Passage 1People have been talking about health for a long time because people know the importance of it. People's understanding of health also becomes deeper with the progress in scientific research. Recently the term “health" has come to have a wider meaning than it used to. It no longer means just the absence of il0lness. Today, health means the well-being of your body, your mind and your relationship with other people. This new concept of health is closely related to another term——quality of life. Quality of life is the degree of overall satisfaction that a person gets from life.Why has the emphasis of health shifted from the absence of disease to a broader focus on the quality of a person's life? One reason for this has to do with the length and conditions of life that people can now expect. Medical advances have made it possible for people today to live longer, healthier lives. Imagine for a moment that you were born in the year 1900. You could have expected on average to live until about the age of 47. In contrast, if you were born in the year 1999, you could expect to live to the age of 75.() leads to people's deeper understanding of health.

Passage 1People have been talking about health for a long time because people know the importance of it. People's understanding of health also becomes deeper with the progress in scientific research. Recently the term “health" has come to have a wider meaning than it used to. It no longer means just the absence of il0lness. Today, health means the well-being of your body, your mind and your relationship with other people. This new concept of health is closely related to another term——quality of life. Quality of life is the degree of overall satisfaction that a person gets from life.Why has the emphasis of health shifted from the absence of disease to a broader focus on the quality of a person's life? One reason for this has to do with the length and conditions of life that people can now expect. Medical advances have made it possible for people today to live longer, healthier lives. Imagine for a moment that you were born in the year 1900. You could have expected on average to live until about the age of 47. In contrast, if you were born in the year 1999, you could expect to live to the age of 75.According to the passage, to people of today, health means ().

Passage 1People have been talking about health for a long time because people know the importance of it. People's understanding of health also becomes deeper with the progress in scientific research. Recently the term “health" has come to have a wider meaning than it used to. It no longer means just the absence of il0lness. Today, health means the well-being of your body, your mind and your relationship with other people. This new concept of health is closely related to another term——quality of life. Quality of life is the degree of overall satisfaction that a person gets from life.Why has the emphasis of health shifted from the absence of disease to a broader focus on the quality of a person's life? One reason for this has to do with the length and conditions of life that people can now expect. Medical advances have made it possible for people today to live longer, healthier lives. Imagine for a moment that you were born in the year 1900. You could have expected on average to live until about the age of 47. In contrast, if you were born in the year 1999, you could expect to live to the age of 75.The emphasis of health has shifted nowadays because ().

Passage 1People have been talking about health for a long time because people know the importance of it. People's understanding of health also becomes deeper with the progress in scientific research. Recently the term “health" has come to have a wider meaning than it used to. It no longer means just the absence of il0lness. Today, health means the well-being of your body, your mind and your relationship with other people. This new concept of health is closely related to another term——quality of life. Quality of life is the degree of overall satisfaction that a person gets from life.Why has the emphasis of health shifted from the absence of disease to a broader focus on the quality of a person's life? One reason for this has to do with the length and conditions of life that people can now expect. Medical advances have made it possible for people today to live longer, healthier lives. Imagine for a moment that you were born in the year 1900. You could have expected on average to live until about the age of 47. In contrast, if you were born in the year 1999, you could expect to live to the age of 75.We can infer from the passage ().

Passage 1People have been talking about health for a long time because people know the importance of it. People's understanding of health also becomes deeper with the progress in scientific research. Recently the term “health" has come to have a wider meaning than it used to. It no longer means just the absence of il0lness. Today, health means the well-being of your body, your mind and your relationship with other people. This new concept of health is closely related to another term——quality of life. Quality of life is the degree of overall satisfaction that a person gets from life.Why has the emphasis of health shifted from the absence of disease to a broader focus on the quality of a person's life? One reason for this has to do with the length and conditions of life that people can now expect. Medical advances have made it possible for people today to live longer, healthier lives. Imagine for a moment that you were born in the year 1900. You could have expected on average to live until about the age of 47. In contrast, if you were born in the year 1999, you could expect to live to the age of 75.This passage is mainly about ().

Passage 2Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it's important to distinguish television's influences on children from those of the fanily. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn't really cause,overlooking our own roles in shaping children's minds.One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child's ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV，children do not merely absorb words and images. Instead, they learn both explicit and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually ，children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree , children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room. Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn't take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents' educational background have a stronger influence on a child's reading. “ A child's reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads. ”Anderson says. Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it's the other way around.“ If you're smart young, you'll watch less TV when you're older," Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed ,Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.By watching TV, children learn ().

Passage 2Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it's important to distinguish television's influences on children from those of the fanily. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn't really cause,overlooking our own roles in shaping children's minds.One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child's ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV，children do not merely absorb words and images. Instead, they learn both explicit and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually ，children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree , children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room. Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn't take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents' educational background have a stronger influence on a child's reading. “ A child's reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads. ”Anderson says. Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it's the other way around.“ If you're smart young, you'll watch less TV when you're older," Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed ,Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.An educational program is best watched by a child ().

Passage 2Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it's important to distinguish television's influences on children from those of the fanily. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn't really cause,overlooking our own roles in shaping children's minds.One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child's ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV，children do not merely absorb words and images. Instead, they learn both explicit and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually ，children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree , children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room. Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn't take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents' educational background have a stronger influence on a child's reading. “ A child's reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads. ”Anderson says. Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it's the other way around.“ If you're smart young, you'll watch less TV when you're older," Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed ,Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.Which of the following is most related to children's reading ability?

Passage 2Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it's important to distinguish television's influences on children from those of the fanily. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn't really cause,overlooking our own roles in shaping children's minds.One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child's ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV，children do not merely absorb words and images. Instead, they learn both explicit and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually ，children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree , children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room. Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn't take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents' educational background have a stronger influence on a child's reading. “ A child's reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads. ”Anderson says. Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it's the other way around.“ If you're smart young, you'll watch less TV when you're older," Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed ,Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.Anderson believed that ().

Passage 2Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it's important to distinguish television's influences on children from those of the fanily. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn't really cause,overlooking our own roles in shaping children's minds.One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child's ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV，children do not merely absorb words and images. Instead, they learn both explicit and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually ，children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree , children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room. Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn't take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents' educational background have a stronger influence on a child's reading. “ A child's reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads. ”Anderson says. Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it's the other way around.“ If you're smart young, you'll watch less TV when you're older," Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed ,Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.What is the main purpose of the passage?