Questões de Inglês - Reading/Writing

Examine os gráficos e leia o texto para responder a questão.

Educated Americans live longer, as others die younger

catching up faliing behind

united states, average life expectance at age 25

    A 25-year-old American with a university degree can expect to live almost a decade longer than a contemporary who dropped out of high school. Although researchers have long known that the rich live longer than the poor, this education gap is less well documented — and is especially marked in rich countries. And whereas the average American’s expected span has been flat in recent years — and, strikingly, even fell between 2015 and 2017 — that of the one-third with a bachelor’s degree has continued to lengthen.

    This disparity in life expectancy is growing, according to new research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Using data from nearly 50m death certificates filed between 1990 and 2018, Anne Case and Angus Deaton of Princeton University analysed differences in life expectancy by sex, race, ethnicity and education. They found that the lifespans of those with and without a bachelor’s degree started to diverge in the 1990s and 2000s. This gap grew even wider in the 2010s as the life expectancy of degree-holders continued to rise while that of other Americans got shorter.

    What is the link between schooling and longevity? Some argue that better-educated people develop healthier lifestyles: each additional year of study reduces the chances of being a smoker and of being overweight. The better-educated earn more, which in turn is associated with greater health. Ms Case and Mr Deaton argue that changes in labour markets, including the rise of automation and increased demand for highly-educated workers, coupled with the rising costs of employer-provided health care, have depressed the supply of well-paid jobs for those without a degree. This may be contributing to higher rates of alcohol and drug use, suicide and other “deaths of despair”.

(www.economist.com,17.03.2021. Adaptado.)

Texto - Chile’s Atacama Desert: Where Fast Fashion Goes to Die.

    Deep in the Atacama Desert of Chile, new dunes are forming - not of sand, but of last year’s unsold clothing from around the world. Piled high atop the previous year’s fast fashion casualties and unpurchased lines of clothes, the garments are usually filled with toxins and dyes and do not biodegrade. The result: a fast fashion faux-pas and environmental disaster that’s been largely overlooked - until now.

    Aljazeera estimated that up to 59,000 tons of clothes that can’t be sold in the U.S. or Europe end up at the Iquique port in the Alto Hospicio free zone in northern Chile each year. These are meant for resale in Latin America, but only 20,000 tons actually make their way around the continent. What doesn’t get sold in Santiago or smuggled and shipped to other countries stays in the free zone. It’s no one’s responsibility to clean up and no one will pay the necessary tariffs to take it away, Aljazeera reported.

    (...)

    While the human externalities of rampant consumerism - with child labor and horrible conditions in factories - are well documented, the environmental cost is less publicized and less understood. The truth, though, is that fast fashion uses an outrageous amount of water - something to the tune of 7,500 liters for one pair of jeans, a United Nations news report found. This is the equivalent amount of water that an average person drinks over seven years, the international body noted. In total, UNCTAD estimates that the fashion industry uses roughly 93 billion cubic meters of water each year, enough to quench the thirst of five million people.

    "When we think of industries that are having a harmful effect on the environment, manufacturing, energy, transport and even food production might come to mind," the U.N. news report said. "But the fashion industry is widely believed to be the second most polluting industry in the world- right behind big oil.

(...)

    Factories also often dump chemicals from manufacturing into local waterways and rivers, turning them toxic and polluting communities downstream. This is particularly bad in places like Bangladesh and Indonesia, known as cheap textile manufacturing hubs. "We are committing hydrocide," said Sunita Narain, director general of Center for Science and the Environment in India, about the dirty practice. "We are deliberately murdering our rivers."

    In 2017, a documentary on the pollution of waterways caused by fast fashion found that tanneries were dumping toxic chromium into the water supply in Kanpur, India. The chemical then ended up in cow’s milk and agriculture products.

    All of that environmental cost doesn’t even account for end-of-life pollution created by clothes. Unsold clothes are usually burned, buried or trucked to Chile. In all these scenarios, toxins contained in the garments are released into the air and underground water channels, Aljazeera reported. As noted above, the colors, sequins and other accouterments that make the clothes the style of the minute also usually create environmental harms when chemicals leach and the garments fail to biodegrade.

    All of that environmental cost doesn’t even account for end-of-life pollution created by clothes. Unsold clothes are usually burned, buried or trucked to Chile. In all these scenarios, toxins contained in the garments are released into the air and underground water channels, Aljazeera reported. As noted above, the colors, sequins and other accouterments that make the clothes the style of the minute also usually create environmental harms when chemicals leach and the garments fail to biodegrade.

(...)

    Analysis shows a continued rise in consumerism. McKinsey estimated that the average consumer purchased 60% more clothes in 2014 than in 2000, Insider reported. That aligns with the doubling in clothing production between 2004 and 2019 that the Ellen McArthur Foundation found, the news report added.

    "We need a model that doesn’t compromise on ethical, social and environmental values and involves customers, rather than encouraging them to binge buy ever-changing trends," Greenpeace noted as part of their Detox My Fashion campaign in Greenpeace Italy

    Instead of changing our wardrobes and styles with the whims and attitudes of fast fashion, experts encourage us to slow down our desire for more. Manufacturers are also encouraged to create pieces that are meant to last and endure and to embrace truly sustainable practices. Shifts and innovations in dyeing and in fiber choice can help. As consumers and manufacturers, only by changing our mindsets instead of our outfits will we be able to effect actual change.

    Until then, toxic dunes in Chile’s desert will continue to grow.

Adapted from: https://www.ecowatch.com/chile-desert-fast-fashion-2655551898.html. Accessed on 14/02/2022

Directions: Answer question according to the text.

TEXT

    Many parents are concerned with their child’s
seemingly obsessive video game play. Fortnite, the
most recent gaming phenomenon, has taken the world
by storm and has parents asking if the shooter game is
[5] okay for kids. The short answer is yes, Fortnite is
generally fine. Furthermore, parents can breathe easier
knowing that research suggests gaming (on its own)
does not cause disorders like addiction.
    However, there’s more to the story. A
[10] comprehensive answer to the question of whether video
games are prejudicial must take into account other
factors, and parents need to understand why kids play,
as well as when to worry and when to relax.
    The word “addiction” gets tossed around quite
[15] a bit these days, but if it isn’t causing serious harm and
disorder to daily function, it isn’t an addiction. Parents
may worry that their kids are addicted, but if the children
can pull themselves away from a game to join the family
for a conversation over dinner and shows interest in
[20] other activities, like sports or socializing with friends,
then they are not addicted.
    Generally, parents panic when their kid’s video
game playing comes at the expense of doing other
things, like studying or helping around the house. But
[25] let’s be honest, kids have been avoiding these activities
for ages. Equally true is the fact that parents have been
complaining about their unhelpful children well before the
first video game was plugged into its socket.
    In fact, moderate video game play has been
[30] shown to be beneficial. A study conducted at Oxford by
Dr. Andrew Przybylski revealed that playing about one
hour per day improved psychological well-being, while
when taken to an extreme, playing over three hours per
day, was correlated with less well-being.
[35]    The real question should be what is it about
the special attraction of gaming that makes it the
preferred pastime of so many millions of kids? What
makes it so difficult for even non-addicted kids to step
away from video games sometimes? The answer has to
[40] do with the way games address basic psychological
needs.
    Fortnite, like any well-designed video game,
satisfies what we are all looking for. According to Drs.
Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, people need three
[45] things to flourish. We look for competence — the need
for mastery, progression, achievement, and growth. We
seek autonomy — the need for volition and freedom of
control over our choice. And finally, we look for
relatedness — the need to feel like we matter to others,
[50] and that others matter to us. Unfortunately, when
considering the state of modern childhood, many kids
aren’t getting enough of these three essential elements.
    School, where kids spend most of their waking
hours, is in many ways the antithesis of a place where
[55] kids feel competence, autonomy, and relatedness.
There, kids are told what to do, where to be, what to
think, what to wear, and what to eat. While some argue
that discipline and control provide structure, it’s clear
why teachers and students might struggle with
[60] motivation in the classroom.
    Gamers feel competence when they practice
strengths to reach their goals. In a game, players have
the autonomy to call the shots, do what they want, and
experiment with creative strategies to solve problems.
[65] Games are also social outlets where players can feel
relatedness. In Fortnite, for example, players often
meet in the virtual environment to chat and socialize,
because doing so in the real world is often inconvenient
or off limits.
[70]    Of course, none of this is to say video games
are a good substitution — quite the opposite. No game 

can give a child the feeling of competence that comes
from accomplishing a difficult task or learning a new
skill on their own accord. Fortnite can’t compete with
[75] the exhilaration that comes from the autonomy of
exploring reality, where a child is free to ask questions
and unlock mysteries in the real world. No social media
site can give a kid the sense of relatedness, safety, and
warmth that comes from an adult who loves that child
[80] unconditionally just the way they are, no matter what,
and takes the time to tell them so.
    Some kids suffer from gaming disorders, but
such dependencies are often combined with preexisting
conditions, including problems with impulse control. For
[85] most children, however, parents understanding the
deeper truth behind what kids are getting out of games
empowers them to take steps to give their children
more of what they need. Video games are this
generation’s outlet, and some kids use them as a tool to
[90] escape the same way some of us use our own flavor of
dissociative devices to tune out reality for a while.

(Adapted from https://www.psychologytoday.com. Access on March 25th, 2021)

Glossary:
1. to toss around – to discuss possibilities or new ideas
2. to step away – to not become involved with something
3. to flourish – to grow or develop successfully
4. volition – the power to make your own decision
5. exhilaration – excitement and happiness
6. to call the shots – to be in position to decide
7. outlet – a way in which emotions, energy or abilities can be expressed or made use of
8. to tune out – to stop paying attention to something or someone

Is breakfast always a good idea?

By Philippa Roxby

Breakfast may be the most important meal of the day, but eating it won’t help you lose weight, research suggests

    Those who ate breakfast consumed 260 more
[5] calories per day and gained 1 lb. (approximately 500
kilograms) more than those who skipped it, a review
of previous studies found. But experts say a healthy
breakfast can be a good source of calcium and fiber.
It has also been shown to improve concentration and
[10] attention levels, particularly in children. Breakfast
gives you energy, stops you snacking later in the day
and supplies essential nutrients – so we are told.
Its reputation as the nutritional backstop to our day
stems from observational studies showing a positive
[15] link between people eating breakfast and having a
healthy weight.

    But this new Australian research in the British
Medical Journal, which reviewed the results of 13
separate trials on breakfast eating, weight change
[20] and energy intake, found little evidence for those
views. The findings of the Monash University research
team suggest that skipping breakfast might in fact be
a good way to reduce total daily calorie intake. They
found that breakfast eaters consumed more calories
[25] overall and breakfast skippers did not have a greater
appetite in the afternoon. And they say caution is
needed when recommending breakfast for weight
loss in adults – because it could have the opposite
effect. However, the researchers added that there
[30] were limitations to their study. The participants in the
studies were only followed for short periods – from
between two and 16 weeks – and the difference in
calorie intake between breakfast eaters and skippers
was small. The researchers concluded that working
[35] out the long-term effect of skipping or adding breakfast
to diets still needed more research.

Calcium and fiber boost

    Prof Kevin Whelan, dietetics expert and head
of King College of London’s nutritional sciences
[40] department, says we should not get too hung up on
calorie intake first thing in the morning. “This study
does not say breakfast is bad for the health,” he said.
“Breakfast is important for nutrient intake, such as
cereals and milk which are good for calcium and fiber.”
[45] But the BMJ research did not look at this aspect of
breakfast. “We are not talking about breakfast being
the cause of obesity,” he said.

Available at: https:www.bbc.com/news/health-47070173?intlink_ from_url. Retrieved on: Jan. 31, 2019. Adapted.

Leia o texto para responder à questão.

Minority ethnic Britons face ‘shocking’ job discrimination
Haroon Siddique
Thu 17 Jan 2019 17.00 GMT Last modified on Fri 18 Jan 2019 00.50 GMT

A study by experts based at the Centre for Social Investigation at Nuffield College, University of Oxford, found applicants from minority ethnic backgrounds had to send 80% more applications to get a positive response from an employer than a white person of British origin.

A linked study by the same researchers, comparing their results with similar field experiments dating back to 1969, found discrimination against black Britons and those of south Asian origin – particularly Pakistanis – unchanged over almost 50 years.

The research, part of a larger cross-national project funded by the European Union and shared exclusively with the Guardian before its official launch, prompted concerns that race relations legislation had failed.

It echoes findings published as part of the Guardian’s Bias in Britain series that people from minority ethnic backgrounds face discrimination when seeking a room to rent. In a snapshot survey of online flatshare ads the Guardian found that an applicant called Muhammad was significantly less likely to receive a positive response than an applicant called David.

Prof Anthony Heath, co-author and emeritus fellow of Nuffield College, said: “The absence of any real decline in discrimination against black British and people of Pakistani background is a disturbing finding, which calls into question the effectiveness of previous policies. Ethnic inequality remains a burning injustice and there needs to be a radical rethink about how to tackle it.”

Dr Zubaida Haque, the deputy director of the race equality thinktank Runnymede, described the findings as shocking. They demonstrated that “it’s not just covert racism or unconscious bias that we need to worry about; it’s overt and conscious racism, where applicants are getting shortlisted on the basis of their ethnicity and/or name”, she said.

“It’s clear that race relations legislation is not sufficient to hold employers to account. There are no real consequences for employers of racially discriminating in subtle ways, but for BME* applicants or employees it means higher unemployment, lower wages, poorer conditions and less security in work and life.”

https://tinyurl.com/y9nohdte Acesso em: 07.10.2019. Adaptado.

*BME – Black and Minority Ethnicity