The world economy develops rapidly. As a result, longevity and life ______ have increased worldwide.

Economic Recovery on the Way
Economic experts are predicting that the poorly performing domestic economy will recover in the next financial quarter. After months of economic recession, local companies 44 to make larger profits. Ted Wilder, a leading authority in the field, suggests that the reasons for the positive outlook can largely be attributed to recent 45.
Laws enacted by the federal government last month granting benefits and subsidies to the manufacturing industry have greatly increased production, leading to record numbers of goods being shipped overseas. The 46 in exports is also having a positive impact on the rest of the economy.
阅读以上短文，回答200-202题。

第44题答案是__________

A.are expected
B.have expected
C.is expected
D.had expected

When countries develop economically,people live longer lives.Development experts have long Delieved this is because having more money expands lifespan,but a massive new study suggests that education may play a bigger role.The finding has huge implications for public health spending.Back in 1975,economists plotted rising life expectancies against countries'wealth,and concluded that wealth itself increases longevity.It seemed self-evident:everything people need to be health from food to medical care--costs money But soon it emerged that the data didn't always fit that theory.Economic upturns didn’t always mean longer lives.In addition,for reasons that weren't clear,a given gain in gross domestic product（GDP）caused increasingly higher gains in life expectancy over time,as though it was becoming cheaper to add years of life.Me moreover,in the 1980s researchers found ga ins in literacy were associated with greater increases in life expectancy than gains in wealth were Finally,the more educated people in any country tend to live longer than their less educated compatriots.But such people also tend to be wealthier,so it has been difficult to untangle which factor is increasing lifespan Permanent change Wolfgang Lutz of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Vienna and colleagues have now done that by compiling average data on GDP per person,lifespans,and years of education from 174 countries,dating from 1970 to 2010 They found that,Just as in 1975,wealth correlated with longevity.But the correlation between longevity and years of schooling was closer,with a direct relationship that did not change over time way wealth does When the team put both these factors into the same mathematical model,they found that differences in education closely predicted differences in life expectancy,while changes in wealth barely mattered Lutz argues that because schooling happens many years before a person has attained their life expectancy,this correlation reflects cause:better education drives longer life.It also tends to lead to more wealh,which is why wealth and longevity are also correlated.But what is important,says Lutz,is that wealth does not seem to be driving longevity,as experts thought-in fact,education is driving both of them Lifestyle choices Some medical professionals may not like these findings,"says Lutz,as they suggest schools may be a better health investment than high-tech hospitals.But RudigerKrech at the World Health Organization welcomes the study."It confirms education as a major social determinant of health,"he says-aconcept WHO actively promotes.But if medical health experts welcome the findings,economists are less comfortable Sangheon Lee,at the UN International Labour Organisation in Geneva,Switzerland agrees education affects lifespan but doubts that simple models like Lutz's can fully resolve cause and effect."It's a very difficult econometric problem,"he says,with health,wealth and education all affecting each other But Lutz says that extreme examples are telling.Cuba is dead poor but has a higher life expectancy than the US because it is well educated.Meanwhile in oil-rich but poorly-educated Equatorial Guinea,people rarely reach 60
Which of the following is true according to the findings of Wolfgang Lutz?

A.The correlation between longevity and wealth changes as time goes by
B.His findings are roughly the same as the research made in 1975.
C.Longevity is driven directly by both of one's education and wealth
D.Life expectancy can be accurately predicted by one s education.

When countries develop economically,people live longer lives.Development experts have long Delieved this is because having more money expands lifespan,but a massive new study suggests that education may play a bigger role.The finding has huge implications for public health spending.Back in 1975,economists plotted rising life expectancies against countries'wealth,and concluded that wealth itself increases longevity.It seemed self-evident:everything people need to be health from food to medical care--costs money But soon it emerged that the data didn't always fit that theory.Economic upturns didn’t always mean longer lives.In addition,for reasons that weren't clear,a given gain in gross domestic product（GDP）caused increasingly higher gains in life expectancy over time,as though it was becoming cheaper to add years of life.Me moreover,in the 1980s researchers found ga ins in literacy were associated with greater increases in life expectancy than gains in wealth were Finally,the more educated people in any country tend to live longer than their less educated compatriots.But such people also tend to be wealthier,so it has been difficult to untangle which factor is increasing lifespan Permanent change Wolfgang Lutz of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Vienna and colleagues have now done that by compiling average data on GDP per person,lifespans,and years of education from 174 countries,dating from 1970 to 2010 They found that,Just as in 1975,wealth correlated with longevity.But the correlation between longevity and years of schooling was closer,with a direct relationship that did not change over time way wealth does When the team put both these factors into the same mathematical model,they found that differences in education closely predicted differences in life expectancy,while changes in wealth barely mattered Lutz argues that because schooling happens many years before a person has attained their life expectancy,this correlation reflects cause:better education drives longer life.It also tends to lead to more wealh,which is why wealth and longevity are also correlated.But what is important,says Lutz,is that wealth does not seem to be driving longevity,as experts thought-in fact,education is driving both of them Lifestyle choices Some medical professionals may not like these findings,"says Lutz,as they suggest schools may be a better health investment than high-tech hospitals.But RudigerKrech at the World Health Organization welcomes the study."It confirms education as a major social determinant of health,"he says-aconcept WHO actively promotes.But if medical health experts welcome the findings,economists are less comfortable Sangheon Lee,at the UN International Labour Organisation in Geneva,Switzerland agrees education affects lifespan but doubts that simple models like Lutz's can fully resolve cause and effect."It's a very difficult econometric problem,"he says,with health,wealth and education all affecting each other But Lutz says that extreme examples are telling.Cuba is dead poor but has a higher life expectancy than the US because it is well educated.Meanwhile in oil-rich but poorly-educated Equatorial Guinea,people rarely reach 60
Which of the following can back up the theory that wealth itself increases longevity?

A.A robust economic turnaround didn't translate into greater longevity
B.Because everything people need to stay physically healthy costs money
C.Because education is more associated with longevity than wealth
D.Because the more educated are likely to live longer than the less educated

共用题干
第二篇

In many of the developinlg countries in Africa and Asia,the population is growing fast.The reason for this is simple:Women in these countries have a high birth rate一from 3.0 to 7.0 children per woman.The majority of these women are poor,without the food or resources to care for their families.Why do they have so many children?Why don't they limit the size of the family?The answer may be that they often have no choice.There are several reasons for this.
One reason is economic.In a traditional agricultural economy,large families are helpful.Having more children means having more workers in the fields and someone to take care of the parents in old age.In an industrial economy,the situation is different. Many children do not help a family;instead,they are an expense.Thus,industrialization has generally brought down the birth rate.This was the case in Italy,which was industrialized quite recently and rapidly.In the early part of the twentieth century,Italy was a poor,largely agricultural country with a high birth rate.After World War Ⅱ,Italy's economy was rapidly modernized and industrialized.By the end of the century,the birth rate had dropped to 1.3 children per woman,the world's lowest.
However,the economy is not the only important factor that influences birth rate.Saudi Arabia, for example,does not have an agriculture-based economy,and it has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world.Nevertheless,it also has a very high birth rate(7.0).Mexico and Indonesia, on the other hand,are poor countries,with largely agricultural economies,but they have recently reduced their population growth.
Clearly,other factors are involved.The most important of these is the condition of women.A high birth rate almost always goes together with lack of education and low status for women.This would explain the high birth rate of Saudi Arabia.There,the traditional culture gives women little education or independence and few possibilities outside the home.On the other hand,the improved condition of womnen in Mexico,Thailand,and Indonesia explains the decline in birth rates in these countries.Their governments have taken measures to provide more education and opportunities for women.
Another key factor in the birth rate is birth control.Women may want to limit their families but have no way to do so. In countries where governments have made birth control easily available and inexpensive ,birth rates have gone down.This is the case in Singapore,Sri Lanka,and India,as well as in Indonesia,Thailand,Mexico,and Brazil.In these countries,women have also been provided with health care and help in planning their families.
These trends show that an effective programn to reduce population growth does not have to depend on better economic conditions. It can be effective if it aims to help women and meet theii needs.Only then,in fact,does it have any real chance of success.

In a traditional agricultural economy,a large family_________.
A:can be an advantage
B:may limit income
C:isn't necessary
D:is expensive