(Q).
Right is right. Right? Of course. But is left wrong? Well, the Romans used to think so. They thought left-handed people were mistakes of nature. Latin, the language of the Romans, had many words that expressed this view. Some words we use today still have this meaning. The Latin word "dexter" means "right". The English word "dexterous" comes from this word. It means "handy" (clever with hands). So, right is handy. But the Latin word for left is "sinister". The English word "sinister" comes from this word. Sinister means "evil" (very bad). Is it fair to call right-handed people handy and left-handed people evil? Well, fair or not, many languages have words that express such beliefs. In old English, the word for left means "weak". That isn't much of an improvement over "evil". Not very long ago, children were often forced to write with their right hands. Doctors have since found that this can be very harmful. You should use the hand you were born to use. People who use their left hands are just starting to get better treatment. But why they get all these bad names in the first place? One reason may be that there are not as many left-handed people as there are right-handed people. There is one left-handed person for every five right-handed ones. People who are different are often thought to be wrong. But attitudes do seem to be changing. Fair-minded right-handed people are finally starting to give left-handed people a hand. The last sentence of this article means   _  . A) Fair-minded right-handed people want to change the habit of the left-handed people B) Fair-minded right-handed people are starting to help the left-handed people C) Fair-minded right-handed people are starting to use left hand to write and so on D) Fair-minded right-handed people are starting to give up using their left hands
(A).
B


(Q).
A few days ago we - that's me and the husband - took a cab to the station. Chat with the driver fell to the wrong of cyclists, and the misunderstanding of the road rules. So far as the rules of the road go, there seems to be one basic principle: when you are driving a car you hate bikes, when you are riding a bike you hate cars (and I guess walkers hate everyone). There is an obvious difference of viewpoint built in here. It wasn't until I started to drive a car (almost 20years after I had first rode a bike) that I actually realized that you could not see a cyclist at night without lights. In fact I now want to shout at late night cyclists without lights(like motortists once did at me): "You'll get killed, sunshine, I can't see you." The problem is that cyclists do ride headlong into danger. It's not just not having lights. It's biking on pavements (and so threatening to injure a load of innocent walkers in the process) and biking down one-way streets the wrong way. I admit that I do bike the wrong way down a one-way street sometimes. My feeble  defense is that I try always to do it as if I know I was doing wrong. That is slowly, with an apologetic look on the face, and ready to get off at any minute. I can't bear the guys  (usually, but not always it is guys) who do it as if they owned the place, and at high speed. So cyclists are not entirely innocent. But they are among the disadvantaged groups, because the bottom line is that a car or a lorry can kill a cyclist and not the other way around. Which group is most likely to face danger according to the writer? A) walkers B) passers-by C) cyclists D) motorists
(A).
C


(Q).
Death is natural, but do you have any idea of the process of dying? Modern scientists divide the process of dying into two phases --- clinical or temporary death and biological death. Clinical death occurs when the vital organs, such as the heart or lungs, have ceased to function, but have not suffered permanent damage. The organism can still be revived . Biological death occurs when changes in the organism lead to the "breaking up" of vital cells and tissues. Death is then unchangeable and final. Scientists have been seeking a way to prolong the period of clinical death so that the organism can remain alive before biological death occurs. The best method developed so far involves cooling of the organism, combined with narcotic sleep. By slowing down the body's metabolism , cooling delays the processes leading to biological death. To illustrate how this works, scientists performed an experiment on a six-year-old female monkey called Keta. The scientist put Keta to sleep with a narcotic. Then they surrounded her body with ice-bags and began checking her body temperature. When it had dropped to 28 degrees the scientists began draining blood from an artery. The monkey's blood pressure decreased and an hour later both the heart and breathing stopped: clinical death set in. For twenty minutes Keta remained in this state. Her temperature dropped to 22 degrees. At this point the scientists pumped blood into an artery in the direction of the heart and started artificial breathing. After two minutes Keta's heart became active once more. After fifteen minutes, spontaneous breathing began, and after four hours Keta opened her eyes and lifted her head. After six hours, when the scientists tried to give her a penicillin injection, Keta seized the syringe and ran with it around the room. Her behavior differed little from that of a healthy animal. Scientists try to make the time of clinical death longer in order to A) slow down the body's metabolism. B) bring vital cells and tissues back to active life. C) cool the organism. D) delay the coming of biological death.
(A).

D