In the animal rights (), much is made of the volume of pain these animals () in the na

A.fragments

B.legislations

C.motivations

D.advocates

research？

know that animal research saves lives. I am concerned about deceptive claims from anima rights activists about the need for animal research. As we know, animal studies continue to be necessary for advancing human and animal health and have played a vital role in every major medical advance. This includes lifesaving drugs, vaccines (疫苗), new surgical procedures, and improved diagnosis of disease.Animal activists try to deceive people and count on society’s general lack of scientific insight to advance their agendA.These activists misrepresent the ability of computers and emerging scientific techniques to serve as substitutes for animal studies. Government regulations around the world require that new drugs, vaccines, and surgical implants first be tested in animals for potential reactions to poisonous substances. Beyond these formal legal requirements, research into the root causes of disease and how diseases become resistant to current treatments cannot be simulated by computer programs or imitated in test tubes.Although present-day technology cannot yet replace many types of animal research, the research community is committed to finding new ways to reduce and replace animal testing. Animal studies are time-consuming and resource-intensive. If meaningful alternatives exist, companies can save hundreds of millions of dollars in facilities and personnel costs. Concern about animal welfare can take very different forms. Some people are offended by the use of leather and fur as fashion but accept that medical research must unavoidably use animals until alternatives are founD.Some groups argue persuasively against intensive farming practices but, again, recognize the need for animals in medical research.My advice is that people carefully consider not just whether or not a group shares their beliefs, but whether or not they behave morally. The strategies used by opponents have included false claims about alternatives to animal testing and misinformation aimed at provoking community concerns about potential disasters. Fortunately, very few people support such extreme views. Surveys show that most Americans support the need for animal studies aimed at medical advances. There is agreement on one key issue: We all look forward to a day when mankind’s wisdom provides a way to completely eliminate the need for animal studies.

21)Why is the author concerned about claims from animal rights activists？ A.The claims will arrest the development of animal research.

B.The claims will make the public believe something untrue.

C.Medical advancement will slow down.

D.Animal rights activists will play an important role.

22)What do animal rights activists say wrong about animal research？

A.Government regulations around the worlD.

B.The advances of new drugs, vaccines and surgical implants.

C.The causes of disease and its resistance to the current treatment.

D.The ability of computers and emerging scientific techniques.

23)What is the animal research community trying to do？

A.Find new ways to reduce and replace animal testing.

B.Further commit themselves to animal research.

C.Criticize animal rights activists’ deceptive claims.

D.Help companies to save a lot of money and costs.

24)Different forms of the concern about animal welfare tell us ________.

A.fewer people are interested in animal research

B.fewer people care about animal rights to live

C.more people support animal research

D.more people are against intensive farming practices

25)Based on the reading, we can see the author is ________.

A.an animal right activist

B.someone who cares about animals

C.arguing for animal studies

D.arguing for alternatives to animal testing

ientists should

A. communicate more with the public.

B. employ hi-tech means in research.

C. feel no shame for their cause.

D. strive to develop new cures.

ph of a misguided cause is that good people do nothing.”One such cause now seeks to end biomedical research because of the theory that animals have rights ruling out their use in research. Scientists need to respond forcefully to animal rights advocates, whose arguments are confusing the public and thereby threatening advances in health knowledge and care. Leaders of the animal rights movement target biomedical research because it depends on public funding, and few people understand the process of health care research. Hearing allegations of cruelty to animals in research settings, many are perplexed that anyone would deliberately harm an animal. For example, a grandmotherly woman staffing an animal rights booth at a recent street fair was distributing a brochure that encouraged readers not to use anything that opposed immunizations, she wanted to know if vaccines come from animal research. When assured that they do, she replied,“Then I would have to say yes.”Asked what will happen when epidemics return, she said,“Don’t worry, scientists will find some way of using computers.”Such well-meaning people just don's understand. Scientists must communicate their message to the public in a compassionate, understandable way-in human terms, not in the language of molecular biology. We need to make clear the connection between animal research and a grandmother's hip replacement, a father's bypass operation a baby's vaccinations, and even a pet's shots. To those who are unaware that animal research was needed to produce these treatments, as well as new treatments and vaccines, animal research seems wasteful at best and cruel at worst.Much can be done. Scientists could“adopt”middle school classes and present their own research. They should be quick to respond to letters to the editor, lest animal rights misinformation go unchallenged and acquire a deceptive appearance of truth. Research institutions could be opened to tours, to show that laboratory animals receive humane care. Finally, because the ultimate stakeholders are patients, the health research community should actively recruit to its cause not only well-known personalities such as Stephen Cooper, who has made courageous statements about the value of animal research, but all who receive medical treatment. If good people do nothing there is a real possibility that an uninformed citizenry will extinguish the precious embers of medical progress.

第46题：The author begins his article with Edmund Burke\'s words to

A. call on scientists to take some actions.

B. criticize the misguided cause of animal rights.

C. warn of the doom of biomedical research.

D. show the triumph of the animal rights movement.

of us bought our beloved “pets”at pet shops or kept beautiful birds in cages.We never considered the impact of these actions on the animals involved.

People often ask if animals should have rights, and quite simply, the answer is “Yes!” Supporters of animal rights believe that animals have a value completely separate from their usefulness to humans.We believe that every creature with a will to live has a right to live free from pain and suffering.Animal rights is not just a philosophy-it is a social movement that challenges society’s traditional views that all animals exist solely for human use.

philosopher in this country in the field of the moral status of non-rational animals", says Bob Bryan, former chairman of the N.C. State Philosophy and Religion Department. Regan has lectured from Stockholm to Melbourne about the importance of recognizing animals as part of the evolving field of ethics. His books, The Case for Animal Rights and In Defense of Animal Rights, are widely acknowledged as having cemented the roots of the modem animal-rights movement in academia.

To be sure, vegetarianism dates back to Plato and Plutarch. And in America, the first cruelty busts happened in the late 19th century in New York. But society viewed animals largely as properties, until Regan and a handful of other philosophers pushed animal-rights issues into the academic mainstream. Indeed, this academic focus has dramatically altered how Americans approach the ethics of husbandry, some observers say. Once-radical ideas have been firmly woven into society.

Regan envisions a type of "bill of rights" for animals, including the abandonment of pet ownership, elimination of a meat-based diet, and new standards for biomedical research on animals. Essentially, he wants to establish a new kind of solidarity with animals, and stop animal husbandry altogether. "In addition to the visible achievements and changes, there's been what I might call an invisible revolution taking place, and that revolution is the seriousness with which the issue of animal rights is taken in the academy and in higher education," Regan says.

But with Regan planning to retire in December, a growing number of farmers, doctors, and others are questioning the sustainability of his ideas. Increasingly, Americans who feel their rights have become secondary to animals' rights are speaking out against a wave of arson attacks on farmers and pies thrown in the faces of researchers. Radical groups, with sometimes-violent tactics, have been accused of scaring farmers away from speaking up for traditional agrarian values. Indeed, tensions are only rising between animal-rights activists and groups that have traditionally used the land with an eye toward animals' overall welfare, not their "right" to be happy or to live long lives.

The controversy around Regan is heightened by the fact that he's no pacifist. He says he believes it's OK to break the law for a greater purpose. He calls it the "greater-evil doctrine", the idea that there's moral hierarchy to crime. "I think that you can win in court, and that's what I tell people," Regan says. "I don't believe that you should run and hide." The shift in the level of respect has been "seismic", he says. "Contrary to what a lot of people think, there really has been a recognition that there are some things that human beings should not be permitted to do to animals. Where the human heart has grown is in the recognition of what is to be prohibited."

Regan is called the intellectual leader of the animal-rights movement because

A．he is a philosopher in the field of animal-rights protection.

B．he helps to make animal-rights movement an academic subject.

C．he has written many books on how to protect animal rights.

D．he proves that animal societies have their moral standards as human societies do.

ties are omitted.

A.should

B.ought to

C.must to

D.dare