欢迎访问考研秘籍考研网!    研究生招生信息网    考博真题下载    考研真题下载    全站文章索引
文章搜索   高级搜索   

 您现在的位置: 考研秘籍考研网 >> 文章中心 >> 考研英语 >> 正文  英语冲刺第28天:《经济学家》文章讲解之一

新闻资讯
普通文章 上海市50家单位网上接受咨询和报名
普通文章 北京大学生“就业之家”研究生专场招聘场面火爆
普通文章 厦大女研究生被杀案终审判决 凶手被判死刑
普通文章 广东八校网上试点考研报名将开始
普通文章 2004年硕士北京招生单位报名点一览
普通文章 洛阳高新区21名硕士研究生被聘为中层领导
普通文章 浙江省硕士研究生报名从下周一开始
普通文章 2004年上海考区网上报名时间安排表
普通文章 广东:研究生入学考试2003年起重大调整
普通文章 2004年全国研招上海考区报名点一览表
调剂信息
普通文章 宁夏大学04年硕士研究生调剂信息
普通文章 大连铁道学院04年硕士接收调剂生源基本原则
普通文章 吉林大学建设工程学院04年研究生调剂信息
普通文章 温州师范学院(温州大学筹)05研究生调剂信息
普通文章 佳木斯大学04年考研调剂信息
普通文章 沈阳建筑工程学院04年研究生调剂信息
普通文章 天津师范大学政治与行政学院05年硕士调剂需求
普通文章 第二志愿考研调剂程序答疑
普通文章 上海大学04年研究生招收统考生调剂信息
普通文章 广西大学04年硕士研究生调剂信息

友情提示:本站提供全国400多所高等院校招收硕士、博士研究生入学考试历年考研真题、考博真题、答案,部分学校更新至2012年,2013年;均提供收费下载。 下载流程: 考研真题 点击“考研试卷””下载; 考博真题 点击“考博试卷库” 下载 

第二十八天:《经济学家》文章讲解之一

今天有两个任务。一是有一篇关于学术造假方面的文章,是应有些同学的要求提供的。注意文中的粗体部分,是一些可以借鉴的词汇与句子。二是选了《经济学家》的文章,文章本身并不难,如果不明白,可以看文章后面的摘要。

今天的结束语是:唯一不变的是变化本身(The only thing that does not change is change itself)。

一、学术造假方面的文章(Emf 研究人员科研数据造假)

学术行为不端 academic misconduct

伪造数据 falsify and fabricate data

Emf Researcher Made Up Data, Ori Says

In a blow to a research area hungry for credible findings, the federal Office of Research Integrity (ORI) reported last month that a biochemist "engaged in scientific misconduct... by intentionally falsifying and fabricating data and claims" in two studies on how electromagnetic fields (EMFs)--the kind shed by power lines and home appliances--affect living cells. The researcher, Robert P. Liburdy, formerly of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) in California, has agreed to ask the journals to retract the results. "There's a lot of acrimony in the debate, and this won't calm things down," says Richard G. Stevens, a cancer epidemiologist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Hanford, Washington.

Liburdy's findings were among the first to offer a plausible mechanism for a possible link between EMF exposure and cancer or other diseases. In a pair of 1992 papers of which he is the sole author, Liburdy offered evidence that EMFs increase the flow of calcium into lymphocytes, a kind of immune cell produced in the thymus. The papers created a stir, as calcium ions signal cells to turn genes on and off, and play a role in cell division. Because tumor growth is tied to cell proliferation, an alteration in calcium signaling could conceivably lead to cancer. But in an analysis obtained by Science, ORI states that "Liburdy's claims that EMF causes cellular effects related to calcium signaling [in three figures in the two journal articles] are not supported by the primary data."

Responding to an unknown whistle-blower's allegations of scientific misconduct by Liburdy, LBNL in January 1995 appointed a panel of four lab scientists to investigate. After reviewing raw data and interviewing Liburdy and other scientists, the panel concluded in a July 1995 report that Liburdy "deliberately created 'artificial' data where no such data existed" in a figure in FEBS Letters. In addition, it found, he fabricated data noise for a figure in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences "in order to mislead the reader." These actions, the panel stated, "fall within the definition of scientific misconduct." When contacted by Science, LBNL officials declined to comment, other than to confirm that Liburdy no longer works at the lab.

Because Liburdy had been awarded more than $3.3 million in federal grants for his EMF research, ORI launched a formal review of LBNL's report in fall 1997. ORI approved a request by Liburdy for an interview with ORI staff and two outside experts, which took place in March 1998. At the meeting, Liburdy produced original data he had not shared with LBNL investigators, according to the ORI report. But the data failed to exculpate him: In its analysis, ORI accuses Liburdy of having lied to LBNL and ORI investigators, and it "concurs with [LBNL's] findings of scientific misconduct." "Some of the numbers, essentially, he made up," says John Krueger, an ORI investigator involved in the case.

In a May 1999 agreement signed by Liburdy and ORI acting director Chris Pascal, Liburdy agreed to retract the tainted figures in the two papers and not to receive federal funds for 3 years. He "neither admits nor denies ORI's findings of scientific misconduct," the document states. Liburdy did not respond to requests for an interview.

The misconduct findings are unlikely to shift the playing field in EMF research. Since 1992, 20 to 30 scientific papers have looked at EMF exposures and calcium signaling, without settling the issue, says Christopher Portier, associate director of the environmental toxicology program at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS). In a report to Congress released on 15 June, NIEHS director Kenneth Olden states the scientific evidence that EMF exposures "pose any health risk is weak" and that mechanistic and toxicology studies "fail to demonstrate any consistent pattern." The day before the report came out, National Institutes of Health officials had asked NIEHS to determine quickly whether any of Liburdy's research had influenced the report's conclusions, Portier says. The truth was simple, he says: "It had no impact whatsoever."

二、《经济学家》文章:休克疗法(分析为何油价上涨不会让美国经济衰退,但上涨较多也会伤害美国经济)

Shock treatment

Oil prices have a special place in economic folklore. The two nastiest global recessions of recent decades were preceded by huge and sudden rises in the price of oil, first in 1973 and then in 1979. These twin spikes, both engineered by the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries limiting its oil shipments, are still the textbook example of an economic “shock”—a sudden change in business conditions. Abrupt increases in the oil price have prompted anxiety about stunted growth ever since.

Higher oil prices hurt the economy because they act like a tax increase. Firms that use oil face higher costs which, if they cannot be passed on in higher prices, might mean that some production becomes unprofitable. Consumers paying more for their petrol and heating oil have less to spend on other things. If they look for higher wages to compensate for a drop in purchasing power, that will only lead to job losses.

Oil-producing countries benefit from higher crude prices so the impact on global demand depends how their extra income is spent. But even if oil windfalls are spent largely on goods produced by oil importers, the abrupt shift in the distribution of global income will still be destabilising.

Given the gloomy history, the lingering unease about higher oil prices is understandable. A demonstration of this came on November 13th when, after a rough few days, stockmarkets rose on news that the oil price had fallen below $93. After all the talk of breaking the three-figure barrier, a drop towards a mere $90 spurred a relief rally.

Yet for all that, something has changed. Today's oil prices would have been unthinkable until very recently. Six years ago, when a barrel of crude could be bought for as little as $20, oil prices at today's levels would have raised fears of deep recession. Notwithstanding the spectre of past oil shocks, crude prices have risen to ever-dizzier heights without derailing a five-year period of strong global growth. But why has the oil bogeyman become less scary? Two new papers* by three well-known economists set out to explain. They come to similar conclusions: oil shocks do not hurt as much because oil is used less intensively than before, because the economy is more flexible and because central banks are better at controlling inflation.

What makes oil special is that it is a uniquely dense and portable form of energy. It is not easy to switch to alternatives very quickly, so disruptions to supply are damaging. Yet improvements in energy efficiency mean dependence on oil is not what it once was. Rich countries use less than half as much oil as they did in 1970 for each inflation-adjusted dollar of GDP. So although prices in real terms have returned to levels last seen in the 1970s, their impact is not as powerful when set against the diminished economic importance of oil.

The blow from dearer oil is less powerful than it was and compared with their rigid state in the 1970s, today's more flexible economies are better able to take a punch. Higher oil prices have some unavoidable direct consequences on companies' production costs and on prices paid by consumers for oil-derived products. Wider damage to jobs and output depends on how well these increased costs are absorbed. If workers insist on higher cash wages to maintain their spending power, firms' costs will take an additional hit, resulting in lay-offs, higher unemployment and depressed demand. To the extent that workers take it on the chin, accepting higher oil prices as a temporary tax increase that lowers their real take-home pay, the collateral damage will be smaller. The rigidity of the 1970s economies, where union power and indexed contracts meant wages were unyielding, only magnified the adverse effects of oil shocks. Today's flexible jobs markets allow oil shocks to be absorbed less harmfully. If consumers are more forgiving of oil shocks, it is partly because they have become more accustomed to volatile prices and partly because they have

内容摘要:

This article attempts to explain why record setting oil prices have not sent the U.S. into recession. The author says that two papers on the subject by economists say that the oil prices do not hurt so much because oil is used less than before, because the economy is more flexible and because central banks like the Federal Reserve are better at controlling inflation. The author says even with this encouraging news, enough increases in prices could still damage the U.S. economy.

免责声明:本文系转载自网络,如有侵犯,请联系我们立即删除,另:本文仅代表作者个人观点,与本网站无关。其原创性以及文中陈述文字和内容未经本站证实,对本文以及其中全部或者部分内容、文字的真实性、完整性、及时性本站不作任何保证或承诺,请读者仅作参考,并请自行核实相关内容。

  • 上一篇文章:

  • 下一篇文章:
  • 考博咨询QQ 3455265070 点击这里给我发消息 考研咨询 QQ 3455265070 点击这里给我发消息 邮箱: 3455265070@qq.com
    公司名称:昆山创酷信息科技有限公司 版权所有
    考研秘籍网 版权所有 © kaoyanmiji.com All Rights Reserved
    声明:本网站尊重并保护知识产权,根据《信息网络传播权保护条例》,如果我们转载或引用的作品侵犯了您的权利,请通知我们,我们会及时删除!