英文时文阅读

考研时文阅读（12
Text 11 Why texting harms your IQ
为什么收发短信会降低智商？
The regular use of text messages and e-mails can lower the IQ more than twice as much as smoking marijuana. That is the claim of psychologists who have found that tapping away on a mobile phone or computer keypad or checking them for electronic messages temporarily knocks up to ten points off the user's IQ. This rate of decline in intelligence compares unfavorably with the four-point drop in IQ associated with smoking marijuana, according to British researchers, who have labeled the fleeting phenomenon of enhanced stupidity as infomania.
Research on sleep deprivation suggests that the IQ drop caused by electronic obsession is also equivalent to a wakeful night. Infomania is mainly a problem for adult workers, especially men, as the study commissioned by Hewlett Packard, the technology company, has concluded.
The noticeable drop in IQ is attributed to the constant distraction of always on technology when employees should be concentrating on what they are paid to do. Infomania means that they lose concentration as their minds remain fixed in an almost permanent state of readiness to react to technology instead of focusing on the task in hand. Workers lose productivity by interrupting a business meeting and disrupt social gatherings because of their infirmity, the report said.
The brain also finds it hard to cope with juggling lots of tasks at once, reducing its overall effectiveness, it added. And while modern technology can have huge benefits, excessive use can be damaging not only to a person's mind, but to their social life.
Furthermore, infomania is having a negative effect on work colleagues, increasing stress and dissenting feelings. Nine out of ten polled thought that colleagues who answered e-mails or messages during a face-to-face meeting were extremely rude. Yet one in three Britons believes that it is not only acceptable, but actually diligent and efficient to do so.
The effects on IQ were studied by Dr Glenn Wilson, a University of London psychologist, as part of the research project. This is a very real and widespread phenomenon, he said. We have found that infomania, if unchecked, will damage a worker's performance by reducing their mental sharpness. Companies should encourage a more balanced and appropriate way of working.
经常收发短信和e-mail会降低人的智商。

这种损害比吸食大麻对智商带来的损害要高两倍多。

心理学家发现，使用手机或敲击电脑键盘发送或接收电子信息会暂时降低使用者约十个百分点的智商。

根据英国研究人员的研究，吸食大麻会使智商下降个百分点，而与之相比，经常使用电子文本信息造成的智力衰减率更加严重。

研究人员将这种暂时变笨的现象称为“信息狂躁”。

关于剥夺睡眠的研究表明因为痴迷于电子产品而造成的智力衰退相当于一夜失眠。

惠普科技公司委托进行的研究结果表明，信息狂躁主要表现在成年人身上，尤其是成年男性。

造成这种智力明显衰退的原因在于当员工们应该集中精力工作时，“无处不在”的科技却总是不断分散他们的注意力。

信息狂躁是指他们的意识近乎一直处于一种随时对“技术”做出反应的状态，因而无法将注意力集中在手头的工作上。

报告中说，因为工人们的虚弱，通过中断了业务会议而失去生产效率，并且破坏了社交聚会的范围。

该报告还补充说大脑很难同时应付许多难题，其整体效率会降低。

此外，虽然现代科技可以给予我们巨大的帮助，但过多地使用科技也会给人们的大脑和社会生活带来危害。

此外，信息狂躁对同事也有负面影响，增加他们的压力和敌对情绪。

90％的被调查者认
为在面对面会议时回电子邮件是非常无礼的行为。

但是三分之一的英国人不仅可以接受这种行为，而且觉得这样做说明自己工作勤奋、高效。

伦敦大学的心理学家Glenn Wilson博士正在做一个名为“这是一个真实的普遍现象”的研究项目，信息狂躁对智商的影响是其中的一个部分。

他说：“如果不进行检查控制，信息狂躁将会降低员工的精神敏感度，进而影响其工作效率。

所以，公司应提倡一种更加平衡的适当的工作方式。

”
核心单词记忆：
1. text v. 发送短信（文字讯息）[新词义]
2. tap on vt. 在……上轻敲，轻拍
3. knock up v.（使）筋疲力尽，（使）累垮
4. label vt. 贴标签于，指……为，分类，标注
5. deprivation n. 剥夺动词为deprive vt. 剥夺，使丧失
6. be equivalent to 相等(当) 于……，等（同）于，与……等效
7. commission vt. 委任，任命，委托，委托制作；n. 委任，委托，代办（权），代理（权），犯（罪），佣金
8. attribute to v. 归因于
9. cope with v. 与……竞争，应付
10. while conj. 虽然，尽管例句：While the grandparents love the children，they are strict
with them. 虽然祖父母们都爱他们的孩子，但却对他们要求严格。

11. dissenting adj.（=dissentient）不同意的
12. poll v. 投票，获得选票，选举中获得
13. face-to-face adv. 面对面地
14. unchecked adj. 未受制止的，未经检查的，未加抑制的
15. appropriate adj. 适当的
Text 2 使用不健康网络可能有损心理健康
Internet use appears to cause a decline in psychological well-being, according to research at Carnegie Mellon University. Even people who spent just a few hours a week on the Internet experienced more depression and loneliness than those who logged on less frequently, the two-year study showed. And it wasn't that people who were already feeling bad spent more time on the Internet, but that using the Net actually appeared to cause the bad feelings.
Researchers are puzzling over the results, which were completely contrary to their expectations. They expected that the Net would prove socially healthier than television, since the Net allows users to choose their information and to communicate with others.
The fact that Internet use reduces time available for family and friends may account for the drop in well-being, researchers hypothesized. Faceless, bodiless virtual communication may be less psychologically satisfying than actual conversation, and the relationships formed through it may be shallower. Another possibility is that exposure to the wider world via the Net makes users less satisfied with their lives.
But it's important to remember this is not about the technology; it's about how it is used, says psychologist Christine Riley of Intel, one of the study's sponsors. It really points to the need for considering social factors in terms of how you design applications and services for technology.
卡内基麦伦大学的研究表明，使用因特网可能会导致心理健康程度下降。

两年的研究表明，上网次数多的人与较少的人相比，即使是一周仅上网几小时也会经常地感觉到沮丧和孤
独。

这不是说已经有不良感觉的人在网上花费了更多的时间，而是说使用因特网似乎确实诱发了人们的不良感觉。

研究人员对这些结果困惑不解，因为这与他们的预料截然相反。

他们预测，和看电视相比，从社交角度来说，上网可能更健康一些，因为网络允许使用者选择自己需要的信息并且和别人进行交流。

研究者推测说，实际情况是上网使网民减少了和家人及朋友共度的时光，这也许可以解释他们心理健康状况下降的原因。

和面对面的交谈相比，这种见不着面、看不见人的“虚拟”的交流可能会使人从心理上缺乏满足感。

人们通过这种交流结下的友谊也不会太深。

还有一种可能是，网民通过因特网所了解到的广阔世界使他们对自己的生活不那么满意了。

“然而，重要的是不要忘记这与技术本身是无关的，问题在于如何使用因特网。

”这项研究的发起人之一、心理学家、英特尔公司的克里斯廷·赖利说，“这的确表明在考虑从技术上如何设计应用和服务时有必要把社会因素考虑进去。

核心单词记忆：
1. available 可利用的，可支配的；例句The swimming pool is available only in summer. 这个游泳池只在夏天开放。

2. contrary to 与……相反例句：What you are doing now is contrary to the doctor's advice.
3. hypothesize 假设，假定；
4. virtual [电脑]虚拟的，虚的；对于这个词可以结合上下文理解. Faceless, bodiless virtual communication may be less psychologically satisfying than actual conversation, and the relationships formed through it may be shallower. 文中virtual communication对应着后面的actual conversation，又有than，可以想到这是两个对应的反义词。

5. actual 现实的；
6. exposure to 暴露，（文中引申为了解）例句：The paint came off as the result of exposure to the rain.油漆因受雨淋而剥落。

7. sponsor 发起者，主办者，赞助者
考研时文阅读（13A）
Is GE food Safe to Eat?
转基因食物食用是否安全?
Traditional plant breeding involves crossing varieties of the same species in ways they could cross naturally. For example, disease－resistant varieties of wheat have been crossed with high－yield wheat to combine these properties. This type of natural gene exchange is safe and fairly predictable.
Genetic engineering（GE）involves exchanging genes between unrelated species that cannot naturally exchange genes with each other. GE can involve the exchange of genes between vastly different species, e.g. putting scorpion toxin genes into maize or fish antifreeze genes into tomatoes. It is possible that a scorpion toxin gene, even when it is in maize DNA, will still get the organism to produce scorpion toxin, but what other effects may it have in this alien environment? We are already seeing this problem——adding human growth hormone genes to pigs certainly makes them grow——but it also gives them arthritis and makes them cross－eyed, which was entirely unpredictable.
It will be obvious, for example, that the gene for human intelligence will not have the same effect if inserted into cabbage DNA as it had in human DNA——but what side－effect would it have? In other words, is GE food safe to eat? The answer is that nobody knows because long－
term tests have not been carried out.
Companies wanting a GE product approved in the UK or USA are required to provide regulatory bodies with results of their own safety tests. Monsanto''s soya beans were apparently fed to fish for 10 weeks before being approved. There was no requirement for independent testing, for long-term testing, for testing on humans or testing for specific dangers to children or allergic people.
The current position of the UK Government is that there is no evidence of long-term dangers from GE foods. In the US, the American Food and Drug Administration is currently being prosecuted for covering up research that suggested possible risks from GE foods.
传统的植物培育方法，是用植物自然杂交的方式，来进行相同物种的人工杂交。

比如，抗病小麦同高产小麦杂交，形成了一种具有双重特性的新的小麦品种。

这种自然的基因交换既安全，又具有相当的可预见性。

基因工程是在彼此毫无关系的物种之间，相互交换在自然条件下无法交换的基因。

它可在有巨大差异的物种之间进行基因交换。

比如，将蝎子毒素基因注入玉米，或者将鱼防冻基因注入西红柿。

即使在玉米DNA中，蝎子毒素基因依然可能获得有机组织产生蝎子毒素。

但是在这种异质的环境中，这种基因产品会有什么其他作用吗？我们实际上已经发现这个问题：将人类生长荷尔蒙基因植入猪的体内，一定会使猪的生长加速，但是同时也使猪患上了关节炎和内斜视，而这一切是完全无法预测的比如，人类的智力基因显而易见在人体DNA 内和注入卷心菜DNA后的作用是不同的。

但将它植入卷心菜中会产生什么样的副作用呢？换句话说，食用转基因食品安全吗？没有人知道答案，因为人们尚未进行长期的测试。

在英国或者美国，一个公司如果希望其转基因产品获得批准，它必须向管理机构提供本公司转基因产品安全测试的结果。

Monsanto的大豆在获得批准之前，曾用了10周时间进行喂鱼试验。

目前，尚无要求对转基因产品进行独立测试、长期测试、人体测试，或者就其对儿童及过敏者所造成的特定危险进行测试。

英国政府目前的态度是：“尚无证据表明食用转基因食品存在长期性的危险。

”在美国，人们正在起诉美国食品药品管理局掩盖转基因食品安全性的研究结果，这些研究结果表明，食用转基因食品可能导致危险。

核心单词：
1. breeding 生育，繁殖，培植
2. resistant 抵抗的、防……的
3. yield 出产，结出，被迫放弃例句：These apple trees yield plenty of fruit this year. 这些苹果树今年结了许多苹果。

例句：He was forced to yield the castle. 他被迫放弃城堡。

4. property 特性，属性例句：He is studying the medicinal properties of wild plants. 他正在研究野生植物的药物特性。

5. scorpion 蝎子
6. toxin 毒素
7. alien 外国的，性质不相容的；例句：Her behavior is alien to our ethical values. 她的行为和我们的伦理标准格格不入。

8. side-effect 副作用
考研时文阅读(13B)
The history of life on earth has been a history of interaction between living things and their surroundings. To a large extent, the physical form and the habits of the earth's vegetation and its
animal life have been molded by the environment. Considering the whole span of earthly time, the opposite effect, in which life actually modifies its surroundings, has been relatively slight. Only in the present century has one species man acquired significant power to alter the nature of his world.
During the past quarter century this power has not only become increasingly great but it has changed in character. The most alarming of all man's assaults upon the environment is the contamination of air, earth, rivers, and sea with dangerous and even lethal materials. This pollution is for the most part irrecoverable. In this now universal contamination of the environment, chemicals are the sinister partners of radiation in changing the very nature of the world as well as the very nature of its life. Chemicals sprayed on croplands or forests or gardens lie long in soil, entering into living organisms, passing from one to another in a chain of poisoning and death. Or they pass mysteriously by underground streams until they emerge and combine into new forms that kill vegetation, sicken cattle, and work unknown harm on those who drink from once pure wells. Man can hardly even recognize the devils of his own creation, as a scientist has said.
It took hundreds of millions of years to produce the life that now inhabits the earth. Given time not in years but in millennia life adjusts, and a balance has been reached. But in the modern world there is no time.
The rapidity of change follows the impetuous pace of man rather than the deliberate pace of nature. Radiation is now the unnatural creation of man's tampering with the atom. The chemicals are the synthetic creations of man's inventive mind, having no counterparts in nature.
To adjust to these chemicals would require not merely the years of a man's life but the life of generations. And even this, were it by some miracle possible, would be futile, for the new chemicals come from our laboratories in an endless stream; almost five hundred annually find their way into actual use in the United States alone. Among them are many that are used in man's war against nature. Since the mid 1940's over 200 basic chemicals have been created for use in killing insects, weeds, and other organisms described as pests.
地球上生命的历史一直就是一部生物与其环境相互作用的历史。

在很大程度上，地球上动植物的形态以及习性都是由外部环境所塑造的。

考虑到地球上生命存在的整个时间，相反作用，即生命对其周围环境的实际改变作用，却相对很小。

只有在当前这个世纪（指20世纪）才有一个物种——人类，获得了强大的力量，改变了其所生存的世界的自然状态。

在过去的1/4世纪中，这种力量不仅日趋强大，而且其性质也发生了变化。

在人类破坏环境的种种行为中，最令人担忧的是人类向大气、土壤、河流以及海洋中排放危险甚至致命物质，而当今这种污染在很大程度上是无法挽救的。

在当今这种对环境的普遍污染中，化学制品与辐射狼狈为奸，改变着地球的自然状态，也就是改变着地球上生命的自然状态。

喷洒到农田、森林或者花园里的化学物质长期滞留于土壤中，渗入有机体内，并彼此相传，形成了一个中毒与死亡的链条。

化学物质还神秘地通过地下水传递，最终以新的形式出现并结合，使植物毒死，牲畜害病，并使饮用一度纯净的井水的人遭受了不明之害。

正如一位科学家所言：“人类甚至对自己创造的恶魔都不认识。

”
地球历经了许多亿年才创造了栖息其上的生命。

经过了一定时间——不是以若干年计而是以若干千年计的时间——生命开始适应环境，并形成了一种与环境的平衡。

但是在现代世界中，时间这一因素已经没有了。

环境改变的速度不再顺从大自然从容不迫的节奏，而是顺从人类急切匆匆的步伐。

辐射是当今人类通过支配原子而得到的一种非自然的创造物。

化学制品则是人类有发明创造力的头脑创造出来的合成物，在自然界本无相应的东西。

为了适应这些化学制品，人类需要付出的时间不会只是一个人一生的时间，而是几代人
的时间。

而即使这样，就算出现奇迹成为可能，这种适应也是徒劳的，因为新的化学制品从我们的实验室中源源不断地涌出。

仅在美国，每年就有大约500种化学制品投入使用，其中许多是用于人类对自然的战争中。

从20世纪40年代中期起，人类已经创造了200多种基本化学制品用来消灭昆虫、野草以及其他所谓的“有害生物”。

重点词汇：
1. character（人的）品质，性格；（事物的）性质、特性；He has a changeable character. 他性格多变。

2. assault 攻击，袭击They made a strong assault on the town. 他们猛烈攻击这个镇子。

3. spray 浪花，水花，喷液Did you bring along some insect spray？你带来杀虫剂了吗？
4. impetuous 性急的，鲁莽的It was impetuous of her to do that. 她竟做那种事，真是鲁莽。

5. deliberate 不慌不忙的，从容的He is deliberate in his speech. 他说话从容不迫。

The rapidity of change follows the impetuous pace of man rather than the deliberate pace of nature. 可见由than相连，
必然是两个反义词。

6. futile 无益的，无效的，无希望的His efforts to save the business were futile. 他挽救公司的努力未能奏效。

考研时文阅读（14）篇章结构分析
本文所讨论的中心主题是：由于电视业不断地在进行结构调整，结果造成了一种商业主义泛滥的文化氛围。

作者在第一段指出英国媒体的一个阴暗面，并指出对电视业的行业标准与诚信逐渐沦丧的一个普遍存在的原因。

接着，作者在第二、三段分析了这个问题的一些其它原因。

作者在第四段用了一个转折词but,指出一个最为重要但却被公众所忽视并不理解的原因：节目制作被外包给独立的公司。

最后作者分析了在电视业培养诚信和保证质量的最好方法。

属于现象分析型文章。

The abundant commentary on British television’s faking crises, including Jeremy Pitman’s recent Mac Taggart Lecture, doesn’t show British’s media in the best light. The ch orus of TV executives complaining that the core issue is a loss of “trust” is a poor substitute for probing analysis of the underlying reasons why television’s standards and integrity have been undermined.
In many accounts, the BBC’s current agonies are in tegrated with the pervasive apprehension afflicting the TV industry. This is not to excuse the BBC. But the wider problems have been worsening for a decade, and they affect the BBC because the corporation is inevitably influenced by the wider broadcasting ecology.
The causes of the problems are several. Hyper-competition from the early Nineties onwards has led to a culture of rampant commercialism from which the BBC is not exempt, as is shown by the promotion of ratings-chasing, sensationalist and populist programs. Crucial, too, are the changes to working conditions, in particular a catastrophic decline in training, the growth of short-term employment, the erosion of career structures, and prevalent ageism, which leads to experienced producers being kicked out at 50 or before.
But the most important cause is obscured in the present debate: the outsourcing of production to independent companies, the leading figures of which are international businesses, and which are particularly tempted to put profit over standards and quality. This is where the government comes in, as the prominent position of the independents is due to repeated restructurings of the industry, during which the old producer-broadcasters were collapsed and the independents were given more and more of the cake. Right now, spurred on by a disappointing
license-fee settlement, the BBC is making further cuts to its already depleted production base and increasing independent programming. Why should this matter? Because with outsourcing, the lines of communication and responsibility are fragmented, making it difficult for broadcasters to oversee and enforce standards with disobedient commercial suppliers. This problem is rarely acknowledged and little understood in public debate.
Renewed values and pu rposes: these can’t stem the tide when the incentives are piled to encourage deliberate deception and the manufacture of celebrity. Finally, nor is it true to claim, as some executives complacently do, that audiences have only recently decided they expect more from television. For some years, research has shown that audiences are mightily fed up with the diet of lacking initiative, low-quality output. The BBC can’t reverse the rot alone. As has been recently grasped, integrity and quality are best cultivated competitively between media companies that are regulated and funded to deliver them.
The independents are a varied bunch. Some, like, End mol, are multinational subsidiaries that pride themselves on delivering ratings. Such companies can sometimes cross-subsidies to support adventurous fare. But, as an RDF executive told me, ultimately their operations are driven just as much by the bottom line. That RDF’s creative director, Stephen Lambert---previously in charge of some of the BBC’s finest documentary ou tput----was the man who edited the culpable publicity tape is a tragic but telling symptom of the Faustian pact driving the TV industry. This is not just about Lambert’s individual failing; the rot is systematic.
有关英国电视媒体造假危机长篇累牍的评论----包括杰里米帕克斯曼最近所做的麦克塔格特纪念演说----暴露出英国媒体的一个阴暗面。

电视业管理者们齐声抱怨的问题的关键是“责任”的丧失，但这一说法并不能取代对电视业的行业标准与诚信逐渐沦丧的根本原因所进行的深入分析。

在很大程度上，BBC眼下的麻烦是与困扰电视业的普遍担忧相伴随的问题。

这并不是要为BBC开脱。

但更广泛的问题十年来一直在恶化，这些问题也影响到了BBC，因为在这样的媒体大环境之下，它也难以独善其身。

问题的原因是多方面的。

自上世纪90年代以来，过度竞争导致商业主义泛滥的文化氛围。

BBC也未能幸免，这从它提倡追求收视率、轰动效应、媚俗的节目即可看出。

同样重要的原因还包括工作状况的变化，尤其是职业培训严重滑坡、短期聘用增加、从业者结构恶化以及普遍存在的年龄歧视等，而年龄歧视导致许多有经验的制作人在50岁甚至不到50岁就被扫地出门。

然而最为重要的原因却在目前的争论中被掩盖了起来：节目制作被外包给独立的公司，这些公司中的那些显赫者都是一些跨国公司，它们尤其会受到利润的驱使而使其凌驾于标准和质量之上。

在这一点上，政府摆脱不了干系，因为这些独立公司的突出地位是由于电视业的多次结构调整而造成的。

在此过程中，旧的制作、播放一体的体制遭到瓦解，独立制作公司分得的蛋糕则越来越大。

眼下，受到令人失望的许可证费用方案的推动，BBC进一步削减了它原本就已萎缩的制作基地，同时增加独立公司的节目编排。

为什么这一点关系重大？因为由于实行外包，制作的交流和责任链条就被割裂，遇到难对付的商业供片商，播出方就很难监督和强化节目的水准。

这一问题在公众讨论过程中很少为人所认识和理解。

重建的价值观和目的：这些都阻止不了道德滑坡的趋势，因为这个方面的因素都在激发从业者的蓄意欺骗和制造名人效应行为。

最后，事实并不像一些管理者们得意声称的那样，观众们只是最近才决定对电视节目给予更多期待。

研究显示，观众多年来早已受够了那些制作播出的相互抄袭、质量低劣的节目了。

单靠BBC一家无法逆转这种腐败之势。

正如最近认识到的那样，只有在加强监督和资金投入的同时，促进媒体公司之间的竞争，才是培养诚信和保证质量的
最好办法。

这些独立制作公司形形色色。

有些跨国公司的子公司，如End mol公司，它们以提高收视率的产品而感到自豪。

这类公司有时候相互提供资金支持，以完成一些冒险性节日。

但是，正如RDF的一位管理者告诉我的那样，他们经营的最终动力还是赢利。

RDF的创意总监Stephen Lambert---过去曾是BBC制作出的一些最精良的记录片的负责人----就是对那盘难辞其咎的宣传录像带进行编辑加工的人。

这一事实虽然令人悲哀，却是背后驱策电视业的浮士德契约的鲜活例证。

这不只是Lambert个人的污点，这种腐败是全行业的。

考研时文阅读（15A）How safe is biosafe?
Dressed in blue scrubs and disposable underwear, Simon Caidan cautiously transfers liquid into a series of bottles inside the airtight cabinet in front of him. His arms are pushed up to his elbows in a pair of gloves sealed to the glass, preventing him from coming into contact with the potentially deadly material inside.
This is one of the most secure research laboratories in Britain, dealing with some of the world's most dangerous diseases. The threat posed by the pathogens kept here, on the outskirts of north London, is so great that the rooms are maintained at a lower air pressure than the outside to ensure nothing can escape when the doors are opened.
All the air passing through the building is filtered several times to strip it of even the finest particles, while staff have to remove all clothing before entering and must shower before leaving. If there is a leakage, the entire laboratory can be sealed and fumigated.
Yet, despite these formidable safety measures, it is from a laboratory similar to this that a foot and mouth virus is thought to have escaped, infecting nearby livestock. Initial reports into the outbreak in Normandy, Surrey, have pointed to a high-security laboratory in Pirbright, three miles away, shared by the government-funded Institute for Animal Health and a private drug firm, Merial UK.
The incident has sparked grave concerns about the state of the country's secure laboratories and the threat they pose. If a virus can escape from one such laboratory, can it happen again? And next time, could it be from a lab handling deadly human diseases?
In Britain, there are 15 “Containment Level Four” laboratories, the maximum bio-security level, across the country. Each handles some of the deadliest organisms known to man and animals: diseases that are highly infectious, fatal even in low doses and impossible to treat.
“I am surprised there has been a release from a facility in the UK, of all places,” said Dr Ingegerd Kallings, an expert on bio-safety for the World Health Organization and the Swedish Institute for Infectious Disease Control. “You have good regulations in place.” For Dr Kallings, the escape of foot and mouth into the countryside around the Pirbright laboratory illustrates the weak link in the world's bio-security measures: people.
“It comes down to a lax attitude among the staff,” she said. “You can't really blame the age of a facility for an escape, as ultimately the bio-security is not a technical issue.”
What she, and other scientists, fear is that the tight regulations and safety measures can be rendered useless by carelessness. Adhering to safety protocols is tedious, and researchers can pick up bad habits or become complacent. Washing contaminated material down the wrong sink, for instance; carrying infected samples between rooms, or removing equipment from the laboratory before it has been properly decontaminated. All are hard to monitor and prevent.
生物安全有多安全?
身穿蓝色防护服和一次性内衣, 西蒙﹒凯旦小心谨慎地将液体转移到面前密封柜中的一套小瓶子里。

他将双臂伸进封帖在玻璃上的一副手套里，直至肘部，以防接触盗柜子里那具潜在致命性的物质。

这是英国最为安全的科研实验室之一，位于伦敦北部郊区，从事世界上一些最具危险性疾病的研究。

保存在这里的病原体具有非常大的危险性，因此实验室内的气压维持在低于外界气压的状态，以确保开门时不会发生任何泄露。

所有经由实验室流通的空气都经过数次过滤，以除去哪怕最微小的颗粒，同时，工作人员在进入前必须除掉所有衣物，而且沐浴后才能离开。

如果发生泄漏，整个实验室都要封闭，进行熏蒸消毒。

然而，尽管采取了这些严密的安全措施，据认为还是有一个与其类似的实验室发生了口蹄疫病毒泄露，感染了附近的牲畜。

关于萨里郡诺曼底所暴发的口蹄疫疫情的初步报告，把矛头指向了位于3英里之外皮尔布赖特的一所高安全性实验室。

这所实验室由政府资助的动物卫生研究所和私营的英国梅里亚尔药品公司共管。

该事件引发了人们对英国安全实验室的状况及其所构成威胁的严重关切。

如果病毒能从这样的实验室外泄，那么此类事件是否会再次发生？而下一次，病毒是否会从研究致命性人类疾病的实验室外泄？
英国拥有15所“四级防护”实验室，即全国最高生物安全级别实验室。

每所实验室所研究的都是一些已知的对人和动物最致命的微生物：最有高度传染性的疾病，哪怕是最小剂量也会致命，而且绝无治愈的可能。

“我很惊讶，在所有那些地方中，偏偏是在英国发生了泄露，”世界卫生组织及瑞典传染病研究所的生物安全专家英格德﹒克林斯博士说，“你们已经制定了严格的规章制度啊。

”在克林斯博士可看来，口蹄疫病毒外泄到皮尔布赖特实验室附近的乡村，表明了世界生物安全措施中存在的薄弱环节：人。

“归结到一点，就是工作人员态度松懈，”她说，“你的确不能把泄露的原因归为设备老化，因为归根结底生物安全不是一个技术问题。

”
她和其他科学家所担心的是，严格的规章制度和安全措施会因粗心大意而变得毫无用处。

恪守安全议定书是件令人厌烦的事，研究人员会染上各种坏习惯或变得满不在乎。

例如，在错误的水池冲洗被污染的物品，携带被感染的样品穿梭于各个房间，或者未经适当消毒就将设备带出实验室。

所有这一切都难以进行监督和预防。

考研时文阅读（15B）
Malicious behavior is even harder to control, if a member of staff decides to smuggle a virus out of a facility. Doctors and scientists, as the recent terrorist attacks on Glasgow airport showed, can be radicalized like anyone else and many experts have pointed at the folly of keeping stocks of dangerous diseases so readily at hand.
Then there are the facilities themselves. Can a simple household electric shower, as used in the National Institute for Medical Research where Mr Caidan works, for instance, remove all traces of a virus?
“Lab accidents happen more frequently than the public knows,” says Ed Hammond, of the Sunshine Project, a non-profit-making organization that monitors the use of biological agents. “They are not always as spectacular as the one in the UK, but I believe there's a real culture of denial about the scale of the problem.”
In 2004, a Russian scientist working on an Ebola vaccine died after pricking her hand with a syringe, while in April 2005, a pandemic strain of Asian flu was released by a laboratory in。