阅读理解

　　It is difficult for a visitor to India to avoid noticing the poverty, which surrounds him. The truth is that the land will yield only enough food to support two thirds of India's 480 million people. In a frank examination of Indian poverty, Ronald Segal in The Crisis of India observes, “Not only is the Indian economy overwhelmingly agricultural, it is less productive, land measure for land measure, than the agricultural economies of most other states too marry people struggle to wrest survival from the earth, and the earth yields far too little in return.”

　　“The stark consequence is that India produces only enough to feed a little less than two thirds of its population adequately. In a recent year, with a population of 438 million, food production reached 78 million tons. Together with three million tons of imported food, this permitted an average consumption of ounces a day, or ounces less than the essential minimum recommended nutritionists. If a diet necessary to sustain health was provided for as many people as possible, some 150 million people in India would have nothing whatsoever to eat. If everyone received the same food, 438 million people would eat less than two thirds of what their bodies required. As it is, a few are able to buy more food than they need, some can just afford the necessary diet, most live in constant—if manageable—want, and many ( no one knows how many, but they are numbered in tens of millions)exist in a state of starvation.”

　　And time is not on India's side. While production moves barely perceptibly, the population gallops along at something like 9,400,000 a year.

1．If sufficient food could be imported, how many people in India would it have to support to make up for the shortage of food?

[　　]

A．160 million people.

B．480 million people.

C．438 million people.

D．9,400,000 people.

2．According to the second paragraph, if 150 million people did not eat anything, ________.

[　　]

A．the remainder would probably die

B．they would all have 8.5 ounces less than the minimum diet

C．the rest would have 25 ounces a month

D．they would have a diet necessary to sustain their health

3．The current increase in the production of food ________.

[　　]

A．will gradually remedy the shortage

B．is not less than the rate of increase in the population

C．is a factor which will improve the situation eventually

D．is inadequate to cope with the rising population

4．The writer uses Segal's statement ________.

[　　]

A．to back up his own remarks

B．to appeal for foreign assistance

C．to stress the need for family planning

D．to refute the statement made in the last paragraph

5．The article suggests that agricultural methods in India ________ .

[　　]

A．are comparatively inefficient

B．are likely to improve in time

C．provide an average of 16.5 ounces a day for each person

D．less wasteful than those of most other countries

阅读理解

阅读下列短文，从每题所给的四个选项(A，B，C和D)中，选出最佳选项．

　　One of the most important weapons used during the Second World War was not a weapon used against people, but rather a drug(药) used against disease. The wartime use of penicillin(青霉素)saved thousands of lives. In the First World War, for example, pneumonia(肺炎) caused eighteen percent of all the deaths in the United States army. In the Second World War, the rate(比率)went down to less than one percent. In addition, penicillin was instrumental (有助于) in keeping wounds from getting infected(感染)and in helping to speed the healing process(愈合过程), of those wounds that did become infected.

1．According to the author, the most important weapon in the Second War was ________.

[　　]

2．From the passage, we know that ________ of America soldiers in the First World War died of pneumonia.

[　　]

3．Why did much fewer soldiers die of pneumonia in the Second World War?

[　　]

A．Because there were fewer soldiers.

B．As there were fewer diseases.

C．Because the use of penicillin.

D．As soldiers were clever.

4．Penicillin was not used ________ in the Second World War.

[　　]

5．What would be the title of this passage?

[　　]