题目内容
子宫脱垂Ⅱ度重
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
International investors seem incapable of ending their love affair with the dollar. America’s economy has slowed sharply this year, yet its currency has risen to a 15 year high in trade weighted terms. (46) Against the euro the dollar touched $ 0.88 — 8% higher than in early January and close to the level at which the European Central Bank and the Federal Reserve jointly intervened to prop up the European currency last September. Why is the euro looking sickly There are plenty of theories. One is that the markets do not trust the ECB: (47) the euro area economies are not immune to America’s downturn, yet the central bank still seems more concerned with fighting inflation than with supporting growth; another more plausible explanation is that, in an uncertain global economic climate, the dollar has resumed its traditional role as a safe-haven currency. Most economists reckon that the euro is undervalued and expect a rebound over the next year. One of the most optimistic is Goldman Sachs, which is predicting a rate of $1.22 in 12 months. But an analysis by David Owen, an economist at Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein, gives pause for thought. (48) He has found that, over the past decade, movements in the real exchange rate of the euro against the dollar have closely reflected the difference between productivity growth in the euro area and in America. When productivity growth in America has been faster than in Europe—as it was in most of the late 1990s—the euro falls, and vice versa. This is exactly what economic theory would predict: countries with faster productivity growth in the traded goods sector should see rising real exchange rates. Mr. Owen uses monthly data for productivity growth in manufacturing, a good proxy for the traded goods sector. Using annual productivity data for the whole economy (which are available over a longer period), the broad relationship between the exchange rate and relative productivity growth in America and Europe seems to have persisted for most of the past 30 years. Mr. Owen reckons that, in the short term, America’s downturn will reduce the productivity gap between America and the euro area, and so boost the euro. (49) But in the long term, he expects productivity growth to remain faster in America—in which case, a sustained rise in the euro is unlikely over the next few years. Only if the downturn completely kills the belief in America’s new paradigm, and its productivity growth plummets, will the euro be able to rebound more permanently. The strength of the dollar this year does indeed seem to hinge on a belief among investors that America’s slowdown will be brief, and that in the longer run America remains the best place in which to invest. (50) But they may be underestimating the potential for productivity gains in Europe, as the single currency boosts competition and encourages firms to exploit economies of scale through mergers and acquisitions. The adoption of more flexible working practices in many countries should also help to improve productivity. Studies in America suggest that the bulk of its productivity gains from information technology come from the use of it rather than from its production. So the euro area, too, should start to enjoy productivity gains over the next decade, as it makes fuller use of it. If you believe that Europe really is starting to change, buy Euros. If not, stick with the darling dollar.
男性，40岁，阑尾切除术后发生粘连性肠梗阻，脐周阵发性疼痛2天，伴恶心呕吐较频繁，尿少，口渴明显。查体：脉搏96/分，血压100/70mmHg，腹胀不明显，偶见肠型，脐右侧有轻压痛，肠鸣音亢进。采用禁食、胃肠减压、输液及应用抗生素等非手术治疗。 非手术治疗最重要的护理措施是
Years ago, Charlie, a highly respected orthopedist and a mentor of mine, found a lump in his stomach. He had a surgeon explore the area, and the diagnosis was pancreatic cancer. He went home the next day, closed his practice, and never set foot in a hospital again. He focused on spending time with family and feeling as good as possible. Several months later, he died at home. He got no chemotherapy, radiation, or surgical treatment. Medicare didn’t spend much on him.It’s not a frequent topic of discussion, but doctors die, too. And they don’t die like the rest of us. What’s unusual about them is not how much treatment they get compared to most Americans, but how little. Of course, doctors don’t want to die ; they want to live. But they know enough about modern medicine to know its limits. Almost all medical professionals have seen what we call "futile care" being performed on people. That’s when doctors bring the cutting edge of technology to bear on a grievously ill person near the end of life. The patient will get cut open, perforated with tubes, hooked up to machines, and assaulted with drugs. I cannot count the number of times fellow physicians have told me, in words that vary only slightly, "Promise me if you find me like this that you’ ll kill me. "How has it come to this—that doctors administer so much care that they wouldn’t want for themselves The simple, or not-so-simple, answer is this: patients, doctors, and the system.To see how patients play a role, imagine a scenario in which someone has lost consciousness and been admitted to an emergency room, and shocked and scared family members find themselves caught up in a maze of choices. When doctors ask if they want "everything" done, they answer yes. Then the nightmare begins. Feeding into the problem are unrealistic expectations of what doctors can accomplish. For example, many people think of CPR as a reliable lifesaver when, in fact, the results are usually poor.But of course it’s not just patients making these things happen. Doctors play an enabling role, too. The trouble is that even doctors who hate to administer futile care must find a way to address the wishes of patients and families. Imagine, once again, the emergency room with those grieving family members. They do not know the doctor. Establishing trust and confidence under such circumstances is a very delicate thing. People are prepared to think the doctor is acting out of base motives, trying to save time, or money, or effort, especially if the doctor is advising against further treatment.It’s easy to find fault with both doctors and patients in such stories, but in many ways all the parties are simply victims of a larger system that encourages excessive treatment. In some unfortunate cases, doctors use the fee-for-service model to do everything they can, no matter how pointless, to make money. More commonly, though, doctors are fearful of litgation and do whatever they’re asked to avoid getting in trouble. In the passages that follows the last paragraph in the excerpt, the author is most likely to （）
Overall, belief in climate change has declined in the American public from roughly 75 percent to 55 percent between 2008 and 2011, with a recent rebound to 62 percent in the fall of 2011, the Brookings Institution survey finds. One noted reason for the rebound was personal experiences with warmer fall and winter temperatures. Though this kind of weather disruption is what climate scientists predict, they hesitate to place too much emphasis on one or two unusual seasons as a trend that changes public opinion. If next winter is more normal, the public may get the wrong impression about the dangers of climate change. Better for science to be more convincing. But there’s the rub. The American public is generally illiterate when it comes to science. And when American scientists complain about public illiteracy and lethargy on the vitally important subject of climate change, they also have themselves to blame. Generally, those who know the most about climate—and other important scientific fields—are locked up in their university ivory towers and conference rooms, speaking a language only they can understand. And they speak mostly to each other, not to the general public, policymakers, or business people—not to those who can actually make things happen. This is dangerous. We live in an age when scientific issues permeate our social, economic, and political culture. People must be educated about science and the scientific process if we are to make rational and informed decisions that affect our future. But instead, the relative absence of academics and academic scholarship in the public discourse creates a vacuum into which uninformed, wrong, and downright destructive viewpoints get voiced and take hold. Here’s a typical example. After the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh argued that "The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone... " In fact, the spill created extensive damage to wide ranging marine habitats as well as the Gulf Coast’s fishing and tourism industries. Long-term impacts are still unclear as scientists continue to monitor underwater plumes of dissolved oil that lie along the bottom. The fact is that today’s scientists are indeed lost to the academy. The failure begins with training in doctoral programs and continues through professional development where the constant immersion in academic seminars and journals serves to weaken scientists’ literacy in the language of public, economic, and political discourse. Scientists limit involvement in such "outside activities" because tenure and promotion are based primarily on publication in top-tier academic journals. "In my view, few contemporary issues warrant critical analysis by problem-focused researchers more than environmental sustainability, and particularly climate change. Universities need to train emerging and seasoned scholars in the skills of communicating science to the public and policy makers. We need to develop a new generation of scholars for whom the role of public intellectual is not an anachronism. Without such changes, the climate change debate devolves into a " logic schism" where the ideological extremes dominate the conversation and the space for solutions disappears into a rhetorical shouting match. In the author’s opinion, in order to enhance public’s awareness of climate change, the universities should ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付