Text 4 A US drug company has increased the price of an acne cream by more than 3,900%to$9,561 in less than 18 months in the latest example of drug"price cheating",which has enraged the American public and become a central topic of debate in the presidential election campaign.Novum Pharma,a recently formed privately held Chicago-based company,bought the rights to drug Aloquin in May 2015.The 60g cream,which contains two cheap ingredients,was sold by its previous owner,Primus Pharmaceuticals,for$241.50.Nowm almost immediately increased the price by l,100%,and hiked the price higher still in January 2016.Figures seen by the Financial 77mes show the company increased the price a third time last week to take the cost to$9,561.So-called"price cheating",in which companies buy the rights to older drugs and then vastly increase their cost,has provoked outrage across the country and led to calls for reform of the US healthcare system.Earlier this month,Hillary Clinton claimed"It's time to move beyond talking about these price hikes and start acting to address them.AlI Americans deserve full access to the medications they need-without being burdened by excessive,unjustified costs."Clinton said she would change the law to allow the"emergency importation"of safe altemative treatments from abroad.Aloquin contains two cheap active ingredients:a decades-old antibiotic,iodoquinol,and an extract from the aloe vera plant.Iodoquinol can be bought for as little as$30 a tube and aloe vera cream costs a few dollars.The drug is labelled as"possibly effective",as the US Food and Drug Administration has stated that there is only limited evidence that the drug is effective.Novum has also drastically increased the price of its other two skin creams,Alcortin A and Novacort.The drugs are prescription only,with the cost being mostly covered by health insurance or government assistance.In instances when the full cost of the treatment isn't covered by insurance,Novum provides coupons to reduce the proportion that patients have to pay,while collecting the rest from the health plan.The company,which is privately held and does not publish figures on sales or profits,did not reply to requests for comment.A spokesman told the public that the firm was founded by"a group oflike-minded investors who believe in the firm's focus ofproviding therapeutic innovations that are affordable for patients".According to the first two paragraphs,Novum Pharma——A.has been founded for many yearsB.created new drugs for AmericansC.received public hatred for high priceD.sold the right of drug in low price
Text 4 A US drug company has increased the price of an acne cream by more than 3,900%to$9,561 in less than 18 months in the latest example of drug"price cheating",which has enraged the American public and become a central topic of debate in the presidential election campaign.Novum Pharma,a recently formed privately held Chicago-based company,bought the rights to drug Aloquin in May 2015.The 60g cream,which contains two cheap ingredients,was sold by its previous owner,Primus Pharmaceuticals,for$241.50.Nowm almost immediately increased the price by l,100%,and hiked the price higher still in January 2016.Figures seen by the Financial 77mes show the company increased the price a third time last week to take the cost to$9,561.So-called"price cheating",in which companies buy the rights to older drugs and then vastly increase their cost,has provoked outrage across the country and led to calls for reform of the US healthcare system.Earlier this month,Hillary Clinton claimed"It's time to move beyond talking about these price hikes and start acting to address them.AlI Americans deserve full access to the medications they need-without being burdened by excessive,unjustified costs."Clinton said she would change the law to allow the"emergency importation"of safe altemative treatments from abroad.Aloquin contains two cheap active ingredients:a decades-old antibiotic,iodoquinol,and an extract from the aloe vera plant.Iodoquinol can be bought for as little as$30 a tube and aloe vera cream costs a few dollars.The drug is labelled as"possibly effective",as the US Food and Drug Administration has stated that there is only limited evidence that the drug is effective.Novum has also drastically increased the price of its other two skin creams,Alcortin A and Novacort.The drugs are prescription only,with the cost being mostly covered by health insurance or government assistance.In instances when the full cost of the treatment isn't covered by insurance,Novum provides coupons to reduce the proportion that patients have to pay,while collecting the rest from the health plan.The company,which is privately held and does not publish figures on sales or profits,did not reply to requests for comment.A spokesman told the public that the firm was founded by"a group oflike-minded investors who believe in the firm's focus ofproviding therapeutic innovations that are affordable for patients".According to the first two paragraphs,Novum Pharma——
A.has been founded for many years
B.created new drugs for Americans
C.received public hatred for high price
D.sold the right of drug in low price
B.created new drugs for Americans
C.received public hatred for high price
D.sold the right of drug in low price
参考解析
解析：推理判断题。根据定位词定位到第一、二段。第一段提到美国诺威姆公司药品价格上涨激怒了美国的民众，故C项为正确选项。【干扰排除】第二段第一句中表示，诺威姆最近才成立，故A项错误；第一句中只是提到诺威姆公司购买药品的生产权，并没有提到这家公司创造新药，所以B项不准确；诺威姆从别处低价购买药品生产权，而不是低价卖出生产权，所以D项错误。
相关考题：
18 Which of the following statements about accounting ratios and their interpretation are correct?1 A low-geared company is more able to survive a downturn in profit than a highly-geared company.2 If a company has a high price earnings ratio, this will often indicate that the market expects its profits to rise.3 All companies should try to achieve a current ratio (current assets/current liabilities) of 2:1.A 2 and 3 onlyB 1 and 3 onlyC 1 and 2 onlyD All three statements are correct
3 The managers of Daylon plc are reviewing the company’s investment portfolio. About 15% of the portfolio is represented by a holding of 5,550,000 ordinary shares of Mondglobe plc. The managers are concerned about the effect on portfolio value if the price of Mondglobe’s shares should fall, and are considering selling the shares. Daylon’s investment bank has suggested that the risk of Mondglobe’s shares falling by more than 5% from their current value could be protected against by buying an over the counter option. The investment bank is prepared to sell an appropriate six month option to Daylon for ￡250,000.Other information:(i) The current market price of Mondglobe’s ordinary shares is 360 pence.(ii) The annual volatility (variance) of Mondglobe’s shares for the last year was 169%.(iii) The risk free rate is 4% per year.(iv) No dividend is expected to be paid by Mondglobe during the next six months.Required:(a) Evaluate whether or not the price at which the investment bank is willing to sell the option is a fair price.(10 marks)
听力原文： Currency options may have two kinds of value, intrinsic value and time value. If and to the extent that an option would currently be profitable to exercise, it is said to have intrinsic value. In the case of a call, if the spot price is higher than the option exercise price, the option has intrinsic value. In the case of a put, if the spot price is less than the option exercise price, the option has intrinsic value. Such options are said to bein-the-money'. If the opposite is true of either calls or puts, they have no intrinsic value and said to be out-of-the-money'.28. What are the two kinds of value do currency options have?29.When does a call option have intrinsic value?30.What is the option said to be if it has intrinsic value?(28)A．Intrinsic value and time value.B．Internal value and external value.C．Exchange value and time value.D．Real value and stated value.
_____ ice cream in the world is more delicious than American ice cream.A: NoneB: NeitherC: NotD: No
Text 4Could the bad old days of economic decline be about to return? Since OPEC agreed to supply - cuts in March, the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $ 26 a barrel, up from less than $10 last December. This near - tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock, when prices quadrupled, and 1979 -80, when they also almost tri- pled. Both previous shocks resulted in double - digit inflation and global economic decline. So there are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil experts. Strengthening economic growth, al the' same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere, could push the price higher still in the short Item.Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s. In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s. In Europe, tuxes account for up to four - fifths of the retail price, so even quite big changes in the price of crude have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were, and so less sensitive to swings in the 'oil price. Energy conservation, a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption. Software, consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production. For each dollar of GDP (in constant prices) rich economies now use nearly 50% less oil than in 1973. The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that, oil prices averaged $ 22 a barrel for a full year, compared with $13 in 1998, this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25 - 0.5% of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980. On the other hand, oil-importing emerging economies—to which heavy industry has shifted—have become more energy-intensive, and se could he more seriously squeezed.One more reason net to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that, unlike the rises in the 1970s, it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand. A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline. The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%, and in 1979 by almost 30%.36. The main reason for the latest rise of oil price is______.A) global inflationB) reduction in supplyC) fast growth in economyD) Iraq' s suspension of exports
Text 3 Could the bad old days of economic decline be about to return? Since OPEC agreed to supply-cuts in March, the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel, up from less than $10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock, when prices quadrupled, and 1979-80, when they also almost tripled. Both previous shocks resulted in double-digit inflation and global economic decline. So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports. Strengthening economic growth, at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere, could push the price higher still in the short term.Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s. In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s. In Europe, taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price, so even quite big changes in the price of crude have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were, and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price. Energy conservation, a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption. Software, consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production. For each dollar of GDP (in constant prices) rich economies now use nearly 50% less oil than in 1973. The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that, if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year, compared with $13 in 1998, this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.5% of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980. On the other hand, oil-importing emerging economies--to which heavy industry has shifted-have become more energy-intensive, and so could be more seriously squeezed.One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that, unlike the rises in the 1970s, it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand. A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline. The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%, and in 1979 by almost 30%.第51题：The main reason for the latest rise of oil price isA global inflation.B reduction in supply.C fast growth in economy.D Iraq's suspension of exports.
Social change is more likely to occur in societies where there is a mixture of different kinds of people than in societies where people are similar in many ways. The simple reason for this is that there are more different ways of looking at things present in the first kind of society. There are more ideas, more disagreements in interest, and more groups and organizations with different beliefs. In addition, there is usually a greater worldly interest and greater tolerance in mixed societies. All these factors tend to protnote social change by opening more areas of life to decision.In a society where people are quite similar in many ways, there are fewer occasions for people to see the need or the opportunity for change because everything seems to be the same. And although conditions may not be satisfactory, they are at least customary and undisputed.Within a society, social changes is also likely to occur more frequently and more readily in the material aspects of the culture than in the non-material, for example, in technology rather than in values; in what has been learned later in life rather than what was learned early; in the less basic and less emotional aspects of society than in their opposites; in the simple elements rather than in the complex ones; in form rather than in substance; and in elements that are acceptable to the culture rather than in strange elements.Furthermore, social change is easier if it is gradual. For example, it comes more readily in human relations on a continuous scale rather than one with sharp difference. This is one reason why change has not come more quickly to Black Americans as compared to other American minorities,because of the sharp difference in appearance between them and their white counterparts.One of the factors that tend to promote social change is__________.A.joint interestB.different points of viewC.less emotional peopleD.advanced technology
共用题干第三篇Oil and EconomyCould the bad old days of economic decline be about to return?Since OPEC agreed to supplycuts in March,the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel,up from less than$10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock,when prices quadrupled,and 1979一1980,when they also almost tripled.Both previous shocks resulted in double一digit inflation and global economic decline.So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports.Strengthening economic growth,at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere,could push the price higher still in the short term.Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s.In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s.In Europe,taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price,so even quite big changes in the price of crude oil have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were,and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price.Energy conservation,a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption.Software,consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production.For each dollar of GDP(in constant prices)rich economies now use nearly 50%less oil than in 1973.The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that,if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year,compared with $13 in 1998,this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.S%of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980.On the other hand,oil-importing emerging economies一to which heavy industry has shifted一have become more energy一intensive,and so could be more seriously squeezed.One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that,unlike the rises in the 1970s,it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand.A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline.The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%,and in 1979 by almost 30%.The estimates in Economic Outlook show that in rich countries______.A:heavy industry becomes more energy-intensiveB:income loss mainly results from fluctuating crude oil pricesC:manufacturing industry has been seriously squeezedD:oil price changes have no significant impact on GDP
共用题干第三篇Oil and EconomyCould the bad old days of economic decline be about to return?Since OPEC agreed to supplycuts in March,the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel,up from less than$10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock,when prices quadrupled,and 1979一1980,when they also almost tripled.Both previous shocks resulted in double一digit inflation and global economic decline.So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports.Strengthening economic growth,at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere,could push the price higher still in the short term.Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s.In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s.In Europe,taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price,so even quite big changes in the price of crude oil have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were,and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price.Energy conservation,a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption.Software,consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production.For each dollar of GDP(in constant prices)rich economies now use nearly 50%less oil than in 1973.The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that,if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year,compared with $13 in 1998,this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.S%of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980.On the other hand,oil-importing emerging economies一to which heavy industry has shifted一have become more energy一intensive,and so could be more seriously squeezed.One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that,unlike the rises in the 1970s,it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand.A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline.The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%,and in 1979 by almost 30%.We can draw a conclusion from the text that______.A:oil-price shocks are less shocking nowB:inflation seems irrelevant to oil-price shocksC:energy conservation can keep down the oil pricesD:the price rise of crude oil leads to the shrinking of heavy industry
共用题干第三篇Oil and EconomyCould the bad old days of economic decline be about to return?Since OPEC agreed to supplycuts in March,the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel,up from less than$10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock,when prices quadrupled,and 1979一1980,when they also almost tripled.Both previous shocks resulted in double一digit inflation and global economic decline.So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports.Strengthening economic growth,at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere,could push the price higher still in the short term.Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s.In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s.In Europe,taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price,so even quite big changes in the price of crude oil have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were,and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price.Energy conservation,a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption.Software,consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production.For each dollar of GDP(in constant prices)rich economies now use nearly 50%less oil than in 1973.The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that,if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year,compared with $13 in 1998,this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.S%of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980.On the other hand,oil-importing emerging economies一to which heavy industry has shifted一have become more energy一intensive,and so could be more seriously squeezed.One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that,unlike the rises in the 1970s,it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand.A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline.The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%,and in 1979 by almost 30%.The main reason for the latest rise of oil price is______.A:global inflationB:reduction in supplyC:fast growth in economyD:Iraq's suspension of exports
共用题干第三篇Oil and EconomyCould the bad old days of economic decline be about to return?Since OPEC agreed to supplycuts in March,the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel,up from less than$10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock,when prices quadrupled,and 1979一1980,when they also almost tripled.Both previous shocks resulted in double一digit inflation and global economic decline.So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports.Strengthening economic growth,at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere,could push the price higher still in the short term.Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s.In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s.In Europe,taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price,so even quite big changes in the price of crude oil have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were,and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price.Energy conservation,a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption.Software,consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production.For each dollar of GDP(in constant prices)rich economies now use nearly 50%less oil than in 1973.The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that,if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year,compared with $13 in 1998,this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.S%of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980.On the other hand,oil-importing emerging economies一to which heavy industry has shifted一have become more energy一intensive,and so could be more seriously squeezed.One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that,unlike the rises in the 1970s,it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand.A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline.The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%,and in 1979 by almost 30%.From the text we can see that the writer seems______.A:optimistic B:sensitiveC:gloomy D:scared
共用题干第三篇Oil and EconomyCould the bad old days of economic decline be about to return?Since OPEC agreed to supplycuts in March,the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel,up from less than$10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock,when prices quadrupled,and 1979一1980,when they also almost tripled.Both previous shocks resulted in double一digit inflation and global economic decline.So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time?The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports.Strengthening economic growth,at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere,could push the price higher still in the short term.Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s.In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s.In Europe,taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price,so even quite big changes in the price of crude oil have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past.Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were,and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price.Energy conservation,a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption.Software,consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production.For each dollar of GDP(in constant prices)rich economies now use nearly 50%less oil than in 1973.The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that,if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year,compared with $13 in 1998,this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.S%of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980.On the other hand,oil-importing emerging economies一to which heavy industry has shifted一have become more energy一intensive,and so could be more seriously squeezed.One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that,unlike the rises in the 1970s,it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand.A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline.The Economist's commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%,and in 1979 by almost 30%.It can be inferred from the text that the retail price of petrol will go up dramatically in Europe if______.A:price of crude risesB:commodity prices riseC:consumption risesD:oil taxes rise
If American people borrow money from the bank for 25 years，this means that the person who borrows__________．A.has twenty-five years to pay back the moneyB.has more than twenty-five years to pay back the moneyC.has less twenty-five years to pay back the moneyD.has about twenty-five years to pay back the money
Text 4 A US drug company has increased the price of an acne cream by more than 3,900%to$9,561 in less than 18 months in the latest example of drug"price cheating",which has enraged the American public and become a central topic of debate in the presidential election campaign.Novum Pharma,a recently formed privately held Chicago-based company,bought the rights to drug Aloquin in May 2015.The 60g cream,which contains two cheap ingredients,was sold by its previous owner,Primus Pharmaceuticals,for$241.50.Nowm almost immediately increased the price by l,100%,and hiked the price higher still in January 2016.Figures seen by the Financial 77mes show the company increased the price a third time last week to take the cost to$9,561.So-called"price cheating",in which companies buy the rights to older drugs and then vastly increase their cost,has provoked outrage across the country and led to calls for reform of the US healthcare system.Earlier this month,Hillary Clinton claimed"It's time to move beyond talking about these price hikes and start acting to address them.AlI Americans deserve full access to the medications they need-without being burdened by excessive,unjustified costs."Clinton said she would change the law to allow the"emergency importation"of safe altemative treatments from abroad.Aloquin contains two cheap active ingredients:a decades-old antibiotic,iodoquinol,and an extract from the aloe vera plant.Iodoquinol can be bought for as little as$30 a tube and aloe vera cream costs a few dollars.The drug is labelled as"possibly effective",as the US Food and Drug Administration has stated that there is only limited evidence that the drug is effective.Novum has also drastically increased the price of its other two skin creams,Alcortin A and Novacort.The drugs are prescription only,with the cost being mostly covered by health insurance or government assistance.In instances when the full cost of the treatment isn't covered by insurance,Novum provides coupons to reduce the proportion that patients have to pay,while collecting the rest from the health plan.The company,which is privately held and does not publish figures on sales or profits,did not reply to requests for comment.A spokesman told the public that the firm was founded by"a group oflike-minded investors who believe in the firm's focus ofproviding therapeutic innovations that are affordable for patients".The other two skin creams by Novum——A.are labelled ineffective by FDAB.can only be prescribed by doctorsC.are covered by the govemment and hospitalsD.are discounted for poor people
Text 4 A US drug company has increased the price of an acne cream by more than 3,900%to$9,561 in less than 18 months in the latest example of drug"price cheating",which has enraged the American public and become a central topic of debate in the presidential election campaign.Novum Pharma,a recently formed privately held Chicago-based company,bought the rights to drug Aloquin in May 2015.The 60g cream,which contains two cheap ingredients,was sold by its previous owner,Primus Pharmaceuticals,for$241.50.Nowm almost immediately increased the price by l,100%,and hiked the price higher still in January 2016.Figures seen by the Financial 77mes show the company increased the price a third time last week to take the cost to$9,561.So-called"price cheating",in which companies buy the rights to older drugs and then vastly increase their cost,has provoked outrage across the country and led to calls for reform of the US healthcare system.Earlier this month,Hillary Clinton claimed"It's time to move beyond talking about these price hikes and start acting to address them.AlI Americans deserve full access to the medications they need-without being burdened by excessive,unjustified costs."Clinton said she would change the law to allow the"emergency importation"of safe altemative treatments from abroad.Aloquin contains two cheap active ingredients:a decades-old antibiotic,iodoquinol,and an extract from the aloe vera plant.Iodoquinol can be bought for as little as$30 a tube and aloe vera cream costs a few dollars.The drug is labelled as"possibly effective",as the US Food and Drug Administration has stated that there is only limited evidence that the drug is effective.Novum has also drastically increased the price of its other two skin creams,Alcortin A and Novacort.The drugs are prescription only,with the cost being mostly covered by health insurance or government assistance.In instances when the full cost of the treatment isn't covered by insurance,Novum provides coupons to reduce the proportion that patients have to pay,while collecting the rest from the health plan.The company,which is privately held and does not publish figures on sales or profits,did not reply to requests for comment.A spokesman told the public that the firm was founded by"a group oflike-minded investors who believe in the firm's focus ofproviding therapeutic innovations that are affordable for patients".The price of the Aloquin is considered as cheating for____.A.the price has been raised for many timesB.patients cannot get access to medicines they needC.the increase ofthe price has been dramaticD.the drug is not effective at all
Text 4 A US drug company has increased the price of an acne cream by more than 3,900%to$9,561 in less than 18 months in the latest example of drug"price cheating",which has enraged the American public and become a central topic of debate in the presidential election campaign.Novum Pharma,a recently formed privately held Chicago-based company,bought the rights to drug Aloquin in May 2015.The 60g cream,which contains two cheap ingredients,was sold by its previous owner,Primus Pharmaceuticals,for$241.50.Nowm almost immediately increased the price by l,100%,and hiked the price higher still in January 2016.Figures seen by the Financial 77mes show the company increased the price a third time last week to take the cost to$9,561.So-called"price cheating",in which companies buy the rights to older drugs and then vastly increase their cost,has provoked outrage across the country and led to calls for reform of the US healthcare system.Earlier this month,Hillary Clinton claimed"It's time to move beyond talking about these price hikes and start acting to address them.AlI Americans deserve full access to the medications they need-without being burdened by excessive,unjustified costs."Clinton said she would change the law to allow the"emergency importation"of safe altemative treatments from abroad.Aloquin contains two cheap active ingredients:a decades-old antibiotic,iodoquinol,and an extract from the aloe vera plant.Iodoquinol can be bought for as little as$30 a tube and aloe vera cream costs a few dollars.The drug is labelled as"possibly effective",as the US Food and Drug Administration has stated that there is only limited evidence that the drug is effective.Novum has also drastically increased the price of its other two skin creams,Alcortin A and Novacort.The drugs are prescription only,with the cost being mostly covered by health insurance or government assistance.In instances when the full cost of the treatment isn't covered by insurance,Novum provides coupons to reduce the proportion that patients have to pay,while collecting the rest from the health plan.The company,which is privately held and does not publish figures on sales or profits,did not reply to requests for comment.A spokesman told the public that the firm was founded by"a group oflike-minded investors who believe in the firm's focus ofproviding therapeutic innovations that are affordable for patients".The quotation of Clinton indicates that——A.emergency alternative drugs should be importedB.Americans should decide the price of medicinesC.we should know the address ofthe medicine companiesD.prices ofAmerican drugs are too high to afford
可插入多行注释的 JavaScript 语法是？（）A、 /*This comment has more than one line*/ B、 //This comment has more than one line// C、 !--This comment has more than one line--
问答题Over the course of a year, a certain house appreciated in value by 10 percent while the house next door decreased in value by 10 percent as a result of foundation damage. At the end of the year, the reduced price of the second house was what percentage of the increased price of the first house? (1) The amount by which the first house increased in value was half as much as the amount by which the second house decreased in value. (2) At the end of the year, the second house was worth $70,000 more than the first house.
单选题If the effective bearing area has been reduced , remedial action should be taken（）Aby more than 5 percentBby less than 10 percentCto 95 percentDto less than 90 percent
单选题We may infer from the second paragraph that ______.Agas price has no influence on drivers.BToyota Yaris is not welcome in Manhattan.CNissan Versa has already been well selling for its six-speed transmission.DHonda Fit is more economical than Chevy Suburban SUV.
多选题View the Exhibit and examine the data in the PRODUCT INFORMATION table. Which two tasks would require subqueries？ （）Adisplaying the minimum list price for each product statusBdisplaying all supplier IDs whose average list price is more than 500Cdisplaying the number of products whose list prices are more than the average list priceDdisplaying all the products whose minimum list prices are more than the average list price of products having the product status orderableEdisplaying the total number of products supplied by supplier 102071 and having product status OBSOLETE
单选题At the beginning of the day, the prices of stocks X and Y are the same. At the end of the day, the price of stock X has increased by 1/20 of its original price and the price of stock Y has decreased by 1/20 of its original price. The new price of stock X is what fraction of the new price of stock Y?A2/20B19/21C21/19D18/20E20/18
问答题Directions:In this section, there is one passage followed by 5 questions. Read the passage carefully, then answer the questions in a maximum of 10 words. Remember to write the answers on the Answer Sheet. Questions 1-5 are based on the following passage. Could the bad old days of economic decline be about to return? Since OPEC agreed to supply-cuts in March, the price of crude oil has jumped to almost $26 a barrel, up from less than $10 last December. This near-tripling of oil prices calls up scary memories of the 1973 oil shock, when prices quadrupled, and 1979-1980, when they also almost tripled. Both previous shocks resulted in double-digit inflation and global economic decline. So where are the headlines warning of gloom and doom this time? The oil price was given another push up this week when Iraq suspended oil exports. Strengthening economic growth, at the same time as winter grips the northern hemisphere, could push the price higher still in the short term. Yet there are good reasons to expect the economic consequences now to be less severe than in the 1970s. In most countries the cost of crude oil now accounts for a smaller share of the price of petrol than it did in the 1970s. In Europe, taxes account for up to four-fifths of the retail price, so even quite big changes in the price of crude have a more muted effect on pump prices than in the past. Rich economies are also less dependent on oil than they were, and so less sensitive to swings in the oil price. Energy conservation, a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries have reduced oil consumption. Software, consultancy and mobile telephones use far less oil than steel or car production. For each dollar of GDP (in constant prices) rich economies now use nearly 50% less oil than in 1973. The OECD estimates in its latest Economic Outlook that, if oil prices averaged $22 a barrel for a full year, compared with $13 in 1998, this would increase the oil import bill in rich economies by only 0.25-0.5% of GDP. That is less than one-quarter of the income loss in 1974 or 1980. On the other hand, oil-importing emerging economies—to which heavy industry has shifted—have become more energy-intensive, and so could be more seriously squeezed. One more reason not to lose sleep over the rise in oil prices is that, unlike the rises in the 1970s, it has not occurred against the background of general commodity-price inflation and global excess demand. A sizable portion of the world is only just emerging from economic decline. The economist’s commodity price index is broadly unchanging from a year ago. In 1973 commodity prices jumped by 70%, and in 1979 by almost 30%. Questions: 1．What is the main reason for the latest rise of oil price? 2．What are the results of the 1970s’ oil shock? 3．It can be inferred from the text that the retail price of petrol will go up dramatically if ________. 4．According to the passage, reduction in oil consumption is due to ________, a shift to other fuels and a decline in the importance of heavy, energy-intensive industries. 5．According to the passage, compared with those in the 1970s, oil-price shocks are ________ now.
单选题可插入多行注释的 JavaScript 语法是？（）A /*This comment has more than one line*/ B //This comment has more than one line// C !--This comment has more than one line--
单选题It can be inferred from the passage that the minimal basis for a complaint to the international Trade Commission is which of the following?AA foreign competitor has received a subsidy from a foreign government.BA foreign competitor has substantially increased the volume of products shipped to the United States.CA foreign competitor selling products in the United States at less than fair market value.DThe company requesting import relief has been injured by the sale of imports in the United States.
单选题Which of the following statements is TRUE?AThe less education he or she has, the more regrets she or he would have.BThe more education he or she has, the less regrets she or he would have.CMore women than men had regrets about love and family.DThe regret of action seems to last longer than that of inaction.