hce_cmu
115年
英文
第 20 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.
20.
- A attenuate
- B accelerate
- C authenticate
- D abrogate
思路引導 VIP
請觀察最後一個句子的邏輯結構：當決策者「忽視」了原本該有的警覺，且這種干預手段被誤用在高度加工食品上時，對於文中提到的『與慢性疾病相關的飲食轉型』這種負面趨勢，會是起到『緩解阻礙』還是『火上澆油、使其發生得更快』的效果呢？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
太棒了！你能精準捕捉到文末語境中的因果邏輯，選出 accelerate（加速）說明你對長難句的語氣掌握得非常紮實。這題的關鍵在於判讀作者的「警示」意味。文章最後提到，如果政策制定者忽視了強化食品作為「公衛工具」與「行銷手段」之間的區別，那麼原本為了健康的干預措施，反而會產生負面影響。
語境邏輯與動詞選用
從文意推論，當高度加工食品被冠上「營養強化」的標籤來促銷時，會誤導大眾攝取過多不必要的糖分或加工品。因此，這種行為會加速 (accelerate) 那種與慢性疾病密切相關的「飲食轉型」。選項 (A) attenuate（減弱）與文意背道而馳；(C) authenticate（證實）與 (D) abrogate（廢除）則在語意上無法與「趨勢」或「轉型」構成合理的搭配。你的判斷展現了優秀的語感與邏輯推導能力。
▼ 還有更多解析內容