2012年考研英語閱讀理解精讀高分版(23)

　WHAT do you do when everyone hates you? That is the problem faced by America's pharmaceutical industry. Despite its successes in treating disease and extending longevity, soaring health-care costs and bumper profits mean that big drug firms are widely viewed as exploitative, and regarded almost as unfavourably as tobacco and oil firms (see chart). Last week, at a conference organised by The Economist in Philadelphia, the drug industry was offered some advice from an unlikely source: a tobacco firm. Steven Parrish of Altria, the conglomerate that includes Philip Morris, gave his perspective on how an industry can improve its tarnished public image.

　　Comparing the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries might seem absurd, or even offensive. "Their products kill people. Our products save people's lives," says Alan Holmer, the head of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, an industry association. Yet the drug giants currently face an unprecedented onslaught of class-action lawsuits and public scrutiny; industry bosses are being grilled by lawmakers asking who knew what and when. It is all reminiscent of what happened to the tobacco industry in 1994.

　　Mr Parrish advised drug firms to abandon their bunker mentality and engage with their critics. Rather than arguing about the past, he said, it is better to move on, and give people something new to think about. (Philip Morris now acknowledges, for example, that cigarettes are addictive and deadly, and is trying to develop less harmful products.) Not everyone is open to persuasion, so focus on those who are, he said. But changing opinions takes time and demands deeds as well as words: "This is not about spin, this is about change."

　　The pharmaceutical industry is pursuing a range of initiatives to mollify its critics, Mr Holmer noted in his own speech. But Mr Parrish suggested that speaking with one voice through a trade association might be counter-productive, since it can give the impression that the industry is a monolithic cartel. And too much advertising, he said, can actually antagonise people further.

　　The audience was generally receptive, claims Mr Parrish. This is not the first time he has offered his thoughts on dealing with implacable critics. At a conference at the University of Michigan last year, he offered America's State Department advice on improving America's image in the Middle East. So does his prescription work? There has been a positive shift in attitudes towards tobacco firms, if only a small one. But at least, for once, a tobacco firm is peddling a cure, rather than a disease.

　1.Why is America’s pharmaceutical industry so unpopular?

　　A. Because it, like tobacco and oil firms, does harm to people’s health and environment.

　　B. Because it fails to cure disease and make people live longer.

　　C. Because the prices of its products are too high and its profit margin is too wide.

　　D. Because it exploits its employees.

　　2.Alan Holmer is quoted to illustrate that __________.

　　A. the comparison between tobacco and pharmaceutical industries might seem ridiculous, or even insulting

　　B. the pharmaceutical industries agree that they are similar to tobacco industry

　　C. tobacco products do more harm to people than pharmaceutical products

　　D. pharmaceutical industries are currently facing lots of problems

　　3.According to the text, Mr. Parrish gives the following suggestions to drug firms except______.

　　A. To acknowledge the problems and try to do something to improve their images.

　　B. Not to react to the public in one voice through the drug association.

　　C. Not to care about the past.

　　D. To try to spend time and energy to persuade the majority of the audience who are open to persuasion.

　　4.The word “mollify” (Line 1, Paragraph 4) might mean?

　　A. placate.

　　B. enrage.

　　C. fight.

　　D. relieve.

　　5.What does the author imply by saying “This is not the first time he has offered his thoughts on dealing with implacable critics.”?

　　A. Mr. Parrish has offered his advice to other on dealing with tough critics for several times.

　　B. Mr. Parrish has dealt successfully with other critics himself.

　　C. Mr. Parrish has given sound advice to drug firms.

　　D. Mr. Parrish has been of help to others on critical moments.

　1.答案是C，屬推理判斷題。第一段第2—4行“Despite its successes in treating disease and extending longevity, soaring health-care costs and bumper profits mean that big drug firms are widely viewed as exploitative, and regarded almost as unfavourably as tobacco and oil firms (see chart).”一句中的“soaring health-care costs and bumper profits”是正確回答該問題的關鍵。“Soaring” 表示“飛漲的”。“bumper” 表示通常表示“豐盛的，豐收的”例如，“a bumper crop”表示“大豐收”；但該詞在本句中與“profits”連用，表示“豐厚的利潤”。

　　2.答案是A，屬推理判斷題。該題的關鍵在于正確判斷出第二段第一句是概括句，而緊隨其

　　后的引言是細節句。細節句是為說明概括句服務的。由此可以看出引言是用來說明“Comparing the tobacco and pharmaceutical industries might seem absurd, or even offensive.”。

　　3.答案是D，屬推理判斷題。本題的關鍵在于正確理解第三、第四段中帕爾什提出的幾條建

　　議。根據關鍵詞：advice及其同義詞和句型suggest，better to, so do sth.等，我們可以從第三段和第四段中挑出以下句子，如果能正確理解這些句子，就能順利完成該題。第三段第一句話：“Mr Parrish advised drug firms to abandon their bunker mentality and engage with their critics.” “帕里什先生建議制藥商擯棄他們的掩蔽心理，正面回應批評。”“Rather than arguing about the past, he said, it is better to move on, and give people something new to think about.” “他建議說，不要對過去糾纏不清，而是要繼續發展，這樣才能讓民眾淡忘過去的一切，看到進步。” “Not everyone is open to persuasion, so focus on those who are, he said.”“帕里什還指出，并不是人人都能被說服的。因此集中精力說服那些聽的進取的人。”But Mr Parrish suggested that speaking with one voice through a trade association might be counter-productive, “但帕里什先生說，通過行業協會發布一致看法有可能適得其反”。

　　4.答案是A，屬猜詞題。根據上文提到的對制藥業的批評，可以判斷“The pharmaceutical

　　industry is pursuing a range of initiatives to mollify its critics ”中的“mollify its critics”表示“平息批評”。

　　5.答案是C，屬推理判斷題。 從本句“This is not the first time he has offered his thoughts on dealing with implacable critics.”，以及下面舉出的例子：他為美國國務院提建議。結合在一起可以看出作者隱含的意思是：他認為帕里什先生為制藥業提的建議有道理，會奏效。

   考試須知：2012考研時間安排 ♦應試技巧及考場須知 ♦首發2012考研真題

    考前必看：準考證下載入口 ♦2012年考研考場規則 ♦2012考研考場查詢

    復習備考：政治時事匯總 必背考點 預測試題 ♦ 英語作文預測 模板大全