刷题刷出新高度,偷偷领先!偷偷领先!偷偷领先! 关注我们,悄悄成为最优秀的自己!

单选题

        Sugar shocked. That describes the reaction of many Americans this week following revelations that, 50 years ago, the sugar industry paid Harvard scientists for research that shifted the focus away from sugar’s role in heart disease—and put the spotlight (注意的中心) squarely on dietary fat.

        What might surprise consumers is just how many present-day nutrition studies are still funded by the food industry. Nutrition scholar Marion Nestle of New York University spent a year informally tracking industry-funded studies on food. “Roughly 90% of nearly 170 studies favored the sponsor’s interest,” Nestle tells us. Other systematic reviews support her conclusions.

        For instance, studies funded by Welch Foods—the brand behind Welch’s 100% Grape Juice—found that drinking Concord grape juice daily may boost brain function. Another, funded by Quaker Oats, concluded, as a Daily Mail story put it, that “hot oatmeal (燕麦粥) breakfast keeps you full for longer.”

        Last year, The New York Times revealed how Coca-Cola was funding well-known scientists and organizations promoting a message that, in the battle against weight gain, people should pay more attention to exercise and less to what they eat and drink. Coca-Cola also released data detailing its funding of several medical institutions and associations between 2010 and 2015.

        “It’s certainly a problem that so much research in nutrition and health is funded by industry,” says Bonnie Liebman, director of nutrition at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “When the food industry pays for research, it often gets what it pays for.” And what it pays for is often a pro-industry finding.

        Given this environment, consumers should be skeptical (怀疑的) when reading the latest finding in nutrition science and ignore the latest study that pops up on your news feed. “Rely on health experts who’ve reviewed all the evidence,” Liebman says, pointing to the official government Dietary Guidelines, which are based on reviews of hundreds of studies.

        “And that expert advice remains pretty simple,” says Nestle. “We know what healthy diets are—lots of vegetables, not too much junk food, balanced calories. Everything else is really difficult to do experimentally.”

50. What is the author’s advice to consumers?

A
Follow their intuition in deciding what to eat.
B
Be doubtful of diet experts’ recommendations.
C
Ignore irrelevant information on their news feed.
D
Think twice about new nutrition research findings.
使用微信搜索喵呜刷题,轻松应对考试!

答案:

D

解析:

解析:D。根据题干中的author’s advice to consumers可定位到原文倒数第二段第一句,定位句中的consumers should即作者对消费者的建议。定位句提到,鉴于当下的这种环境,消费者应该在阅读营养科学的最新发现时保持怀疑态度。D项与此内容相符,其中的Think twice对应定位句中的be skeptical,new nutrition research findings是对该句中the latest finding in nutrition science的同义替换,故D项为正确答案。

错项排除:A项在原文中无依据,故排除。原文中说对营养科学的最新发现保持怀疑态度,但可以信赖那些审查过各方面证据的健康专家,B项利用原文中的细节信息skeptical和experts进行拼凑,曲解了原文的意思,故错误。C项利用ignore和news feed设置干扰,但文中说要忽略的是动态消息里弹出的最新研究,而不是无关信息,故C项错误。

创作类型:
原创

本文链接:50. What is the author’s advice to consumers?

版权声明:本站点所有文章除特别声明外,均采用 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可协议。转载请注明文章出处。

让学习像火箭一样快速,微信扫码,获取考试解析、体验刷题服务,开启你的学习加速器!

分享考题
share