When a Scottish research team startled the world by revealing 3 months ago that it had cloned an adult sheep, President Clinton moved swiftly. Declaring that he was opposed to using this unusual animal husbandry technique to clone humans, he ordered that federal funds not be used for such an experiment although no one had proposed to do so--and asked an independent panel of experts chaired by Princeton President Harold Shapiro to report back to the White House in 90 days with recommendations for a national policy on human cloning. That group--the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC)--has been working feverishly to put its wisdom on paper, and at a meeting on 17 May, members agreed on a near-final draft of their recommendations. 　　NBAC will ask that Clinton’’s 90-day ban on federal funds for human cloning be extended indefinitely, and possibly that it be made law. But NBAC members are planning to word the recommendation narrowly to avoid new restrictions on research that involves the cloning of human DNA or cells--routine in molecular biology. The panel has not yet reached agreement on a crucial question, however, whether to recommend legislation that would make it a crime for private funding to be used for human cloning. 　　In a draft preface to the recommendations, discussed at the 17 May meeting, Shapiro suggested that the panel had found a broad consensus that it would be"morally unacceptable to attempt to createa human child by adult nuclear cloning". Shapiro explained during the meeting that the moral doubt stems mainly from fears about the risk to the health of the child. The panel then informally accepted several general conclusions, although some details have not been settled. 　　NBAC plans to call for a continued ban on federal government funding for any attempt to clone body cell nuclei to create a child. Because current federal law already forbids the use of federal funds to create embryos ( the earliest stage of human offspring be for birth) for research or to be for knowingly endanger an embryo’’s life, NBAC will remain silent on embryo research. 　　NBAC members also indicated that they will appeal to privately funded researchers and clinics not to try to clone humans by body cell nuclear transfer. But they were divided on whether to go further by calling for a federal law that would impose a complete ban on human cloning. Shapiro and most members favored an appeal for such legislation, but in a phone interview, he said this issue was still "up in the air." It can be inferred from the last paragraph that____________.

A:some NBAC members hesitate to ban human cloning completely B:a law banning human cloning is to be passed in no time C:privately funded researchers will respond positively to NBAC’’s appeal D:the issue of human cloning will soon be settled

When a Scottish research team startled the world by revealing 3 months ago that it had cloned an adult sheep, President Clinton moved swiftly. Declaring that he was opposed to using this unusual animal husbandry technique to clone humans, he ordered that federal funds not be used for such an experiment although no one had proposed to do so--and asked an independent panel of experts chaired by Princeton President Harold Shapiro to report back to the White House in 90 days with recommendations for a national policy on human cloning. That group--the National Bioethics Advisory Commission (NBAC)--has been working feverishly to put its wisdom on paper, and at a meeting on 17 May, members agreed on a near-final draft of their recommendations. 　　NBAC will ask that Clinton’’s 90-day ban on federal funds for human cloning be extended indefinitely, and possibly that it be made law. But NBAC members are planning to word the recommendation narrowly to avoid new restrictions on research that involves the cloning of human DNA or cells--routine in molecular biology. The panel has not yet reached agreement on a crucial question, however, whether to recommend legislation that would make it a crime for private funding to be used for human cloning. 　　In a draft preface to the recommendations, discussed at the 17 May meeting, Shapiro suggested that the panel had found a broad consensus that it would be"morally unacceptable to attempt to createa human child by adult nuclear cloning". Shapiro explained during the meeting that the moral doubt stems mainly from fears about the risk to the health of the child. The panel then informally accepted several general conclusions, although some details have not been settled. 　　NBAC plans to call for a continued ban on federal government funding for any attempt to clone body cell nuclei to create a child. Because current federal law already forbids the use of federal funds to create embryos ( the earliest stage of human offspring be for birth) for research or to be for knowingly endanger an embryo’’s life, NBAC will remain silent on embryo research. 　　NBAC members also indicated that they will appeal to privately funded researchers and clinics not to try to clone humans by body cell nuclear transfer. But they were divided on whether to go further by calling for a federal law that would impose a complete ban on human cloning. Shapiro and most members favored an appeal for such legislation, but in a phone interview, he said this issue was still "up in the air." The panel agreed on all of the following except that ____________.

A:the ban on federal funds for human cloning should be made a law B:the cloning of human DNA is not to be put under more control C:it is criminal to use private funding for human cloning D:it would be against ethical values to clone a human being

Charles Darwin wed his cousin Emma and spawned 10 children, including four brilliant scientists. Albert Einstein’s second wife Elsa was his first cousin. Queen Victoria said “I do” to hers. So have millions worldwide. In parts of Saudi Arabia, 39% of all marriages are between first cousins.
In the U. S., though, the practice bears a stigma of inbreeding just this side of incest. The taboo is not only social hut legislative; 24 states ban the marriage of first cousins: five others allow it only if the couple is unable to bear children. A major reason for this ban is the belief that kids of first cousins are tragically susceptible to serious congenital illnesses.
That view may have to change. A comprehensive study published recently in the Journal of Genetic Counseling indicates such children run an only slightly higher risk of significant genetic disorders like congenital heart defects — about two percentage points above the average 3% to 4%. Says the study’s lead author, Robin Bennett, president-elect of the National Society of Genetic Counselors, which funded the study: “Aside from a thorough medical family history, there is no need to offer any genetic testing on the basis of consanguinity alone”.
Publication of the study will do more than tweak public awareness; it will enlighten doctors who have urged cousin couples not to have children. “Just this week,” says Bennett, “I saw a 23-year-old woman who had had a tubal ligation because her parents were cousins and her doctor told her she shouldn’t have children.”
The American proscription against cousin marriages grew in the 19^th century as wilderness settlers tried to distinguish themselves from the “savage” Indians, says Martin, author of the book Forbidden Relatives: The American Myth of Cousin Marriage. “The truth is that Europeans were marrying their cousins and Native Americans were not.”
And doesn’t God have stern words on the subject Christie Smith, 37, a Nevada writer, says she felt guilty when she fell in love with her first cousin’s son Mark. “I was trying so hard to convince myself not to have these feelings,” she recalls, “that I went to the Bible looking for confirmation that it was wrong. And what I found was the exact opposite: support for cousin marriages.” The patriarch Jacob married two of his first cousins, Rachel and Leah. Smith married Mark in 1999.
The medical ban is lifted; the social stain may take longer to disappear.

A:the ban on cousin marriages is lifted B:cousin marriages are permitted again C:the prejudice against cousin marriages dies hard D:cousin marriages may not be as bad as people think

Questions 15 to 19 are based on the following passage.
The biggest safety threat facing airlines today may not be a terrorist with a gun , but the man with the portable computer in business class. In the last 15 years, pilots have reported well over 100 incidents that could have been caused by electromagnetic interference. The source of this interference remains unconfirmed, but increasingly, experts are pointing the blame at portable electronic devices such as portable computers, radio and cassette players and mobile telephones. RTCA, an organization which advises the aviation (航空) industry, has recommended that all airlines ban (禁止) such devices from being used during "critical" stages of flight, particularly take-off and landing. Some experts have gone further, calling for a total ban during all flights. Currently, rules on using these devices are left up to individual airlines. And although some airlines prohibit passengers from using such equipment during take-off and landing, most are reluctant to enforce a total ban, given that many passengers want to.
The difficulty is predicting how electromagnetic fields might affect an aircraft’s computers. Experts know that portable devices emit radiation which affects those wavelengths which aircraft use for navigation and communication. 8ut, because they have not been able to reproduce these effects in a laboratory, they have no way of knowing whether the interference might be dangerous or not.
The fact that aircraft may be vulnerable (易受损的) to interference raises the risk that terrorists may use radio systems in order to damage navigation equipment. As worrying, though, is the passenger who can’t hear the instructions to turn off his radio because the music’s too loud.

A:is in favor of prohibiting passengers-use of electronic devices completely B:has overestimated the danger of electromagnetic interference C:hasn’t formed his own opinion on this problem D:regards it as unreasonable to exercise a total ban during flight

The revision of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits is the sixth revision of the rules．It is the fruit of more than three years of work by (1) ．UCP 600 applies to any (2) when the text of the credit expressly indicates that it is subject to these rules．They are binding on all parties thereto unless expressly modified or excluded by the credit． (3) means the bank that advises the credit at the request of the issuing bank． (4) means the bank that issues a credit at the request of an applicant or on its own behalf．Article 14 describes the standard for examination of documents．Under UCP 600，the (5) must be made out in the same currency as the L/C．B/L may now allow transshipment，provided that the entire carriage is coved by one and the same bill of lading．

A:Issuing bank B:Advising bank C:Confirming bank D:Negotiating bank

issuing bank

The (1) is the party who requests and instructs the issuing bank to open a letter of credit in favor of the beneficiary. The (2) usually is the importer or the buyer of goods and/or services. The (3) is the party in whose favor a letter of credit is opened by the issuing bank. The (4) usually is the exporter or the seller of goods and/or services. The issuing bank opens a letter of credit in favor of the beneficiary, at the request and on the instructions of the applicant. The issuing bank usually is located in the applicant’ s country. The advising bank advises the beneficiary that a letter of credit opened by the issuing bank is available to him/her and informs the (5) about the terms and conditions of the L/C. The advising bank is not necessarily responsible for the payment of the credit which it advises.

A:beneficiary B:applicant C:issuing bank D:advising bank