To understand the roughly 100,000 genes in the human genome, researchers say they must investigate an even more complicated set of molecules-proteins. Genes are the blueprints for making proteins, and the "sequence" of a gene—its structural pattern— determines the kind of protein it makes. Some proteins become building blocks for structural parts of the cell. Other proteins become molecular "machines" enzymes, hormones, antibodies that carry out the myriad activities necessary to keep the cell and the body working properly.
With an understanding of human proteins (or the proteome), scientists will be able to fight disease on many fronts. For example, scientists at the Center for Proteome Analysis in Odense, Denmark, have isolated a protein, galectin, that may fight diabetes. Diabetes seems to be caused when insulin-producing cells in the pancreas are inadvertently killed by the body’s immune system.
The Danish scientists spent years analyzing the proteins present in diabetes-prone and diabetes-resistant cells, and they tentatively concluded that galectin protects diabetes-prone cells from being attacked by the immune system. Preliminary animal tests, in which the galectin gene has been inserted into diabetes-prone cells, seem to confirm the hypothesis.
Effective cancer drugs may also arise from a deeper understanding of genes and proteins, says Ken Carter, president of Therapeutic Genomics, one of the many biotech companies working to devise new drugs based on genetic knowledge. Soon, scientists will be able to quickly and accurately compare cancer tissue with normal tissue to see which genes are "switched on" and making proteins and which genes are not, he says.
"If you found a gene that was highly expressed in prostate cancer cells but not other tissues, you could deduce that gene was involved in prostate cancer," according to Carter. "We would try to develop in the lab a way to block the expression of that gene." One possibility would be a "small molecule" drug that would attach to and inactivate that gene’s protein.
Finally, drugs themselves will likely become safer and more effective because they will be tailored to an individual’s genetic ability to process medicines, predicts Robert Waterston, director of the Human Genome Project sequencing center at Washington University in St.Louis.
In the future, a blood test could show how much of a particular drug-processing enzyme a person has, Waterston explains. The doctor would then adjust the dose accordingly or prescribe a drug custom designed for that person’s genetic makeup. This new field, called pharmacogenomics, should eliminate many of the drug side effects that result from our current, cruder methods of determining dosage.
The research of scientists at the Center for Proteome Analysis in Odense, Denmark is helpful to ______.

A:isolate a protein, galectin B:cure diabetes C:the body’s immune system D:protect diabetes-prone cells

Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension Part A Directions: Reading the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points) Text 1 When it comes to suing doctors, Philadelphia is hardly the city of brotherly love. A combination of sprightly lawyers and sympathetic juries has made Philadelphia a hotspot for medical-malpractice lawsuits. Since 1995, Pennsylvania state courts have awarded an average of $ 2m in such cases, according to Jury Verdict Research, a survey firm. Some medical specialists have seen their malpractice insurance premiums nearly double over the past year. Obstetricians are now paying up to $ 104,000 a year to protect themselves. The insurance industry is largely to blame. Carol Golin, the Monitor’s editor, argues that in the 1990s insurers tried to grab market share by offering artificially low rates (betting that any losses would be covered by gains on their investments). The stock-market correction, coupled with the large legal awards, has eroded the insurers’ reserves. Three in Pennsylvania alone have gone bust. A few doctors -- particularly older ones --- will quit. The rest are adapting. Some are abandoning litigation-prone procedures, such as delivering babies. Others are moving parts of their practice to neighboring states where insurance rates are lower. Some from Pennsylvania have opened offices in New Jersey. New doctors may also be deterred from setting up shop in litigation havens, however prestigious. Despite a Republican president, tort reform has got nowhere at the federal level. Indeed doctors could get clobbered indirectly by a Patients’ Bill of Rights, which would further expose managed care companies to lawsuits. This prospect has fuelled interest among doctors in Pennsylvania’s new medical malpractice reform bill, which was signed into law on March 20th. It will, among other things, give doctors $ 40m of state funds to offset their insurance premiums, spread the payment of awards out over time and prohibit individuals from double-dipping that is, suing a doctor for damages that have already been paid by their health insurer. But will it really help Randall Bovbjerg, a health policy expert at the Urban Institute, argues that the only proper way to slow down the litigation machine would be to limit the compensation for pain and suffering, so-called "non-monetary damages". Needless to say, a fixed cap on such awards is resisted by most trial lawyers. But Mr Bovbjerg reckons a more nuanced approach, with a sliding scale of payments based on well-defined measures of injury, is a better way forward. In the meantime, doctors and insurers are bracing themselves for a couple more rough years before the insurance cycle turns. Nobody disputes that hospital staff make mistakes: a 1999 Institute of Medicine report claimed that errors kill at least 44,000 patients a year. But there is little evidence that malpractice lawsuits on their own will solve the problem.

A:litigation-prone areas. B:the insurance premium. C:irresponsible hospital staff. D:the insurance industry.

To understand the roughly 100,000 genes in the human genome, researchers say they must investigate an even more complicated set of molecules-proteins. Genes are the blueprints for making proteins, and the "sequence" of a gene—its structural pattern— determines the kind of protein it makes. Some proteins become building blocks for structural parts of the cell. Other proteins become molecular "machines" enzymes, hormones, antibodies that carry out the myriad activities necessary to keep the cell and the body working properly.
With an understanding of human proteins (or the proteome), scientists will be able to fight disease on many fronts. For example, scientists at the Center for Proteome Analysis in Odense, Denmark, have isolated a protein, galectin, that may fight diabetes. Diabetes seems to be caused when insulin-producing cells in the pancreas are inadvertently killed by the body’s immune system.
The Danish scientists spent years analyzing the proteins present in diabetes-prone and diabetes-resistant cells, and they tentatively concluded that galectin protects diabetes-prone cells from being attacked by the immune system. Preliminary animal tests, in which the galectin gene has been inserted into diabetes-prone cells, seem to confirm the hypothesis.
Effective cancer drugs may also arise from a deeper understanding of genes and proteins, says Ken Carter, president of Therapeutic Genomics, one of the many biotech companies working to devise new drugs based on genetic knowledge. Soon, scientists will be able to quickly and accurately compare cancer tissue with normal tissue to see which genes are "switched on" and making proteins and which genes are not, he says.
"If you found a gene that was highly expressed in prostate cancer cells but not other tissues, you could deduce that gene was involved in prostate cancer," according to Carter. "We would try to develop in the lab a way to block the expression of that gene." One possibility would be a "small molecule" drug that would attach to and inactivate that gene’s protein.
Finally, drugs themselves will likely become safer and more effective because they will be tailored to an individual’s genetic ability to process medicines, predicts Robert Waterston, director of the Human Genome Project sequencing center at Washington University in St.Louis.
In the future, a blood test could show how much of a particular drug-processing enzyme a person has, Waterston explains. The doctor would then adjust the dose accordingly or prescribe a drug custom designed for that person’s genetic makeup. This new field, called pharmacogenomics, should eliminate many of the drug side effects that result from our current, cruder methods of determining dosage.

A:isolate a protein, galectin B:cure diabetes C:the body’s immune system D:protect diabetes-prone cells

We used to think that the left brain controlled your thinking and that the right brain controlled your heart. But neuroscientists have learned that it’s a lot more complicated.
In 2007, an influential paper in the journal Behavioral and Brain Functions found that while most of us process emotions through the right hemisphere of the brain, about 35 % of people—especially victims of trauma—process their hurt and anger through their left brain, where logic and language sit. That may be because they had worked so hard to explain, logically, why they were suffering. But pushing emotions through the left brain taxed it: these people performed significantly worse on memory tests.
Now a new paper—out in the September issue of The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease—further complicates the picture with a surprising finding: whether you are right-handed, left-handed or ambidextrous (which the authors call, rather delightfully, " inconsistently handed") seems to be an important clue in understanding how you use your brain to process emotions.
It’s been known for some time that lefties and the ambidextrous are more prone to negative emotions. The new study shows that they also have a greater imbalance in activity between the left and right brains when they process emotions. Of course, you can’t be sure which comes first: maybe angry people are more out of balance, or maybe the inability to find equilibrium makes you angry. As for the left-handed: maybe they’re more angry because the world is designed for the right-handed majority.
The study also used an interesting method to find that angry people are, literally, hot-headed: the authors of the paper—led by Ruth Propper, a psychology professor at Merrimack College in Massachusetts- measured brain-hemisphere activation with a relatively old method called tympanic membrane temperature, which is essentially how hot it is in your inner ear. If you get angry a lot, your head tends to be warmer.
One problem is that the study was small —just 55 undergraduates participated (they were paid $20 each for having to endure ear-temperature tests and psychological questioning). Also, The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, while peer-reviewed, is one of less-respected psychology journals. Still, I like the study just because it explains that when you get hot under the collar, you are actually hot under the collar.
According to the text, which one the author holds is true

A:Angry people are more out of balance. B:Righties are less prone to negative emotions. C:The inability to find equilibrium makes people angry. D:When people get angry, their heads tend to be bigger.

Premature Smoking: A Serious Problem The third report on smoking and health from the Royal College of Physicians, which was published this month, contains important new sections on the smoking habits of children and the possible effect, on their future health. These include a twenty fold in the increase in the risk of lung cancer in heavy smokers and an increase of about three and a half times in the risk of dying from coronary(冠状的) heart disease; chronic(慢性的) oronchitis (支气管炎) and emphysema(肺气肿) are also much commoner. Teachers play an important part in determining the attitude of children to smoking, whether or not the children start to smoke, and in providing knowledge about the consequences of smoking. Whenever I see children of school age openly smoking in public, I wonder whether they really understand what they are doing. Probably most do not. I at least know that my clinical practice in lung disease will not be short of patients for the rest of my working life. About 34 percent of boys aged 15 smoke, and two thirds of this number of girls. Over the past ten years there has been a small but welcome reduction in the number of boys who smoke at this age, but an increase in the number of girls. One large study has shown that of those children who smoke more than one cigarette, as many as 85 percent become habitual (习惯的) smokers. This is partly because nicotine is one of the most dependent—producing drugs known, on a par with heroin and other hard drugs in this respect. One in three smokers start before the age of nine, some even as young as five. The causes of premature death which one-third of smokers will suffer, and of the prolonged illnesses which affect so many of them, are described in the report; its enough to say that the younger a child starts to smoke the greater are his chances of dying early. It has been shown that children who smoke have certain characteristics. Compared with nonsmokers they are more rebellious(__的), their work deteriorates(使变坏) as they move up school, they are more likely to leave school early, and are more often delinquent(违法的) and sexually(性的) precocious(早熟). Many of these features can be summarized as anticipation of adulthood. There are a number of factors which determine the onset(开始) of smoking, and these are largely psychological and social. They include availability of cigarettes, curiosity, rebelliousness, appearing tough, anticipation of adulthood, social confidence, example of parents and teachers, and smoking by friends and older brothers and sisters. It should be much easier to prevent children from starting to smoke than to persuades adults to give up the habit once established, but in fact, this has proved very difficult. The example set by people in authority, especially parents, health care workers, and teachers, is of prime importance. School rules should forbid smoking by children on the premises (场所). This rule has even been introduced at Summerhill School where I spent my school days. There is, however, a risk of children smoking just to rebel against the rules, and even in those schools which have tried to enforce no smoking by corporeal (肉体的) punishment there is much smoking as in other schools, Nevertheless, banning smoking is probably on balance beneficial. Teachers too should not smoke on school premises, at least not in front of children. People who smoke heavily______.

A:run a twenty-to-one risk of contracting lung cancer B:are most certain to suffer from one or more of lung and heart complaints C:are more prone than other people to certain lung complaints D:many run more risk of contracting certain lung and heart disease

Premature Smoking: A Serious Problem The third report on smoking and health from the Royal College of Physicians, which was published this month, contains important new sections on the smoking habits of children and the possible effect, on their future health. These include a twenty fold in the increase in the risk of lung cancer in heavy smokers and an increase of about three and a half times in the risk of dying from coronary(冠状的) heart disease; chronic(慢性的) oronchitis (支气管炎) and emphysema(肺气肿) are also much commoner. Teachers play an important part in determining the attitude of children to smoking, whether or not the children start to smoke, and in providing knowledge about the consequences of smoking. Whenever I see children of school age openly smoking in public, I wonder whether they really understand what they are doing. Probably most do not. I at least know that my clinical practice in lung disease will not be short of patients for the rest of my working life. About 34 percent of boys aged 15 smoke, and two thirds of this number of girls. Over the past ten years there has been a small but welcome reduction in the number of boys who smoke at this age, but an increase in the number of girls. One large study has shown that of those children who smoke more than one cigarette, as many as 85 percent become habitual (习惯的) smokers. This is partly because nicotine is one of the most dependent—producing drugs known, on a par with heroin and other hard drugs in this respect. One in three smokers start before the age of nine, some even as young as five. The causes of premature death which one-third of smokers will suffer, and of the prolonged illnesses which affect so many of them, are described in the report; its enough to say that the younger a child starts to smoke the greater are his chances of dying early. It has been shown that children who smoke have certain characteristics. Compared with nonsmokers they are more rebellious(__的), their work deteriorates(使变坏) as they move up school, they are more likely to leave school early, and are more often delinquent(违法的) and sexually(性的) precocious(早熟). Many of these features can be summarized as anticipation of adulthood. There are a number of factors which determine the onset(开始) of smoking, and these are largely psychological and social. They include availability of cigarettes, curiosity, rebelliousness, appearing tough, anticipation of adulthood, social confidence, example of parents and teachers, and smoking by friends and older brothers and sisters. It should be much easier to prevent children from starting to smoke than to persuades adults to give up the habit once established, but in fact, this has proved very difficult. The example set by people in authority, especially parents, health care workers, and teachers, is of prime importance. School rules should forbid smoking by children on the premises (场所). This rule has even been introduced at Summerhill School where I spent my school days. There is, however, a risk of children smoking just to rebel against the rules, and even in those schools which have tried to enforce no smoking by corporeal (肉体的) punishment there is much smoking as in other schools, Nevertheless, banning smoking is probably on balance beneficial. Teachers too should not smoke on school premises, at least not in front of children. People who smoke heavily______.

A:run a twenty-to-one risk of contracting lung cancer B:are most certain to suffer from one or more of lung and heart complaints C:are more prone than other people to certain lung complaints D:many run more risk of contracting certain lung and heart disease

Premature Smoking: A Serious Problem The third report on smoking and health from the Royal College of Physicians, which was published this month, contains important new sections on the smoking habits of children and the possible effect, on their future health. These include a twenty fold in the increase in the risk of lung cancer in heavy smokers and an increase of about three and a half times in the risk of dying from coronary(冠状的) heart disease; chronic(慢性的) oronchitis (支气管炎) and emphysema(肺气肿) are also much commoner. Teachers play an important part in determining the attitude of children to smoking, whether or not the children start to smoke, and in providing knowledge about the consequences of smoking. Whenever I see children of school age openly smoking in public, I wonder whether they really understand what they are doing. Probably most do not. I at least know that my clinical practice in lung disease will not be short of patients for the rest of my working life. About 34 percent of boys aged 15 smoke, and two thirds of this number of girls. Over the past ten years there has been a small but welcome reduction in the number of boys who smoke at this age, but an increase in the number of girls. One large study has shown that of those children who smoke more than one cigarette, as many as 85 percent become habitual (习惯的) smokers. This is partly because nicotine is one of the most dependent—producing drugs known, on a par with heroin and other hard drugs in this respect. One in three smokers start before the age of nine, some even as young as five. The causes of premature death which one-third of smokers will suffer, and of the prolonged illnesses which affect so many of them, are described in the report; its enough to say that the younger a child starts to smoke the greater are his chances of dying early. It has been shown that children who smoke have certain characteristics. Compared with nonsmokers they are more rebellious(__的), their work deteriorates(使变坏) as they move up school, they are more likely to leave school early, and are more often delinquent(违法的) and sexually(性的) precocious(早熟). Many of these features can be summarized as anticipation of adulthood. There are a number of factors which determine the onset(开始) of smoking, and these are largely psychological and social. They include availability of cigarettes, curiosity, rebelliousness, appearing tough, anticipation of adulthood, social confidence, example of parents and teachers, and smoking by friends and older brothers and sisters. It should be much easier to prevent children from starting to smoke than to persuades adults to give up the habit once established, but in fact, this has proved very difficult. The example set by people in authority, especially parents, health care workers, and teachers, is of prime importance. School rules should forbid smoking by children on the premises (场所). This rule has even been introduced at Summerhill School where I spent my school days. There is, however, a risk of children smoking just to rebel against the rules, and even in those schools which have tried to enforce no smoking by corporeal (肉体的) punishment there is much smoking as in other schools, Nevertheless, banning smoking is probably on balance beneficial. Teachers too should not smoke on school premises, at least not in front of children. People who smoke heavily______.

A:run a twenty-to-one risk of contracting lung cancer B:are most certain to suffer from one or more of lung and heart complaints C:are more prone than other people to certain lung complaints D:many run more risk of contracting certain lung and heart disease