Hypertension Drugs Found to Cut Risk of Stroke

    Australian doctors declared Monday that a cocktail of simple antihypertensive drugs can lower the risk of patients suffering a repeat stroke by more than a third. This is the result of their research. The research, presented at a medical conference in Italyover the weekend, has been valued highly as a major breakthrough in stroke prevention.

    Strokes kill 5 million people a year, and more than 15 million suffer nbn-fatal strokes that often leave them with useless limbs , slurred speech and other serious disabilities. One in five stroke survivors goes on to have a second, often fatal, stroke within five years of the first.

    An international six-year study of 6，100 patients directed from Sydney University found that by taking two blood pressure-lowering drugs,the risk of secondary strokes can be reduced by up to 40 per cent. Even taking one of the commonly available drugs can cut the risk by a third，the study said. The drugs are the diuretic indapamide and the ACE inhibitor¹ perindopril, better known by its brand name Coversyl. The combination was effective even in patients who did not have high blood pressure，the researchers said. They even found that the risk of another stroke could be cut by three quarters among the one-in-ten patients who had suffered a cerebral hemorrhage, the worst type of stroke, where there is direct bleeding into the brain.

    Stephen McMahon, who presented the research at theMilancongress of the European Society of Hypertension, said about 50 million people were alive who had suffered at least one stroke. "If most of those patients were able to get access to² this treatment, it would result in³ maybe the avoidance of half a million strokes a year，” the professor told Australia"s ABC Radio.

    McMahon said doctors had long known that lowering the blood pressure of those with hypertension could help prevent strokes. "What we have shown for the first time is that it does not really matter what your blood pressure is⁴ ； if you have had a stroke，then lowering blood pressure will produce large benefits, to begin with⁵— even for people whose blood pressure is average or below average，” he said.

    McMahon said the Milan gathering had heralded the research as a “ major breakthrough in the care of patients with strokes 一 perhaps the biggest step forward that we have made in the last couple of decades".

 

词汇：

hypertension /ˌhaɪpəˈtenʃn/ n.高血压

cocktail /"kɒkteɪl/ n.鸡尾酒（一种各种成分混合的饮料）；混合剂，合剂

antihypertensive / "ænti:hɑɪpə"tensɪv/ adj. .抗高血压的；抗高血压药

slur  /slɜ:(r) / vt.  (使）含糊不清 

diuretic / ˌdaɪjuˈretɪk/ adj. 禾尿的；利尿剂

indapamide /ɪndəpə"maɪd/ n. 吲达帕胺，茚磺苯酰胺(抗高血压药，利尿药）

inhibitor /ɪnˈhɪbɪtə(r)/ n.抑制剂，抑制物

perindopril .呱哚普利

cerebral / ˈserəbrəl, səˈri:-/ adj. 大脑的

h (a) emorrhage  /ˈhemərɪdʒ/ n.  出血

bleeding  /ˈbli:dɪŋ/ v.出血，放血

avoidance /əˈvɔɪdəns/ n.  避免，逃避

herald  /ˈherəld/ v.宣布；预示……的来临

 

注释：

1.ACE (angiotension converting enzyme) inhibitor:血管紧张肽转化酶抑制剂

2.get/have access to:有机会，有权利,有办法。例如:You can get easy access to him.你可以很容易见到他。Students must have access to good books.学生们必须有机会读到好书。

3.result in：(原因）导致（……结果）请注意另一短语result from,其因果关系正相反：（结果）是由……原因所造成的。 例如:His negligence resulted in the accident.他的疏<忽导致了这个事故。Sickness often results from eating too much.疾病常常是因饮食过度造成的。

4.What we have shown for the first time is that it does not really matter what your blood pressure is...：我们第一次所证明的是，你的血压高低并不太重要……在本句中What.. .time是主语从句，that... is是表语从句。在表语从句中it是形式主语， what... is是主语从句。在这里matter是不及物动词,等于be of importance,即“关系重大”。 例如:It doesn"t matter what you do or where you go.你做什么事或到什么地方去，这都无关紧要。

5.to begin with ：首先（作插入语)，例如:He is very diligent, to begin with.首先，他很勤奋。

What patients among those who have had a stroke will benefit greatly from taking blood pressure-lowering drugs?

A:Those whose blood pressure is high B:Those whose blood pressure is average C:Those whose blood pressure is below average D:All of the above

He had an accident and ______ to hospital.

A:was brought B:was taken C:had been taken D:had to take

He had understood nothing ______ to understand.

A:neither he had sought B:nor had he sought C:and he had neither sought D:and nor he had sought

Reading to oneself is a modern activity that was almost unknown to the scholars of the classical and medieval worlds, while during the fifteenth century the term "reading" undoubtedly meant reading aloud. Only during nineteenth century did silent reading become common place.
One should be wary, however, of assuming that silent reading came about simply because reading aloud is a distraction to others. Examination of factors related to the historical development of silent reading reveals that it became the usual mode of reading for most adult reading tasks mainly because the tasks themselves changed in character.
The last century saw a steady gradual increase in literacy, and thus in the number of readers. As readers increased, so the number of potential listeners declined, and thus there was some reduction in the need to read aloud. As reading for the benefit of listeners grew less common, so came the flourishing of reading as a private activity in such public places as libraries, railway carriages and offices, where reading aloud would cause distraction to other readers.
Towards the end of the century there was still considerable argument over whether books should be used for information or treated respectfully, and over whether the reading of material such as newspapers was in some way mentally weakening. Indeed this argument remains with us still in education. However, whatever its virtues, the old shared literacy culture had gone and was replaced by the printed mass media on the one hand and by books and periodicals for a specialized readership on the other.
By the end of the century students were being recommended to adopt attitudes to books and to use skills in reading them which were inappropriate, if not impossible, for the oral read er. The social, cultural, and technological changes in the century had greatly altered what the term "reading" implied.

The emergence of the mass media and of specialized periodicals showed that（）

A:standards of literacy had declined B:readers' interests had diversified C:printing techniques had improved D:educationalists' attitudes had changed

My piano playing has improved {{U}}significantly{{/U}} since I had a new teacher.

A:definitely B:generally C:certainly D:greatly

It came as something of a surprise when Diana, Princess of Wales, made a trip to Angola in 1997, to support the Red Cross’s campaign for a total ban on all anti-personnel landmines. Within hours of arriving in Angola, television screens around the world were filled with images of her comforting victims injured in explosions caused by landmines. "I knew the statistics," she said, "But putting a face to those figures brought the reality home to me: like when I met Sandra, a 13-year-old girl who had lost her leg, and people like her. "
The Princess concluded with a simple message: "We must stop landmines. " And she used every opportunity during her visit to repeat this message.
But, back in London, her views were not shared by some members of the British government, which refused to support a ban on these weapons. Angry politicians launched an attack on the Princess in the press. They described her as "very ill-informed" and a "loose cannon" (乱放炮的人).
The Princess responded by brushing aside the criticisms: "This is a distraction (干扰) we do not need. All I’m trying to do is help. "
Opposition parties, the media and the public immediately voiced their support for the Princess. To make matters worse for the government, it soon emerged that the Princess’s trip had been approved by the Foreign Office, and that she was in fact very well-informed about both the situation in Angola and the British government’s policy regarding landmines. The result was a severe embarrassment for the government.
To try and limit the damage, the Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, claimed that the Princess’s views on landmines were not very different from government policy, and that it was "working towards" a worldwide ban. The Defense Secretary, Michael Portillo, claimed the matter was "a misinterpretation or misunderstanding. "
For the Princess, the trip to this war torn country was an excellent opportunity to use her ,popularity to show the world how much destruction and suffering landmines can cause. She said that the experience had also given her the chance to get closer to people and their problems.
What did Princess Diana think of her visit to Angola

A:It had caused embarrassment to the British government. B:It had greatly promoted her popularity. C:It had brought her closer to the ordinary people. D:It had affected her relations with the British government.

? ?下面有3篇短文，每篇短文后有5道题。请根据短文内容，为每题确定1个最佳选项。
{{B}}第一篇{{/B}}

What did Princess Diana think of her visit to Angola?

A:It had caused embarrassment to the British government. B:It had greatly promoted her popularity. C:It had brought her closer to the ordinary people. D:It had affected her relations with the British government.

? ?Remember when a trip to the supermarket was nothing more than a boring thing requiring little or no specialized knowledge? You could send your kinds into a cart while you did shopping. You always bought the same brands, usually the brands your mother bought. You didn’t know about unit pricing, and furthermore, you didn’t care. It never occurred to you to read the labels on anything. After all, you’d bought these things a hundred times.
? ?But now, I really look on those days with a feeling of yearn. How innocent we were! How carefree were those trips to the supermarket. No worries. Today a trip to the supermarket is filled with social implication. Every time I buy pork chops I think about the years I’m shaving from my life. I keep a wary eye on the freshness date and examine the tamper-proof packaging. I am victim of that most dangerous social disease: shoppers’ panic.
? ?I didn’t realize how serious my condition had become until the last time I needed laundry soap. It seemed simple enough. Just run into the market, grab a box of the old reliable and pay for it. Can’t get less complicated than that, right? I hadn’t planned on discovering Ecover, a new brand of laundry soap. It sat quietly on the shelf right next to my old reliable. "Healthy, gentle but effective." My respect for it deepened with each new claim as I read the entire package. Then I looked at the price: $5.69 for 2 pound. $5.69! I cast a quick glance at the old reliable, still on sale for $1.39.
? ?Six bucks for laundry soap! These people must be crazy! Who’s going to pay six bucks for laundry soap?
? ?It’s not as though I can’t afford it. See, it’s concentrated-use less, get more. BUT SIX BUCKS! And the box is made from recycled materials...
? ?This act went on for a solid half hour, after which I left the shelf without any soap at all.
? ?Disagreement extends every self. Even the cushion poses a multitude of burning questions. Healthy? Dust free? Or natural? Surely the meat department is most threatening place. Remember what protein was good for you? That’s all over, Every bite you take kills you. I won’t even mention meat’s moral implications.
? ?When all is said and done, we still must eat. I gather up my healthy cooking oil and my recycled paper towels and head to the checkout counter. The cashier smiles across that strange and possible hazardous bar code reader and asks, "Paper or plastic?"
According to the passage, what’s the author’s problem?

A:She could not find the right laundry soap in the supermarket. B:She had to use the most healthy things for her poor health. C:She was too poor to afford the new brands in the supermarket. D:She was greatly influenced by the social implications.

My piano playing has improved significantly since I had a new teacher.

A:definitely B:generally C:certainly D:greatly