Text
The way your fruits and vegetables are grown makes a big difference, right? Don t be so sure.
Few things make you feel better about your health than eating organic fruits and veggies. A diet high in produce is commendable enough, but organic produce? That's a double dose of virtue. What's less clear is how much good that virtue does you. Are there real benefits to going organic? If so, are some organic fruits and vegetables better than others? And how do you choose?
One thing is certain; it's easier than ever to find organic produce. As demand for pesticide—and chemical—free foods has grown, the onetime niche product has gone mass market. Sometimes organic produce simply looks or tastes better, which for me is often reason enough to pay the higher price it may sell for. And sure, it makes sense to avoid pesticides as much as possible. At the same time, scientists have yet to document a definite, long-term negative effect of modem pesticides on our bodies, meaning that while organic foods do you no harm, they may not turn out to be as beneficial as you think.
The evidence of nutritional advantages is almost as thin. Never mind the idea that organically grown foods fairly burst with vitamins that modern facing techniques drain out of crops. To date most studies have either shown no difference between organic and conventional produce or found very small pluses in the organic column, such as slightly higher levels of vitamin C or other antioxidants.
Researchers at the University of California at Davis, however, have recently added to our understanding of hidden benefits in organic foods. In a 10-year study, the longest of its type so far, food chemist Alyson Mitchell and her team compared levels of two antioxidants-quercetin and kaempferol （山柰酚）—in tomatoes. They found that tomatoes grown in organic fields yielded significantly higher amounts of these nutrients (an average of 79% and 97%, respectively) than their conventional counterparts.
Quercetin and kaempferol are members of a larger group of antioxidants known as flavonoids, which when consumed in foods have been associated with reduced risks of chronic health conditions like heart disease, certain cancers and even some forms of dementia. The team also found that the greater the number of seasons tomatoes are grown in organic fields, the higher the soil quality becomes and the higher the level of the flavonoids climbs.
Impressive as these findings are, they alone may not be enough to advocate shelling out the extra bucks or driving those few miles farther to buy organic. For starters the study was conducted in a highly controlled setting, so it's not clear we'd get the same results in the real world of organic farming, where conditions vary from farm to farm and field to field.
（选自 Times）
小试牛刀
1.The author begins the essay by ______.
A.giving an example
B.illustrating a wrong idea
C.stating a fact
D.listing a series of statistics
2.What can we infer from paragraph 3?
A.Most people will pay higher prices for organic fruits or veggies for their better looks or tastes.
B.Organic foods are not beneficial to our bodies.
C.Organic food is a kind of pesticide and chemical free food.
D.Modern pesticides have a definite, long-term negative effect on our bodies.
3.According to the essay, which of the following statements is NOT true about organic fruits or veggies?
A.They are pesticide and chemical free.
B.Compared with conventional foods they are richer in vitamins.
C.It's easier to find them than before.
D.We should try our best to avoid pesticides.
4.Which of the following statements is NOT true according to the study of Alyson Mitchell and her team?
A.Quercetin and kaempferol in tomatoes may cure certain cancers.
B.To consume more tomatoes grown in organic fields will reduce risks of heart disease.
C.Tomatoes grown in organic fields have higher levels of quercetin and kaempferol.
D.The longer tomatoes are grown in an organic field, the higher the level of flavonoids in that field becomes.
5.What's the author's attitude toward the advantages of organic foods?
A.Positive.
B.Negative.
C.Critical.
D.Dubious.
核心词汇
（向上滑动查看核心词汇）
organic[ɔː'gænɪk]
adj. 器官的，有机的，组织的
virtue['vɜːtjuː]
n. 美德，贞操，优点，功效，英勇
mass[mæs]
n. 块；大多数；质量；群众
adj. 群众的，大规模的，集中的
vt. 使集合
vi. 聚集
definite['defɪnɪt]
adj. 明确的，一定的
burst[bɜːst]
vi. 爆裂；爆
n. 突然破裂；爆发；脉冲
conventional[kən'venʃ(ə)n(ə)l]
adj. 惯例的，常规的，习俗的，传统的
yield[jiːld]
vt. 出产，生长，生产
vi. （~ to）屈服，屈从
n. 产量，收益
respectively[rɪ'spektɪvlɪ]
adv. 分别地，各个的
chronic['krɒnɪk]
adj. 慢性的，延续很长时间的
impressive[ɪm'presɪv]
adj. 给人印象深刻的，感人的
advocate['ædvəkeɪt]
n. 提倡者，鼓吹者
vt. 提倡，鼓吹
conduct['kɒndʌkt]
n. 行为，操行
vt. 引导，管理；传导
commendable[kə'mendəb(ə)l]
adj. 值得表扬的
antioxidant[æntɪ'ɒksɪd(ə)nt]
n. [ 化 ] 抗氧化剂，硬化防止剂
quercetin['kwɜːsɪtɪn]
n. 橡黄素
dementia[dɪ'menʃə]
n. [ 医 ] 痴呆
flavonoid['fleɪvənɒɪd]
n. 黄酮类；[ 有机化学 ] 类黄酮
长难句解析
1.At the same time, scientists have yet to document a definite, long-term negative effect of modern pesticides on our bodies, meaning that while organic foods do you no harm, they may not turn out to be as beneficial as you think.
结构分析：本句是一个简单句。句子主干是At the same time, scientists... on our bodies； meaning that...as you think是一个现在分词短语作状语，表伴随；while引导的是一个让步状语从句；as beneficial as you think是一个as…as引导的比较状语从句，同时又是一个省略句。
参考译文：同时，科学家们发表文件声明，现代杀虫剂的使用对人体有绝对的、长期的影响，这就意味着，虽然有机食品不会对我们产生危害，但是它们也不会像你所想的那样有那么多益处。
2.Quercetin and kaempferol are members of a larger group of antioxidants known as flavonoids, which when consumed in foods have been associated with reduced risks of chronic health conditions like heart disease, certain cancers and even some forms of dementia.
结构分析：本句是一个复合句。主句是Quercetin and kaempferol ... as flavonoids；known as flavonoids是过去分词短语作后置定语，修饰 a larger group of antioxidants；which引导一个非限定性定语从句；when引导一个时间状语从句。
参考译文：橡黄素和山萘酚是被称为类黄酮的抗氧化剂中的两种，富含类黄酮的食物能减少人们患某些慢性疾病的风险，如心脏病、癌症和一些痴呆症。
怎么样？你觉得今天的文章难吗？
小贴士：后台回复“题源”获取今日题目解析&参考译文。
发布于：江西