in. Applied Mathematics summa cum laude（以最优等成绩）from Stony Brook University -- the youngest female in US history to do so.  Her education continued at Drexel University, where she earned a Master of Science and a Doctor of Philosophy (哲学博士) in Materials Science and Engineering.

With an unlimited future ahead of her, Sabur directed her first career choice to teaching. "I really enjoy teaching," she said. She was three days short of her 19th birthday in February, 2008, when she was hired to become a professor at Konkuk University in Seoul, Korea.  This distinction made her the youngest college professor in history, according to the Guinness' Book of Worm Records, beating the previous record held by Colin Maclaurin, a student of Isaac Newton, in 1717.

Although she doesn't start until next month, Sabur has taken up teaching math and physics courses at Southern University in New Orleans. Sabur is old enough to teach in the city, but not to join her fellow professors in a bar after work. In Korea, where the drinking age is 20, she might have more luck.  In traditional Korean culture, children are considered to be 1 year old-when they are born, and add a year to their age every New Year instead of their actual birthday, so in Korea Sabur is considered 20.

On top of her unprecedented (空前的) academic achievements, Sabur has a black belt in Tae Kwon Do (跆拳道黑带). She is also a talented clarinet (竖笛) player who has performed with musicians like Lang Lang and Smash Mouth. So is there anything Sabur can't do?

1.We can learn from the passage that Sabur is ________.

2.When Sabur was hired as a professor, her actual age is ________.

3.What does the author mean by saying "she might have more luck" (in Paragraph 3)?

4.According to the passage, which of the following is TRUE?