2. 外语
  3. With all the tools available to modern medicine--the blood tests and M.R.I.’s and endoscopes (内诊镜)--you might think that misdiag

With all the tools available to modern medicine--the blood tests and M.R.I.’s and endoscopes (内诊镜)--you might think that misdiag

admin2010-03-26  17
问题     With all the tools available to modern medicine--the blood tests and M.R.I.’s and endoscopes (内诊镜)--you might think that misdiagnosis (误诊) has become a rare thing. But you would be wrong. Studies of autopsies (尸体解剖) have shown that doctors seriously misdiagnose fatal illnesses about 20 percent of the time. So millions of patients are being treated for the wrong disease.
    As shocking as that is, the more astonishing fact may be that the rate has not really changed since the 1930’s. "No improvement!" was how an article in the normally exclamation-free Journal of the American Medical Association summarized the situation. This is the richest country in the world--one where one-seventh of the economy is devoted to health care--and yet misdiagnosis is killing thousands of Americans every year.
    How can this be happening? And how is it not a source of national outrage?
    A big part of the answer is that all of the other medical progress we have made has distracted us from the misdiagnosis crisis.
    Any number of diseases that were death sentences just 50 years ago---like childhood leukemia (白血病)--are often manageable today. But we still could be doing a lot better. Under the current medical system, doctors, nurses, lab technicians and hospital executives are not actually paid to come up with the right diagnosis. They are paid to perform tests and to do surgery and to give out drugs.
    There is no bonus for curing someone and no penalty for failing, except when the mistakes rise to the level of malpractice. So even though doctors can have the best intentions, they have little economic incentive to spend time double-checking their instincts, and hospitals have little incentive to give them the tools to do so.
    "You get what you pay for," Mark B. McClellan, who runs Medicare and Medicaid, told me. "And we ought to be paying for better quality."
    There are some bits of good news here. Dr. McClellan has set up small pay-for-performance programs in Medicare, and a few insurers are also experimenting. But it isn’t nearly a big enough push. We just are not using the power of incentives to save lives. For a politician looking to make the often-bloodless debate over health care come alive, this is a huge opportunity.
What does the sentence "For a politician looking to make the often-bloodless debate over health care come alive, this is a huge opportunity" (the last paragraph) suggest?
选项 A、Politicians can take advantage of misdiagnosis crisis to debate.
B、The government should consider setting up a better medical system.
C、Health care is a good topic for the politicians to debate about.
D、Politicians should debate over how to create opportunities for people.
答案B
解析 此题要求考生在读懂句子字面意义的基础上分析作者使用该句的真正用意。因此，解题步骤应为读句子，联系句子出现的整个段落以及整个篇章所表达的作者的态度、意图进行分析。“For a politician looking to make the often-bloodless debate over health care come alive，this is a huge opportunity”的字面意思是：国会关于医疗问题的辩论通常是毫无生机的，若有哪个政界人士想给这一问题注入生气，这倒是个好机会。但单凭该句字面意义本身还不能充分确定作者说话的真正意图，应参考整个段落：有人开始提出应根据表现发放工资(pay-for-performance)，但作者认为这还不足以解决问题。随后指出我们未使用激励的力量来拯救生命。据此，联系最后一句，不难看出作者希望政府通过立法来实行激励制度。故选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/eyk7777K
0

大学英语四级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)