题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
[主观题]
Blood testing is another widely accepted method of drug testing.A．YB．NC．NG
Blood testing is another widely accepted method of drug testing.
A．Y
B．N
C．NG
查看答案
如果结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
如果结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
题目内容
（请给出正确答案）
Blood testing is another widely accepted method of drug testing.
A．Y
B．N
C．NG
如果结果不匹配，请 联系老师 获取答案
更多“Blood testing is another widel…”相关的问题
Random drug testing ______.
A．is practiced all over the Britain
B．involves taking the student's blood to test drug use
C．aims at driving drag-taking students out of the school
D．is arranged with the help of computer
听力原文：W: So, have you collected the blood sample so we could do our genetic research？
M: I'm afraid we are in trouble. The people we're testing have religious concern about the work we're doing, so I couldn't collect the sample.
Q: What are the two speakers talking about？
(18)
A．Results of genetic research.
B．The blood sample collection.
C．The way to get the blood sample.
D．Religious concern about genetic research.
回答{TSE}题： DNA testing
DNA testing reveals the genes of each individual person. Since the early twentieth century scientists have known that all human characteristics are contained in a person's genes and are passed from parents to children. Genes work as a chemical instruction manual for each part and each function of the body. Their basic chemical element is called DNA, a copy of which can be found in every cell. The existence of genes and the chemical structure of DNA were understood by the mid-1900s, but scientists have only recently been able to identify a person from just a drop of blood or a single hair.One of the most important uses of DNA testing is in criminal investigation. The very first use of DNA testing in a criminal case was in 1985 in Great Britain, when a man confessed to killing a young woman in the English countryside. Because police had found samples of the killer's DNA at the scene of the crime, a biologist suggested that it might be possible to compare that DNA to some from the confessor's blood. To everyone's surprise, the tests showed that he was not the killer. Nor was he guilty of a similar murder that had happened some time earlier. At that point he admitted that be had confessed to the crimes out of fear and police pressure. The police then asked 5, 000 local men for samples of their blood, and DNA testing revealed that one of them was the real murderer, so the first man was set free. In 1992, two law professors, Peter Neufeld and Barry Scheck, decided to use DNA evidence to help set free such mistakenly convicted prisoners. With the help of their students, they created a not-for-profit organization called the Innocence Project. Most of their clients are poor men, many from racial and ethnic minorities. In fact, studies have shown that U. S. judges and juries are often influenced by racial and ethnic background, and that people from minority groups are more likely to be convicted. Some of these men had been sentenced to death, a form. of punishment used in thirty eight states out of fifty (as of 2006). For most of these prisoners, their only hope was another trial in which DNA testing could be used to prove their innocence. Between 1992 and 2006, the Innocence Project helped free 100 men. Some of these prisoners had been in jail for ten, twenty years or more for crimes they did not commit. However, the goal of the Innocence Project is not simply to set free those who are wrongfully in jail. They also hope to bring about real changes in the criminal justice system. Illinois in the late 1990s, a group of journalism students at Northwestern University were able to bring about such a change in that state. They began investigating some Illinois prisoners who claimed to be innocent. Through DNA testing, the students were able to prove that in fact the prisoners were not guilty of the crimes they had been accused of. Thirteen of these men were set free, and in 2000,Governor Ryan of Illinois decided to stop carrying out death sentences until further study could be made of the prisoners' cases. The use of DNA in criminal cases is still being debated around the world. Some fear that governments will one day keep records of everyone's DNA, which could put limits on the privacy and freedom of citizens. Other people mistrust the science of DNA testing and think that lawyers use it to get their clients free whether or not they are guilty. But for those whose innocence has been proven and who are now free men, DNA testing has meant nothing less than a return to life. And with the careful use of DNA testing, no innocent person should ever be convicted again. {TS}What is the main idea of this passage？
A. DNA testing has changed the American legal system.
B. DNA testing has helped innocent men go free in Illinois.
C. DNA testing uses genetics to identify a person.
D. DNA testing has played a key role in criminal investigation.
根据以下材料，回答题
DNA Fingerprinting
DNA is the genetic material found within the cell nuclei of all living things. In mammals the strands of DNA are grouped into structures called chromosomes. With the exception of identical siblings （as in identical twins）， the complete DNA of each individual is unique.
DNA fingerprinting is sometimes called DNA typing. It is a method of identification that compares bits of DNA. A DAN fingerprint is constructed by first drawing out a DNA sample front body tissue or fluid such as hair， blood， or saliva. The sample is then segmented using enzymes，and the segments are arranged by size. The segments are marked with probes and exposed on X-ray film， where they form. a pattern of black bars- the DNA fingerprint. If the DNA fingerprints produced from two different samples match， the two samples probably came from the same person.
DNA fingerprinting was first developed as an identification technique in 1985. Originally used to detect the presence of genetic diseases， it soon came to be used in criminal investigations and legal affairs. The first criminal conviction based on DNA evidence in the United States occurred in 1988. In criminal investigations， DNA fingerprints derived from evidence collected at the crime scene are compared to the DNA fingerprints of suspects. Generally， courts have accepted the reliability of DNA testing and admitted DNA test results into evidence. However， DNA fingerprinting is controversial in a number of areas: the accuracy of the results， the cost of testing，and the possible misuse of the technique.
The accuracy of DNA fingerprinting has been challenged for several reasons. First， because DNA segments rather than complete DNA strands are "fingerprinted" ; a DNA fingerprint may not be unique; large-scale research to confirn the uniqueness of DNA fingerprinting test results has not been conducted. In addition， DNA fingerprinting is often done in private laboratories that may not follow uniform. testing standards and quality controls. Also， since human beings must interpret the test， human error could lead to false results.
DNA fingerprinting is expensive. Suspects who are unable to provide their own DNA to experts may not be able to successfully defend themselves against charges based on DNA evidence.
Widespread use of DNA testing for identification purposes may lead to the establishment of a DNA fingerprint database.
If two sisters are identical twins， their complete DNAs are __________. 查看材料
A.the same
B.unique
C.different
D.similar
DNA Fingerprinting
？？ DNA isthe genetic material found within the cell nuclei of all living things. Inmammals the strands of DNA are grouped into structures called chromosomes. Withthe exception of identical sib- lings (as in identical twins) , the completeDNA of each individual is unique.
？？DNAfingerprinting is somet？？imes called DNA typing. It is a method of identificationthat compares bits of DNA. A DNA fingerprint is constructed by first drawingout a DNA sample from body tissue or fluid such as hair, blood, or saliva. Thesample is then segmented using enzymes, and the segments are arranged by size.The segments are marked with probes and exposed on X-ray film, where they forma pattern of black bars-the DNA fingerprint. If the DNA fingerprints producedfrom two differ- ent samples match, the two samples probably came from the sameperson.？？
？？DNAfingerprinting was first developed as all identification technique in 1985.Originally used to detect the presence of genetic diseases, it soon came to beused in criminal investigations and legal af- fairs. The first criminal convictionbased on DNA evidence in the United States occurred in 1988. In criminalinvestigations, DNA fingerprints derived from evidence collected at the crimescene are com- pared to the DNA fingerprints of suspects. Generally, courtshave accepted the reliability of DNA tes- ting and admitted DNA test resultsinto evidence. However, DNA fingerprinting is controversial in a number ofareas:the accuracy of the results, the cost of testing, and the possible misuseof the tech-nique.
？？ Theaccuracy of DNA fingerprinting has been challenged for several reasons. First？？,because DNA seg-ments rather than complete DNA strands are"fingerprinted": a DNA fingerprint may not be unique; large-scaleresearch to confirm the uniqueness of DNA fingerprinting test results has notbeen conducted. In addi-tion, DNA fingerprinting is often done in privatelaboratories that may not follow uniform. testing standards and qualitycontrols. Also, since human beings must interpret the test, human error couldlead to false re-sults.
？？ DNA fingerprinting is expen？？sive. Suspectswho are unable to provide their own DNA to experts may not be able tosuccessfully defend themselves against charges based on DNA evidence.
？？ Widespread use of DNA testing for identification purposes may lead tothe establishment of a DNA fingerprint database？？.？？
？？ According to the essay, we can findchromosomes ________？？
A.in a fish
B.in a tree
C.in a sheep
D.in a rock
The bones unearthed in a shallow grave definitely are those of Czar Nicholas II, said Lt. Col (Dr.) Victor Weedn at an Aug. 31 news conference. Weedn heads the Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory in Rockville, Md., which is involved in identifying skeletal remains of U. S. service members who served in Vietnam, Korea and World War II.
The attempt to identify the czar presented a special challenge. The armed forces lab was the perfect place to perform. the type of genetic testing on old, deteriorating bones that was needed in this case, he said.
Until the announcement, scientists had not been able to say for sure whether the bones were those of the czar.
Russian DNA expert Pavel Ivanov, who with Weedn oversaw a team of U. S. military civilians tasked to identify the remains, reached the same conclusion.
Nicholas and his family were rounded up by the Bolsheviks and executed by firing squad in 1918. Their bodies were dumped into a pool of sulfuric acid 20 miles outside the Ural Mountain city of Yekaterinburg.
The shallow grave was uncovered in 1979. Bone fragments believed to be those of the czar, the Czarina Alexandra and three of their five children were unearthed in 1991.
While investigators were able to positively identify the czarina and the daughters early on, a rare, benign genetic condition that first showed up in his generation did not allow them to make a positive identification of Nicholas II.
Rare mutation the key
In the end, it was that genetic mutation which provided the key to solving the mystery, Weedn said. Nicholas' brother, whose remains were exhumed in July 1994, turned out to have the same mutation in his genetic makeup. It is so rare that it makes the identification absolute, he said.
If Russian authorities accept that finding, it will clear the way for the ceremonial burial of the last emperor of Russia.
But the new evidence did not satisfy all skeptics. Emigre Eugene Magerovsky, a retired Russian military intelligence officer, interrupted the news conference to say he was suspicious of how the bones "suddenly" came to light during the Soviet era.
"The Soviets have always been masters of all kinds of shenanigans," he said. He suggested the investigators may have been given two bones from the same corpse, in which case the DNA would have had to match.
Weedn ruled that out, as the tibia and femur from the same side of each body were used in the testing.
Ivanov, a forensic science professor in charge of identifying the remains of the last czar and his family, brought the femur bones—as well as a blood sample from a living relative— to the Rockville laboratory in June.
Much evidence lost
Years of exposure to minerals in the soil destroyed much of the genetic evidence in the bone, Weedn said. Still, through a painstaking process of grinding up bone, reproducing the genetic material from the dust and comparing the results over and over again, the team was able to reach its conclusion.
One mystery Weedn and Ivanov did not address was that of the czar's daughter, Anastasia. Whether she somehow escaped the Bolsheviks' bullets has been the topic of intense debate for more than half a century. The grave yielded bones from only three of the five daughters. Still unresolved is whether Anastasia or Marie might have survived, along with the sickly heir, Alexis.
Weedn, whose laboratory has tested two women who claimed to be Anastasia, found they were not. A third who sought testing has not sent in blood samples for testing, he added. On-again, off-again pairing
Weedn was approached by Ivanov four years ago about becomi
DNA Fingerprinting
DNA is the genetic material found within the cell nuclei of all livingthings. In mammals(哺乳动物)the strands of DNA are grouped into structures called chromosomes(染色体). With the exceptionof identical twins, the complete DNA of each individual is unique.
DNA fingerprinting is sometimes called DNAtyping. It is a method of identification that compares bits of DNA. A DNAfingerprint is constructed by first drawing out a DNA sample from body tissueor fluid such as hair, blood, or saliva(唾液). The sample is then segmented using enzymesc酶) , and the segmentsare arranged by size. The segments are marked with probes and exposed on X-rayfilm,where they form. a pattern of black bars-the DNA fingerprint. If the DNAfingerprints produced from two different samples match, the two samplesprobably came from the same person.
DNA fingerprinting was firstdeveloped as an identification technique in 1985. Originally used to detect thepresence of genetic diseases, it soon came to be used in criminalinvestigations and legal af-fairs. The first criminal conviction based on DNAevidence in theUnited Statesoccurred in 1988. In criminalinvestigations, DNA fingerprints derived from evidence collected at the crimescene are com-pared to the DNA fingerprints of suspects. Generally, courts haveaccepted the reliability of DNA tes-ting and admitted DNA test results intoevidence. However, DNA fingerprinting is controversial in a number of areas:the accuracy of the results, the cost of testing, and the possible misuse of thetech-nique.
The accuracy of DNAfingerprinting has been challenged for several reasons. First, because DNAsegments rather than complete DNA strands are "fingerprinted"; a DNAfingerprint may not be unique; large-scale research to confirm the uniquenessof DNA fingerprinting test results has not been conducted. In addition, DNAfingerprinting is often done in private Iaboratories that may not followuniform. testing standards and quality controls. Also, since human beings mustinterpret the test, human error could lead to false results.
DNA fingerprinting isexpensive. Suspects who are unable to provide their own DNA to experts may notbe able to successfully defend themselves against charges based on DNAevidence.
Widespread use of DNA testingfor identification purposes may lead to the establishment of a DNA fingerprintdatabase.
If two sisters are identical twins, their complete DNAs are
A.the same
B.unique
C.different
D.similar
Genetic Testing
Genetic testing is transforming medicine and the way families think about their health. As science uncovers the complicated secrets of DNA, we face difficult choices and new challenges. About Genetic Testing
The year was 1895 and Pauline Gross, a young actress, was scared. Gross knew nothing about the human-genome (基因组，染色体组) project--such medical triumphs, but she did know about a nasty disease called cancer, and it was running through her family. "I'm healthy now," she often told Dr. Aldred Warthin a pathologist at the University of Michigan, "but I fully expect to die an early death."
At the time, Gross's prediction was based solely on observation: family members had died of cancer; she would, too. Today, more than 100 years later, Gross's relatives have a much more clinical option: genetic testing. With a simple blood test, they can peer into their own DNA, learning--while still perfectly healthy--whether they carry an inheritable gene mutation (突变) that has dogged their family for decades and puts them at serious risk.
Take the Testing
Testing is just one piece of the genomic revolution. A major goal is to create new sophisticated therapies that home in on a disease's biological source, then fix the problem. Already, genes are helping to predict a patient's response to existing medications. A prime example, taken by Dr. Wylie Burke of the University of Washington, is a variant of a gene called TPMT, which can lead to life-threatening reactions to certain doses of chemotherapy (化学疗法). A genetic test can guide safe and appropriate treatment. Two genes have been identified that influence a person's response to some anti-blood-clotting drug. And scientists are uncovering genetic differences in the way people respond to other widely used medications, like antidepressants (搞抑郁药).
Knowing a patient's genotype, or genetic profile, may also help researchers uncover new preventive therapies for sticky diseases. At Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Dr. Christopher Ross has tested several compounds shown to slow the progression of Huntington's in mice. Now he wants to test them in people who are positive for the Huntington's mutation but have not developed symptoms--a novel approach to clinical drug trials, which almost always involve sick people seeking cures. "We're using genetics to move from treating the disease after it happens," he says, "to preventing the worst symptoms of the disease before it happens."
It's not just their own health that people care about. There is also the desire to get rid of disease from the family tree. Therefore, the future is what drives many adults to the clinic. The gene tests currently offered for certain diseases, like breast cancer, affect only a small percentage of total cases. Inherited mutations contribute to just 5 to 10 percent of all breast cancers. But the impact on a single life can be huge. The key: being able to do something to ward off disease. "Genetic testing offers us profound insight," says Dr. Stephen Gruber, of the University of Michigan. "But it has to be balanced with our ability to care for these patients."
Genetic testing today starts at the earliest stages of life. Couples planning to have children can be screened prior to conception to see if they are carriers of genetic diseases; prenatal (产前) tests are offered during pregnancy, and states now screen newborns for as many as 29 conditions, the majority of them genetic disorders. For Jana and Tom Monaco, of Woodbridge, Va. , early testing has made an enormous difference in the lives of their children. Their journey began in 2001, when their seemingly healthy third child, 3-year-old Stephen, developed a life-threatening stomach virus that led to severe brain damage. His diagnosis: a rare but treatable disease called isovaleric acidemia (IVA). Unknowingly, Jana and her husband were carriers
A．stroke
B．cancer
C．SARS
D．AIDS
Informed public debate critical to future of genomic medicine
Just mentioning "stem-cell research" or "genomic medicine" can open a floodgate of beliefs, concerns and, misinformation. Opinions are varied, mixed with fact and fiction, but one thing is clear: Open dialogue among researchers, teachers and the general public must continue as we struggle to define the relationship between our societal values and lifesciences research.
When the University of Washington .and the National Human Genome Research Institute hosted a community genetics forum last spring, questions abounded from the standing-room-only crowd about the implications of genetic research.
When is information about genetic health risks most helpful？ Should genetic testing results be part of medical records and how would the results be used potentially by insurance companies？ How can genetic testing benefit the criminal-justice system, such as establishings guilt or innocence using DNA testing,
The Human Genome Project will lead to amazing advances in medical science that will result in earlier diagnosis, more-targeted treatment, and a dramatic improvement in our ability to prevent terrible diseases. Genomic medicine will mean more personalized medicine tailored to the individual.
But these advances also carry inherent risks.
The obvious benefits of "personalized medicine" —use of genetic tests to guide preventive care and better drug prescribing—are counterbalanced by the possibility that such tests could lead to discrimination by insurers or employers. And, since genetic risk is often only one of the contributing factors to disease, overemphasis on personalized medicine could burden our health-care system with genetic tests of little or no benefit.
For example, smoking, diet and exercise play major roles in the risk of diabetes and heart disease. Identification of a genetic risk for these diseases can provide specific information for more-effective preventive care, but should not detract from pursuit of a healthy lifestyle.
The greatest health benefits of genomic research likely will come from insights into the basic biology of health and disease. This will ultimately lead to improved prevention and treatment—often without any need for genetic testing—for many diseases. The outcome from this research can be "precision medcine" —a morecost-effective approach to providing high-quality care. Thus, genomic medicine has the potential to improve the value of health care.
An example of the potential of genomic medicine to improve quality and reduce cost is the work of UW researchers Mark Rieder, Allan Rettie and Debbie Nickerson. They recently reported the discovery of a genetic method for accurately determining the proper dosage of a common blood-thinning drug, warfarin, which often produces adverse side effects because of its highly variable activity in patients.
Millions of people worldwide take worldwide to prevent stroke and blood clots, yet require expensive, constant testing from their physician to ensure proper dosage. These scientists' findings illustrate how the powerful DNA analysis tools of the Human Genome Project are leading to a new era of tailoring drugs and therapies to an individual's genome. Genomic medicine can lead to more-precise, personalized and cost- effective health care.
Medical advances always involve risk of harm, and genomic medicine is no exception. While technical issues require scientific research, we believe the challenges posed by genetic testing are far too critical to be left to the deliberation of scientists alone.
All members of society should have the opportunity to engage in collaborative discussion about the benefits and harms of genetic testing. Informed public discussion is vital to continue advances that hold so much promise for improving the value of health care.
&nbs
A．Y
B．N
C．NG
S(Sno，Sname，Age，Sex，Dept)
A(Ano，Aname，Location，Manager)
SA(Sno，Ano，Date)
建立一个包含Sno、Sname、Aname和Date的视图ST。
