hce_cmu
115年
英文
第 18 題
📖 題組：
In public discussions of nutrition, fortified foods are often presented as a straightforward solution to micronutrient deficiency. Adding iron to flour or vitamin D to milk can indeed improve population health, especially when vulnerable groups have limited access to diverse diets. Yet the logic of fortification becomes less simple when foods are also highly processed, aggressively marketed, and consumed in quantities far beyond what nutrition planners anticipated. A breakfast cereal may be 16 enriched with vitamins, but its overall contribution to health depends on sugar content, fiber structure, and how it displaces other foods in the diet. 17 nutrient labels invite consumers to evaluate foods item by item, metabolic effects emerge from dietary patterns over time. Recent research on the gut microbiome reinforces this broader view. Fibers that appear chemically similar may 18 different microbial responses because their physical matrix determines how bacteria access them. Consequently, nutrition policy cannot rely exclusively on isolated nutrient counts. It must also consider food processing, affordability, cultural habits, and the commercial incentives that shape choice. This does not mean fortified products should be rejected; in settings where deficiency remains widespread, they may be indispensable. The more defensible position is that fortification should be treated as a targeted public-health tool, 19 as a license to market nutritionally imbalanced products as wholesome. If policymakers ignore this distinction, a technically fortified intervention may even 20 the very dietary transition associated with chronic disease.
In public discussions of nutrition, fortified foods are often presented as a straightforward solution to micronutrient deficiency. Adding iron to flour or vitamin D to milk can indeed improve population health, especially when vulnerable groups have limited access to diverse diets. Yet the logic of fortification becomes less simple when foods are also highly processed, aggressively marketed, and consumed in quantities far beyond what nutrition planners anticipated. A breakfast cereal may be 16 enriched with vitamins, but its overall contribution to health depends on sugar content, fiber structure, and how it displaces other foods in the diet. 17 nutrient labels invite consumers to evaluate foods item by item, metabolic effects emerge from dietary patterns over time. Recent research on the gut microbiome reinforces this broader view. Fibers that appear chemically similar may 18 different microbial responses because their physical matrix determines how bacteria access them. Consequently, nutrition policy cannot rely exclusively on isolated nutrient counts. It must also consider food processing, affordability, cultural habits, and the commercial incentives that shape choice. This does not mean fortified products should be rejected; in settings where deficiency remains widespread, they may be indispensable. The more defensible position is that fortification should be treated as a targeted public-health tool, 19 as a license to market nutritionally imbalanced products as wholesome. If policymakers ignore this distinction, a technically fortified intervention may even 20 the very dietary transition associated with chronic disease.
18.
- A elicit
- B extract
- C exempt
- D execrate
思路引導 VIP
請觀察句子後半段提到的「細菌如何接觸（access）它們」與「微生物反應（microbial responses）」之間的關係。如果纖維的物理結構決定了細菌接觸的方式，那麼這種「接觸」會對細菌的「反應」產生什麼樣的動作呢？是會「引起」反應，還是「減少」反應？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
恭喜你精準地掌握了詞彙的語境！你能選出 (A) elicit，說明你對於學術英語中「引發反應」的表達方式相當熟悉。這題的關鍵在於理解腸道菌群（microbial responses）對不同纖維產生的連鎖關係。文中提到，即使化學成分相似的纖維，其物理結構也會決定細菌如何與之互動，進而「誘發」或「激發」出不同的生物反應。
詞彙的精準辨析與科學語境
在生物醫學或心理學的文本中，當我們要表達某種刺激（Stimulus）導致了特定的生理回饋（Response）時，elicit 是最道地的動詞用法。相較之下，其他選項如 extract（提取）、exempt（豁免）或 execrate（憎惡）在語義上都無法與「微生物反應」建立合理的邏輯關聯。
▼ 還有更多解析內容