试述堂吉诃德的形象演变史

About one million Americans are diagnosed annually with skin cancer

A．every year

B．severely

C．actively

D．every month

Which is probably NOT true of lung cancer？

A．Smokers are usually considered to be at high risk for it.

B．It is the leading cause of cancer deaths around the world.

C．159,000 new cases of it are diagnosed in the US each year.

D．It often goes unnoticed until it has spread.

Which is probably NOT true of lung cancer？

A．Smokers are usually considered to be at high risk for it.

B．It is the leading cause of cancer deaths around the world.

C．159,000 new cases of it are diagnosed in the US each year.

D．It often goes unnoticed until it has spread.

The teacher emphasized that _____ of us should read the essay three times .

A.each everyone

B.all and every one

C.each and every one

D.each someone

根据材料回答{TSE}题：{TS}According to the report, smoking three or four cigars a day__________

A. increases the risk of oral cancer for non-smokers

B. greatly increases the risk of oral cancer for smokers

C. increases the risk of more than one cancer for non-smokers

D. greatly increases the risk of more than one cancer for smokers

A．one

B．two

C．three

D．four

cancer, compared to men with the same H. pylori strains who had one to three siblings.

A．eighth

B．one

C．forth

D．twice

equivalent of two classrooms full of children are diagnosed with cancer every day. Mrs. Pryce lost her own 9-year-old daughter to cancer in 1999. Pediatric cancer remains a little-understood issue in America, where the health-care debate is consumed with the ills, pills and medical bills of the elderly.

Cancer kills more children than any other disease in America. Although there have been tremendous gains in cancer survival rates in recent decades, the proportion of children and teens diagnosed with different forms of the disease increased by almost a third between 1975 and 2001.

Grisly though these statistics are, they are still tiny when set beside the number of adult lives lost to breast cancer (41,000 each year) and lung cancer (164,000). Advocates for more money for child cancer prefer to look at life-years lost. The average age for cancer diagnosis in a young child is six, while the average adult is diagnosed in their late 60s. Robert Arceci, a pediatric cancer expert at Johns Hopkins, points out that in terms of total life-years saved, the benefit from curing pediatric cancer victims is roughly the same as curing adults with breast cancer.

There is an obvious element of special pleading in such calculations. All the same, breast cancer has attracted a flurry of publicity, private fund-raising and money from government. Childhood cancer has received less attention and cash. Pediatric cancer, a term which covers people up to 20 years old, receives one-twentieth of the federal research money doled out by the National Cancer Institute. Funding, moan pediatric researchers, has not kept pace with rising costs m the field, and NCI money for collaborative research will actually be cut by 3% this year.

There is no national pediatric cancer registry that would let researchers track child and teenage patients through their lives as they can do in the case of adult sufferers. A pilot childhood-cancer registry is in the works. Groups like Mr. Reaman's now get cash directly from Congress. But it is plainly a problem most politicians don't know much about.

The biggest problem could lie with 15-19-year-olds. Those diagnosed with cancer have not seen the same improvement in their chances as younger children and older adults have done. There are some physical explanations for this: teenagers who have passed adolescence are more vulnerable to different sorts of cancer. But Archie Bleyer, a pediatric oncologist at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Centre in Texas, has produced some data implying that lack of health insurance plays a role. Older teenagers and young adults are less likely to be covered and checked regularly.

The author cites the example of Mrs. Pryce to show that

A．child cancer is no longer a rare case.

B．nowadays Americans care little about child cancer.

C．the current health-care debate is rather time-consuming.

D．school kids axe more likely to be diagnosed with cancer.

equivalent of two classrooms, full of children are diagnosed with cancer every day. Mrs. Pryce lost her own 9-year-old daughter to cancer in 1999. Pediatric cancer remains a little-understood issue in America, where the health-care debate is consumed with the ills, pills and medical bills of the elderly.

Cancer kills more children than any other disease in America. Although there have been tremendous gains in cancer survival rates in recent decades, the proportion of children and teens diagnosed with different forms of the disease, increased by almost a third between 1975 and 2001.

Grisly though these statistics are, they are still tiny when set beside the number of adult lives lost to breast cancer (41,000 each year) and lung cancer (164,000). Advocates for more money for child cancer prefer to look at life-years lost. The average age for cancer diagnosis in a young child is six, while the average adult is diagnosed in their late 60s. Robert Arceci, a pediatric cancer expert at Johns Hopkins, points out that in terms of total life-years saved, the benefit from curing pediatric cancer victims is roughly the same as curing adults with breast cancer.

There is an obvious element of special pleading in such calculations. All the same, breast cancer has attracted a flurry of publicity, private fund-raising and money from government. Childhood cancer has received less attention and cash. Pediatric cancer, a term which covers people up to 20 years old, receives one-twentieth of the federal research money doled out by the National Cancer Institute. Funding, moan pediatric researchers, has not kept pace with rising costs in the field, and NCI money for collaborative research will actually be cut by 3 % this year.

There is no national pediatric cancer registry that would let researchers track child and teenage patients through their lives as they can do in the case of adult sufferers. A pilot childhood-cancer registry is in the works. Groups like Mr. Reaman's now get cash directly from Congress. But it is plainly a problem most politicians don't know much about.

The biggest problem could lie with 15-19-year-olds. Those diagnosed with cancer have not seen the same improvement in their chances as younger children and older adults have done. There are some physical explanations for this: teenagers who have passed adolescence are more vulnerable to different sorts of cancer. But Archie Bleyer, a pediatric oncologist at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Centre in Texas, has produced some data implying that lack of health insurance plays a role. Older teenagers and young adults are less likely to be covered and checked regularly.

The author cites the example of Mrs. Pryce to show that

A．child cancer is no longer a rare case.

B．nowadays Americans care little about child cancer.

C．the current health-care debate is rather time-consuming.

D．school kids are more likely to be diagnosed with cancer.

Which one is NOT the impact of the Three Mile Island calamity？

A．It frightened people.

B．It aroused media"s concern.

C．It crippled the US nuclear power.

D．It was a national disaster.