2023年英语六级真题和详细答案.doc

Part I Writing (30 minutes)Directions: For this part,you are allowed 30 minutes to write a shortessay on living in the virtual world. Try to imagine what will happen when people spend more and more time inthe virtual world instead of interacting in the real world. You are required to write at least 150 words but no more than 200 words.Part III Reading Comprehension (40 minutes)Section ADirections: In this section, there is a passage with ten blanks. You are required to select one word for each blank from a list of choices given in a word bank following the passage.The robotics revolution is set to bring humans face to face with an old fear-man-made creations as smart and capable as we are without a moral compass. As robots take on ever more complex roles, the question naturally_(27). Who will be responsible when they do something wrong? Manufacturers? Users? Software writers? The answer depends on the robot.Robots already save us time, money and energy. In the future, they will improve our health care, social welfare and standard of living. The _(28)of computational power and engineering advances will _(29)enable lower-cost in-home care for the disabled,_(30)use of driverless cars that may reduce drunk and distracted-driving accidents and countless home and service-industry uses from street cleaning to food preparation.But there are _(31)to be problems. Robot cars will crash. A drone (遥控飞行器)operator will _(32)someones privacy. A robotic lawn mower(割草机)will run over a neighbors cat. Juries sympathetic to the _(33)of machines will punish entrepreneurs with company-crushing _(34)and damages What should government do to protect people while _(35), space for innovation?Big. complicated systems on which much public safety depends, like driverless cars, should be built _(36)and sold by manufacturers who take responsibility for ensuring safety and are liable for accidents. Governments should set safety requirements and then let insurers price the risk of the robots based on the manufacturers driving record. not the passengers.Section BDirections: In this section, you are going to read a passage with ten statements attached to it. Each statement contains information given in one of the paragraphs. Identify the paragraph from which the information is derived. You may choose a paragraph more than once. Each paragraph is marked with a letter. Answer the questions by marking the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2.Reform and Medical CostsAAmerican are deeply concerned about the relentless rise in health care costs and health insurance premiums. They need to know if reform will help solve the problem. The answer is that no once has an easy fix rising medical costs. The fundamental fixreshaping how care is delivered and how doctors are paid in a wasteful, abnormal systemis likely to be a achieved only through trial and incremental(渐进旳)gains.BThe good news is that a bill just approved by the House and a bill approved by the Senate Finance Committee would implement or test many reforms that should help slow the rise in medical costs over the long term. As report in The New England Journal of Medicine concluded. Pretty much every proposed innovation found in the health policy Iiterature these days is contained in these measures.CMedical spending, which typically rises faster than wages and the overall economy, is propelled by two things: the high prices charged for medical services in this country and the volume of unnecessary care delivered by doctors and hospitals, which often perform a lot more tests and treatments than patient really needs.DHere are some of the important proposals in the House and Senate bills to try to address those problem, and why it is hard to know how well they will work.EBoth bills would reduce the rate of growth in annual Medicare payments to hospital, nursing homes and other providers by amounts comparable to the productivity savings routinely made in other industries with the help of new technologies and new ways to organize work. This proposal could save Medicare more than $100 billion over the next decade. If private plans demanded similar productivity savings from providers, and refused to let providers shift additional costs to them, the savings could be much larger. Critics say Congress will give in to lobbyists and let inefficient provider off the hook(放过). That is far less likely to happen if Congress also adopts strong pay-go rules requiring that any increase in payments to providers be offset by new taxes or budge cuts.FThe Senate Finance bill would impose an excise tax(消费税)on health insurance plans that cost more than $8,000 for an individual or $21,000 for a family. It would most likely cause Insures to redesign plans to fall beneath the threshould. Enrollees would have to pay more money for many services out of their own pockets, and that would encourage them to think twice about whether an expensive or redundant test was worth it. Economists project that most employers would shift money from expensive health benefits into wages, The House bill has no similar tax. The final legislation should.GAny doctor who has wrestled with multiple forms from different insurers, or patients who have tried to understand their own parade of statements, know that simplification ought to save money. When the health insurance industry was still cooperating in reform efforts, its trade group offered to provide standardized forms for automated processing. It estimated that step would save hundreds of billions of dollars over the next decade. The bills would lock that pledge into law.HThe stimulus package provided money to convert the inefficient, paper-driven medical system to electronic records that can be easily viewed and transmitted .This requires open investments to help doctors convert. In time it should help restrain costs by eliminating redundant test, preventing drug inter actions, and helping doctors find the best treatments.IVirtually all experts agree that the fee-for-service systemdoctors are rewarded for that the cost of care is so high. Most agree that the solution is to push doctors to accept fixed payments to care for a particular illness or for a patients needs over a year. No one knows how to make that happen quickly. The bills in both houses would start pilot projects within Medicare. They include such measures as accountable care organizations to take charge of a patients needs with an eye on both cost and quality, and chronic disease management to make sure the seriously ill, who are responsible for the bulk of all health care costs, are treated properly. For the most part, these experiments rely on incentive payments to get doctors to try them.JTesting innovations do no good unless the good experiments are identified and expanded and the bad ones arc dropped. The Senate bill would create an independent commission to monitor the pilot programs and recommend changes in Medicares payment policies to urge providers to adopt reforms that work. The changes would have to be approved or rejected as a whole by Congress, making it hard for narrow-interest lobbies to bend lawmakers to their will.KThe bills in both chambers would create health insurance exchanges on which small businesses and individuals could choose from an array of private plans and possibly a public option. All the plans would have to provide standard benefit packages that would be easy to compare. To get access to millions of new customers, insures would have a strong incentive to sell on the exchange. And the head-to-head competition might give them a strong incentive to lower their prices, perhaps by accepting slimmer profit margins or demanding better deals from providers.LThe final legislation might throw a public plan into the competition, but thanks to the fierce opposition of the insurance industry and Republican critics, it might not save much money. The one in the House bill would have to negotiate rates with providers, rather than using Medicare rates, as many reformers wanted.MThe presidents stimulus package is pumping money into research to compare how well various treatments work. Is surgery, radiation or careful monitoring best for prostate(前列腺)cancer? Is the latest and most expensive cholesterol-lowering drug any better than its common competitors? The pending bills would spend additional money to accelerate this effort.NCritics have charged that this sensible idea would lead to rationing of care. (That would be true only if you believe that patients should have an unrestrained right to treatments proven to be inferior.) As a result, the bills do not requires, as they should, that the results of these studies be used to set payment rates in Medicare.OCongress needs to find the courage to allow Medicare to pay preferentially for treatments proven to be superior. Sometimes the best treatment might be the most expensive. But overall, we suspect that spending would come down through elimination of a lot of unnecessary or even dangerous tests and treatments.PThe House bill would authorize the secretary of health and human services to negotiate drug prices in Medicare and Medicaid. Some authoritative analysts doubt that the secretary would get better deals than private insurers already get. We believe negotiation could work. It does in other countries.Q Missing from these bills is any serious attempt to rein in malpractice costs. Malpractice awards do drive up insurance premiums for doctors in high-risk specialties, and there is some evidence doctors engage in defensive medicine by performing tests and treatments primarily to prove they are not negligent should they get sued. a tax imposed on expensive health insurance plans, most employers will likely transfer money from health expenses into wages. in policy would be approved or rejected as a whole so that lobbyists would find it hard to influence lawmakers. is not easy to curb the rising medical costs in America. of forms for automatic processing will save a lot of medical and insurance industry are strongly opposed to the creation of a public insurance plan. of paper to electronic medical records will help eliminate redundant tests and prevent drug interactions. high cost of medical services and unnecessary tests and treatments have driven up medical expenses. main factor that has driven up medical expenses is that doctors are compensated for the amount of care rather than its effect. to analysts doubts, the author believes drug prices may be lowered through negotiation. competition might create a strong incentive for insurers to charge less.Section CPassage OneQuestions 47 to 51 are based on the following passage.Facing water shortages and escalating fertilizer costs, farmers in developing countries are using raw sewage(下水道污水)to irrigate and fertilize nearly 49 million acres of cropland, according to a new report-and it may not be a bed thing.While the practice carries serious health risks for many, those dangers are outweighed by the social and economic gains for poor urban farmers and consumers who need affordable food.There is a large potential for wastewater agriculture to both help and hurt great numbers of urban consumers, said Liqa Raschid-Sally, who led the study.The report focused on poor urban areas, where farms in or near cities supply relatively inexpensive food. Most of these operations draw irrigation water from local rivers or lakes. Unlike developed cities, however, these areas lack advanced water-treatment facilities, and rivers effectively become sewers.(下水道)When this water is used for agricultural irrigation, farmers risk absorbing disease-causing XX, as do consumers who eat the produce raw and unwashed. Nearly million people die a year because of diarrhea-related(与腹泻有关旳)diseases, according to WHO statistics. XXX than 80% of those cases can be attributed to contant with contaminated water and a lack of XXX anitation. But Pay Drechsel, an environmental scientist, argues that the social and economic benefits of using untreated human waste to grow food outweigh the health risks.Those dangers can be addressed with farmer and consumer education, he said, while the free water and nutrients from human waste can help urban farmers in developing countries to escape poverty.Agriculture is a water-intensive business, accounting for nearly 70% of global fresh water consumption.In poor, dry regions, untreated wastewater is the only viable irrigation source to keep farmers in business. In some cases, water is so scarce that farmers break open sewage pipes transporting waste to local rivers.Irrigation is the primary agricultural use of human waste in the developing world. But frequently untreated human waste is used on grain crops, which are eventually cooked, minimizing the risk of transmitting water-borne diseases. With fertilizer prices jumping nearly 50% per metric ton over the last year in some places, human waste is an attractive, and often necessary, alternative.In cases where sewage mud is used, expensive chemical fertilizer us can be avoided. The mud contains the same critical nutrients.Overly strict standards often fail, James Bartram, a WHO water-health expert, said. We need to accept that fact across much of the planet, so waste with little or no treatment will be used in agriculture for good reason. does the author say about the use of raw sewage for farming? risks cannot be overestimated. should be forbidden altogether. benefits outweigh the hazards involved. is polluting millions of acres of cropland. is the main problem caused by the use of wastewater for irrigation? and lakes nearby will gradually become contaminated. will drive producers of chemical fertilizers out of business. and consumers may be affected by harmful bacteria. will make the farm produce less competitive on the market. is environmental scientist Pay Drechsels attitude towards the use of untreated human waste in agriculture? . . . . does Pay Dreschsel think of the risks involved in using untreated human waste for farming? have been somewhat exaggerated. can be dealt with through education. will be minimized with new technology. can be addressed by improved sanitation. do we learn about James Bartrams position on the use of human waste for farming? echoes Pay Drechsels opinion on the issue. chaltenges Liqa Raschid-Sallys conclusion thinks it the only way out of the current food erisis. deems it indispensable for combating global poverty.Passage TwoThese days, nobody needs to cook. Families graze on high-cholesterol take-aways and microwaved ready-meals. Cooking is an occasional hobby and a vehicle for celebrity chefs. Which makes it odd that the kitchen has b