题目内容
Studies of the effect that makes many of us slumber or feel sleepy during the queen’s speech on Christmas Day have revealed that changes may be required in Britain’s drink drive legislation. Dr James Home, director of the Sleep Research Laboratory at Loughborough University, is investigating post-lunch sleepiness. "We humans are designed to sleep twice a day, once at night and a short nap after lunch, but in this part of the world we tend to repress that." It is a remnant of the same primeval programming that makes all animals in the bush rest in the hot afternoon sun to conserve energy. "Hot environments make it worse and many cultures living near the equator," says Dr Home, "have conceded to the inevitable, where the afternoon siesta is the way of life." In these studies Dr Home has been investigating the role of alcohol. "The theory is that if you are more sleepy after lunch then it figures that alcohol will be more potent after lunch. One would figure then that a pint of beer at lunchtime has more effect than in the evening, when people are more alert. Indeed, we find that it has about twice the effect." This has more sinister implications. "If people take alcohol up to the legal driving limit, their performance is seriously impaired after lunch," he said. It seems that alcohol interacts with the circadian rhythm of sleep to cause afternoon sleepiness, so that one pint at lunch-time is equivalent, in effect, to a quart in the evening. "For this reason, most drivers ought not to drink at all at lunchtime and the legal blood alcohol limit is no guide to safe driving here，”said Dr Horne． For those who wish to enjoy the queen’s speech，Dr Horne recommends mild exercise，a splash of cold air or cold water on the face，or a cup of coffee．Otherwise，take a cat nap．But this should be less than 15 minutes，“otherwise，sleep really sets in and one can wake up feeling very groggy and far sleepier than to be in with．” According to the passage，if you sleep more than 15 minutes after lunch
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Why do so many Americans distrust what they read in their newspapers The American Society of Newspaper Editors is trying to answer this painful question. The organization is deep into a long self-analysis known as the journalism credibility project. Sad to say, this project has turned out to be mostly low-level findings about factual errors and spelling and grammar mistakes, combined with lots of head scratching puzzlement about what in the world those readers really want. But the sources of distrust go way deeper. Most journalists learn to see the world through a set of standard templates (patterns) into which they plug each day’s events. In other words, there is a conventional story line in the newsroom culture that provides a backbone and a ready-made narrative structure for otherwise confusing news. There exists a social and cultural disconnect between journalists and their readers, which helps explain why the "standard templates" of the newsroom seem alien to many readers. In a recent survey, questionnaires were sent to reporters in five middle-sized cities around the country, plus one large metropolitan area. Then residents in these communities were phoned at random and asked the same questions. Replies show that compared with other Americans, journalists are more likely to live in upscale neighborhoods, have maids, own Mercedeses, and trade stocks, and they’re less likely to go to church, do volunteer work, or put down roots in a community. Reporters tend to be part of a broadly defined social and cultural elite, so their work tends to reflect the conventional values of this elite. The astonishing distrust of the news media isn’t rooted in inaccuracy or poor reportorial skills but in the daily clash of world views between reporters and their readers. This is an explosive situation for any industry, particularly a declining one. Here is a troubled business that keeps hiring employees whose attitudes vastly annoy the customers. Then it sponsors lots of symposiums and a credibility project dedicated to wondering why customers are annoyed and fleeing in large numbers. But it never seems to get around to noticing the cultural and class biases that so many former buyers are complaining about. If it did, it would open up its diversity program, now focused narrowly on race and gender, and look for reporters who differ broadly by outlook, values, education, and class. The results of the journalism credibility project turned out to be
Increasing numbers of parents in the U.S. are choosing to teach their kids at home. In fact, the U.S. Department of Education estimated that, in 1999, around 850,000 children were being homeschooled. Some educational experts say the real figure is about double this estimate, and the ranks of homeschooled children appear to growing at a rate of about 11 percent annually. At one time, there was a stigma associated with homeschooling. It was traditionally used for students who could not attend school because of behavioral or learning difficulties. Today, however, more parents are taking on the responsibility of educating their children at home due to dissatisfaction with the educational system. Many parents are unhappy about class size, as well as problems inside the classroom. Teacher shortages and lack of funding mean that, in many schools, one teacher is responsible for thirty or forty pupils. The result is often that children are deprived of the attention they need. Escalating classroom violence has also motivated some parents to remove their children from school. Critics of homeschooling say that children who are not in the classroom miss out on learning important social skills because they have little interaction with their peers. Several studies, though, have shown that the home educated appear to do just as well in terms of social and emotional development as other students, having spent more time in the comfort and security of their home, with guidance from parents who care about their welfare. In spite of this, many critics of homeschooling have raised concerns about the ability of parents to teach their kids effectively. Many parents who homeschool have no teacher training and are not competent educators of all the subjects taught in schools. In terms of academic achievement, however, homeschooled children do just as well as those who have been in the classroom and many walk the campuses of Harvard and Stanford alongside the conventionally educated. With an increasing number of disgruntled parents taking their children out of class, schools are receiving less money in per pupil funding. Some see this as a threat to the system, and argue that schools will never be able to improve their situation and restore parents’ confidence in the educational system. Many schools have opened their doors to homeschoolers on a part-time basis, allowing these children to attend classes once or twice a week, or take part in extracurricular activities such as playing football or taking ballet lessons. While parents will not completely put their confidence back into the system, many of them have reached a compromise that allows their children the extra benefits of peer interaction and access to a wider choice of activities. Whatever the arguments for or against it, homeschooling in the U.S. has become a multimillion dollar industry, and it is growing. There are now websites, support groups, and conventions that help parents assert their rights and enable them to learn more about educating their children. Though once the last resort for troubled children, homeschooling today is an accepted alternative to an educational system that some believe is failing. What is the reason that more parents are taking on the responsibility of educating their children at home
提示肺动脉高压体征（）
提示右心室肥大体征（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付