根據(jù)下列短與答案，填寫36-45題。

　　Cancer is the world's top "economic killer" as well as its likely leading cause of death. Cancer costs more in 36_______ and lost life than AIDS, malaria, the flu and other diseases that spread person-to-person. Chronic diseases including cancer, heart disease and diabetes 37 _______ for more than 60 percent of deaths worldwide but less than 3 percent of public and private 38_______ for global health, said Rachel Nugent of the Center for Global Development, a Washington-based policy research group. Money shouldn't be taken away from fighting diseases that. 39_______ person-to-person, but the amount 40_______ to cancer is way out of whack (重擊) with the impact it has, said Otis Brawley, the cancer society's chief medical officer.

　　Cancer's economic toll (損耗) was $895 billion in 2008--equivalent to 1.5 percent of the world's gross 41 _______ product, the report says. That's in terms of disability and years of life lost--not the cost of treating the disease, which wasn't addressed in the report. Many groups have been pushing for more attention to non-infectious causes of death, and the United Nations General Assembly has set a meeting on this a year from now. Some policy experts are 42_______ it to the global initiative that led to big increases in spending on AIDS nearly a decade ago. "This needs to be discussed at the UN--how we are going to deal with this rising burden of 43_______ disease", said Dr. Andreas Ullrich, medical officer for cancer control at WHO.

　　Researchers used the World Health Organization's death and disability reports, and economic data from the World Bank. They 44_______ disability-adjusted life years, which reflect the impact a disease has on how long and how 45 _______ people live.

　　A.productively

　　B.supplying

　　C.shifting

　　D.spread

　　E.account

　　F.funding

　　G.calculated

　　H.devoted

　　I .productivity

　　J.chronic

　　K.comparing

　　L. domestic

　　M.doubtful

　　N.clumsily

　　O.disability

　　Section B

　　Directions: In this section, you are going to read a passage with ten statements attached to it. Each statement contains information given in one of the paragraphs. Identify the paragraph from which the information is derived.

　　You may choose a paragraph more than once. Each paragraph is marked with a letter. Answer the questions by marking the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2.

　　根據(jù)答案，回答46-55題。

　　Daylight Saving Time (DST)

　　How and When Did Daylight Saving Time Start?

　　A.Benjamin Franklin--of "early to bed and early to rise" fame-was apparently the first person to suggest the concept of daylight savings. While serving as U.S. ambassador to France in Paris, Franklin wrote of being awakened at 6 a.m. and realizing, to his surprise, that the sun would rise far earlier than he usually did. Imagine the resources that might be saved if be and others rose before noon and burned less midnight oil, Franklin,tongue half in cheek, wrote to a newspaper.

　　B.It wasn't until World War I that daylight savings were realized on a grand scale. Germany was the first state to adopt the time changes, to reduce artificial lighting and thereby save coal for the war effort. Friends and foes soon followed suit. In the U.S. a federal law standardized the yearly start and end of daylight saving time in 1918--for the states that chose to observe it.

　　C.During World War II the U.S. made daylight saving time mandatory (強制的) for the whole country, as a way to save wartime resources. Between February 9, 1942, and September 30, 1945, the government took it a step further. During this period daylight saving time was observed year-round, essentially making it the new standard time, if only for a few years. Many years later, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 was enacted, mandating a controversial month-long extension of daylight saving time, starting in 2007.

　　Daylight Saving Time: Energy Saver or Just Time Suck?

　　D.In recent years several studies have suggested that daylight saving time doesn't actually save energy-and might even result in a net loss. Environmental economist Hendrik Wolff, of the University of Washington, coauthored a paper that studied Australian power-use data when parts of the country extended daylight saving time for the 2000 Sydney Olympics and others did not. The researchers found that the practice reduced lighting and electricity consumption in the evening but increased energy use in the now dark mornings--wiping out the evening gains. That's because the extra hour that daylight saving time adds in the evening is a hotter hour. "So if people get home an hour earlier in a warmer house, they turn on their air conditioning," the University of Washington's Wolff said.

　　E. But other studies do show energy gains. In an October 2008 daylight saving time report to Congress, mandated by the same 2005 energy act that extended daylight saving time, the U.S. Department of Energy asserted that springing forward does save energy. Extended daylight saving time saved 1.3 terawatt (太瓦) hours of electricity. That figure suggests that daylight saving time reduces annual U.S. electricity consumption by 0.03 percent and overall energy consumption by 0.02 percent. While those percentages seem small, they could represent significant savings because of the nation's enormous total energy use.

　　F. What's more, savings in some regions are apparently greater than in others. California, for instance, appears to benefit most from daylight saving time--perhaps because its relatively mild weather encourages people to stay outdoors later. The Energy Department report found that daylight saving time resulted in an energy savings of one percent daily in the state.

　　G.But Wolff, one of many scholars who contributed to the federal report, suggested that the numbers were subject to statistical variability (變化) and shouldn't be taken as hard facts. And daylight savings' energy gains in the U.S. largely depend on your location in relation to the Mason-Dixon Line, Wolff said."The North might be a slight winner, because the North doesn't have as much air conditioning," he said. "But the South is a definite loser in terms of energy consumption. The South has more energy consumption under daylight saving."

　　Daylight Saving Time: Healthy or Harmful?

　　H. For decades advocates of daylight savings have argued that, energy savings or no, daylight saving time boosts health by encouraging active lifestyles--a claim Wolff and colleagues are currently putting to the test. "In a nationwide American time-use study, we're clearly seeing that, at the time of daylight saving time extension in the spring, television watching is substantially reduced and outdoor behaviors like jogging, walking, or going to the park are substantially increased," Wolff said. "That's remarkable, because of course the total amount of daylight in a given day is the same. "

　　I. But others warn of ill effects. Till Roermeberg, a university professor in Munich (慕尼黑), Germany, said his studies show that our circadian (生理節(jié)奏的) body clocks--set by light and darkness--never adjust to gaining an "extra" hour of sunlight to the end of the day during daylight saving time.

　　J. One reason so many people in the developed world are chronically (長期地) overtired, he said, is that they suffer from social jet lag. " In other words, their optimal circadian sleep periods don't accord with their actual sleep schedules. Shifting daylight from morning to evening only increases this lag, he said. "Light doesn't do the same things to the body in the morning and the evening. More light in the morning would advance the body clock, and that would be good. But more light in the evening would even further delay the body clock. "

　　K.Other research hints at even more serious health risks. A 2008 study concluded that, at least in Sweden, heart attack risks go up in the days just after the spring time change. "The most likely explanation to our findings is disturbed sleep and disruption of biological rhythms," One expert told National Geographic News via email. Daylight Savings' Lovers and Haters

　　L. With verdicts (定論) on the benefits, or costs, of daylight savings so split, it may be no surprise that the yearly time changes inspire polarized reactions. In the U.K., for instance, the Lighter Later movement--part of I0:10,a group advocating cutting carbon emissions--argues for a sort of extreme daylight savings. First, they say, move standard time forward an hour, then keep observing daylight saving time as usual--adding two hours of evening daylight to what we currently consider standard time. The folks behind Standardtime.com, on the other hand, want to abolish daylight saving time altogether, calling energy-efficiency claims "unproven. "

　　M. National telephone surveys by Rasmussen Reports from spring 2010 and fall 2009 deliver the same answer.Most people just "don't think the time change is worth the hassle (麻煩的事). " Forty-seven percent agreed with that statement, while only 40 percent disagreed. But Seize the Daylight author David Prerau said his research on daylight saving time suggests most people are fond of it. "1 think if you ask most people if they enjoy having an extra hour of daylight in the evening eight months a year, the response would be pretty positive."

　　46、Daylight savings' energy gains might be various due to different climates.

　　47、Disturbed sleep and disruption of biological rhythms may be the best explanation to higher heart attack risks in the days after the spring time change.

　　48、A research indicated that DST might not save energy by increasing energy use in the dark mornings, though it reduced lighting and electricity consumption in the evening.

　　49、Germany took the lead to save wartime resources by adopting the time changes and reducing artificial lighting.

　　50、A university professor studied the effect of daylight saving time and sounded the alarm of its negative effects.

　　51、Social jet lag can partly account for people's chronic fatigue syndrome in developed countries.

　　52、The figure of a study in the U.S. suggested that DST could save a lot of energy nationally.

　　53、Supporters of daylight savings have long considered daylight saving time does good to people's health.

　　54、A group advocating cutting carbon emissions launches the Lighter Later movement to back a kind of extreme daylight savings.

　　55、A scholar contributing to a federal report suggested that the amount of saved energy had something to do with geographic position.

　　Section C

　　Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A), B), C) and D ). You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.

　　根據(jù)下列短文，回答56-60題。

　　The unique human habit of taking in and employing animals--even competitors like wolves--spurred on human tool-making and language, which have both driven humanity's success, Pat Shipman says, paleoanthropologist of Penn State University. "Wherever you go in the world, whatever ecosystem (生態(tài)系統(tǒng)), whatever culture, people live with animals," Shipman said.

　　For early humans, taking in and caring for animals would seem like a poor strategy for survival. "On the face of it, you are wasting your resources. So this is a very weird behavior," Shipman said. But it's not so weird in the context something else humans were doing about 2.6 million years ago: switching from a mostly vegetarian diet to one rich in meat. This happened because humans invented stone hunting tools that enabled them to compete with other top predators. Quite a rapid and bizarre switch for any animal. So we invented the equipment, learned how to track and kill, and eventually took in animals who also knew how to hunt--like wolves and other canines. Others, like goats, cows and horses, provided milk, hair and, finally, hides and meat.

　　Managing all of these animals--or just tracking them--requires technology, knowledge and ways to preserve and convey information. So languages had to develop and evolve to meet the challenges. Tracking game has even been argued to be the origin of scientific inquiry, said Peter Richerson, professor emeritus (名譽退休的) in the Department of Environmental Science and Policy at the University of California, Davis. One of the signs that this happened is in petroglyphs (史前巖畫) and other rock art left by ancient peoples. At first they were abstract, geometric patterns that are impossible to decipher (破譯). Then they converge on one subject: animals.

　　There have also been genetic changes in both humans and our animals. For the animals those changes developed because human bred them for specific traits, like a cow that gives more mill or a hen that lays more eggs. But this evolutionary influence works both ways. Dogs, for instance, might have been selectively taken in by humans who shared genes for more compassion, Those humans then prospered with the dogs' help in hunting and securing their homes.

　　56、What do we learn from the first paragraph about animals?

　　A.Animals have driven humanity's success.

　　B.Tool-making and language are uniquely human habits.

　　C.Employing wolves is uniquely human habit.

　　D.People live with animals everywhere.

　　57、Why did Shipman say taking in animal is a poor strategy for survival?

　　A.Early humans were poor in survival resources.

　　B.Taking in animal was a very weird behavior.

　　C.Early humans didn't know how to track and kill.

　　D.Early humans switched from a vegetarian diet to meat.

　　58、Why did languages have to develop and evolve to meet the challenges?

　　A.Early humans should have communication in tracking game.

　　B.Language can enable humans to compete with other top predators.

　　C.Animals should understand the orders given by humans.

　　D.Language could give a rapid and bizarre switch for any animal.

　　59、What do we learn from the statement of Pat Shipman and Peter Richerson?

　　A.Caring for animals seemed common after people invented tools.

　　B.After language developed early humans learned how to track and kill.

　　C.Managing and tracking animals are the origin of modem science.

　　D.Language developed from abstract to specific because of animals.

　　60、What do we learn from the last paragraph?

　　A.Animals changes are developed by themselves.

　　B.Human bred animals for specific genes.

　　C.Evolutionary influence works on both humans and animals.

　　D.Genes could make the dogs help people in hunting.

關(guān)注"566四六級"微信，獲取報名、真題、內(nèi)部資料等信息！

英語四六級題庫【手機題庫下載】 | 微信搜索"566四六級"

　　相關(guān)推薦：

　　2015年12月大學(xué)英語六級重點詞匯復(fù)習匯總

　　2015年12月大學(xué)英語六級考試必備短語匯總

　　2015大學(xué)英語六級考試段落翻譯常用詞匯大全

　　2015年12月大學(xué)英語六級真題高頻詞匯復(fù)習匯總