Pular para o conteúdo

Disciplina · Linguagens

Questões de Inglês do ENEM

Questões de Inglês, da área de Linguagens, com gabarito em cada página.

  • 5.311 questões
  • 57 assuntos

Resultados: 5.311 questões

Página 263 de 266

  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the following text and answer the question.

    The “Modern Physician” needs to embrace technology

    February 12, 2021
    Veronica Diaz, MD

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, Faculdade Evangélica Mackenzie do Paraná 2022, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

            Even before the COVID-19 pandemic forced health systems and private practices to implement technology solutions such as telehealth, the evolution toward a more tech-savvy healthcare experience was firmly underway. The days of carting paper charts and hard film x-rays has been broadly supplanted with cloudbased electronic health records and digital Picture Archiving Communications Systems (PACS). The pandemic has made those previously reticent to adopt technology wake up to its necessity.

            Practicing medicine today requires a higher degree of technical literacy than ever before, and the challenges of the pandemic have only reinforced and accelerated that trend. We have reached an inflection point in the industry where clinical expertise is not the only prerequisite for a successful career. Physicians who familiarize, vet, and incorporate new technology into their practices will likely be in the best position to deliver optimal care. 

    From: https://www.physicianspractice.com/view/ the-modern-physician-needs-to-embrace-technology
    The text implies that, in today’s medicine, technology should be
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa87d536-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, Faculdade Evangélica Mackenzie do Paraná 2022, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

    Source: https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/mark_twain_102859


    The phrase “the world owes you nothing” means that the world

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa853d95-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text below and answer the question. 


    Advancing gender equity in medicine


            […]


            The problem of gender inequity in medical leadership is not the result of too few candidates who are not men with the appropriate experience and training to fulfill leadership roles, nor can it be explained by merely suggesting that different genders do not have the same aspirations as men. Gender inequity is largely underpinned by socially constructed gender norms, roles and relations. For example, gender roles explain why female clinicians with children spend 100.2 minutes more per day on household activities and child care than their male counterparts. This makes it more challenging for female clinicians with children to get ahead. Gender norms explain why more men are given leadership opportunities and have stronger letters of reference than other genders. Furthermore, gender relations explain why men have fewer consequences for uncivil behaviour or for harassment in the workplace compared with other genders. A recent observational study of operating room culture evaluated the prevalence and predictors of exposure to disruptive behaviour in the operating room. Disruptive behaviour was described as a range of unacceptable workplace behaviours, including incivility, bullying and harassment. A further definition provided is “interpersonal behaviour (i.e., directed toward others or occurring in the presence of others) that results in a perceived threat to victims and/or witnesses and violates a reasonable person’s standard of respectful behaviour.” The study found that clinicians who are women report more exposure to disruptive behaviour and are substantially less confident or empowered to take action to address incivility in their hospital and university settings. Gender and sexual harassment may be associated with environments that exhibit gender inequity in pay, opportunity and promotion. Disruptive behaviour and overt harassment likely endure within our medical institutions because the offenders are often considered invaluable to the organization for their stature, leadership, productivity or reputation, and are largely not held unaccountable for their actions, which further amplifies gender inequities.


            Ensuring gender equity in medicine is an issue of justice and rights. Having more physicians who are women and more women in health policy leadership also appears to enhance the provision of high-quality patient care. Large, well-conducted observational studies have shown that patients of female clinicians experience better quality of care for diabetes, and significantly lower rates of mortality, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits than those treated by male clinicians. One study considered that reasons for this may include that women spend more time with their patients, are more patient-centred in their approach and provide more evidence-based care. Two recent opinion pieces discuss research showing that female representation on corporate boards, such as hospital boards, results in more socially thoughtful decisions and less corruption. Without gender equity, we risk extinguishing creative solutions to complex health problems and, most importantly, limiting patient access to the best care. 


    From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034331/ CMAJ. 2021 Feb 16; 193(7): E244–E250.

    The opposite of “often” in “the offenders are often considered invaluable” (1st paragraph) is 
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa827a0b-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text below and answer the question. 


    Advancing gender equity in medicine


            […]


            The problem of gender inequity in medical leadership is not the result of too few candidates who are not men with the appropriate experience and training to fulfill leadership roles, nor can it be explained by merely suggesting that different genders do not have the same aspirations as men. Gender inequity is largely underpinned by socially constructed gender norms, roles and relations. For example, gender roles explain why female clinicians with children spend 100.2 minutes more per day on household activities and child care than their male counterparts. This makes it more challenging for female clinicians with children to get ahead. Gender norms explain why more men are given leadership opportunities and have stronger letters of reference than other genders. Furthermore, gender relations explain why men have fewer consequences for uncivil behaviour or for harassment in the workplace compared with other genders. A recent observational study of operating room culture evaluated the prevalence and predictors of exposure to disruptive behaviour in the operating room. Disruptive behaviour was described as a range of unacceptable workplace behaviours, including incivility, bullying and harassment. A further definition provided is “interpersonal behaviour (i.e., directed toward others or occurring in the presence of others) that results in a perceived threat to victims and/or witnesses and violates a reasonable person’s standard of respectful behaviour.” The study found that clinicians who are women report more exposure to disruptive behaviour and are substantially less confident or empowered to take action to address incivility in their hospital and university settings. Gender and sexual harassment may be associated with environments that exhibit gender inequity in pay, opportunity and promotion. Disruptive behaviour and overt harassment likely endure within our medical institutions because the offenders are often considered invaluable to the organization for their stature, leadership, productivity or reputation, and are largely not held unaccountable for their actions, which further amplifies gender inequities.


            Ensuring gender equity in medicine is an issue of justice and rights. Having more physicians who are women and more women in health policy leadership also appears to enhance the provision of high-quality patient care. Large, well-conducted observational studies have shown that patients of female clinicians experience better quality of care for diabetes, and significantly lower rates of mortality, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits than those treated by male clinicians. One study considered that reasons for this may include that women spend more time with their patients, are more patient-centred in their approach and provide more evidence-based care. Two recent opinion pieces discuss research showing that female representation on corporate boards, such as hospital boards, results in more socially thoughtful decisions and less corruption. Without gender equity, we risk extinguishing creative solutions to complex health problems and, most importantly, limiting patient access to the best care. 


    From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034331/ CMAJ. 2021 Feb 16; 193(7): E244–E250.

    The excerpt that contains a comparison is:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa7fecd4-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text below and answer the question. 


    Advancing gender equity in medicine


            […]


            The problem of gender inequity in medical leadership is not the result of too few candidates who are not men with the appropriate experience and training to fulfill leadership roles, nor can it be explained by merely suggesting that different genders do not have the same aspirations as men. Gender inequity is largely underpinned by socially constructed gender norms, roles and relations. For example, gender roles explain why female clinicians with children spend 100.2 minutes more per day on household activities and child care than their male counterparts. This makes it more challenging for female clinicians with children to get ahead. Gender norms explain why more men are given leadership opportunities and have stronger letters of reference than other genders. Furthermore, gender relations explain why men have fewer consequences for uncivil behaviour or for harassment in the workplace compared with other genders. A recent observational study of operating room culture evaluated the prevalence and predictors of exposure to disruptive behaviour in the operating room. Disruptive behaviour was described as a range of unacceptable workplace behaviours, including incivility, bullying and harassment. A further definition provided is “interpersonal behaviour (i.e., directed toward others or occurring in the presence of others) that results in a perceived threat to victims and/or witnesses and violates a reasonable person’s standard of respectful behaviour.” The study found that clinicians who are women report more exposure to disruptive behaviour and are substantially less confident or empowered to take action to address incivility in their hospital and university settings. Gender and sexual harassment may be associated with environments that exhibit gender inequity in pay, opportunity and promotion. Disruptive behaviour and overt harassment likely endure within our medical institutions because the offenders are often considered invaluable to the organization for their stature, leadership, productivity or reputation, and are largely not held unaccountable for their actions, which further amplifies gender inequities.


            Ensuring gender equity in medicine is an issue of justice and rights. Having more physicians who are women and more women in health policy leadership also appears to enhance the provision of high-quality patient care. Large, well-conducted observational studies have shown that patients of female clinicians experience better quality of care for diabetes, and significantly lower rates of mortality, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits than those treated by male clinicians. One study considered that reasons for this may include that women spend more time with their patients, are more patient-centred in their approach and provide more evidence-based care. Two recent opinion pieces discuss research showing that female representation on corporate boards, such as hospital boards, results in more socially thoughtful decisions and less corruption. Without gender equity, we risk extinguishing creative solutions to complex health problems and, most importantly, limiting patient access to the best care. 


    From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034331/ CMAJ. 2021 Feb 16; 193(7): E244–E250.

    “Nor” in “nor can it be explained” (1st paragraph) signals a(n)
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa7d5a23-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text below and answer the question. 


    Advancing gender equity in medicine


            […]


            The problem of gender inequity in medical leadership is not the result of too few candidates who are not men with the appropriate experience and training to fulfill leadership roles, nor can it be explained by merely suggesting that different genders do not have the same aspirations as men. Gender inequity is largely underpinned by socially constructed gender norms, roles and relations. For example, gender roles explain why female clinicians with children spend 100.2 minutes more per day on household activities and child care than their male counterparts. This makes it more challenging for female clinicians with children to get ahead. Gender norms explain why more men are given leadership opportunities and have stronger letters of reference than other genders. Furthermore, gender relations explain why men have fewer consequences for uncivil behaviour or for harassment in the workplace compared with other genders. A recent observational study of operating room culture evaluated the prevalence and predictors of exposure to disruptive behaviour in the operating room. Disruptive behaviour was described as a range of unacceptable workplace behaviours, including incivility, bullying and harassment. A further definition provided is “interpersonal behaviour (i.e., directed toward others or occurring in the presence of others) that results in a perceived threat to victims and/or witnesses and violates a reasonable person’s standard of respectful behaviour.” The study found that clinicians who are women report more exposure to disruptive behaviour and are substantially less confident or empowered to take action to address incivility in their hospital and university settings. Gender and sexual harassment may be associated with environments that exhibit gender inequity in pay, opportunity and promotion. Disruptive behaviour and overt harassment likely endure within our medical institutions because the offenders are often considered invaluable to the organization for their stature, leadership, productivity or reputation, and are largely not held unaccountable for their actions, which further amplifies gender inequities.


            Ensuring gender equity in medicine is an issue of justice and rights. Having more physicians who are women and more women in health policy leadership also appears to enhance the provision of high-quality patient care. Large, well-conducted observational studies have shown that patients of female clinicians experience better quality of care for diabetes, and significantly lower rates of mortality, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits than those treated by male clinicians. One study considered that reasons for this may include that women spend more time with their patients, are more patient-centred in their approach and provide more evidence-based care. Two recent opinion pieces discuss research showing that female representation on corporate boards, such as hospital boards, results in more socially thoughtful decisions and less corruption. Without gender equity, we risk extinguishing creative solutions to complex health problems and, most importantly, limiting patient access to the best care. 


    From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034331/ CMAJ. 2021 Feb 16; 193(7): E244–E250.

    The last sentence carries a
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa7a9f6e-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text below and answer the question. 


    Advancing gender equity in medicine


            […]


            The problem of gender inequity in medical leadership is not the result of too few candidates who are not men with the appropriate experience and training to fulfill leadership roles, nor can it be explained by merely suggesting that different genders do not have the same aspirations as men. Gender inequity is largely underpinned by socially constructed gender norms, roles and relations. For example, gender roles explain why female clinicians with children spend 100.2 minutes more per day on household activities and child care than their male counterparts. This makes it more challenging for female clinicians with children to get ahead. Gender norms explain why more men are given leadership opportunities and have stronger letters of reference than other genders. Furthermore, gender relations explain why men have fewer consequences for uncivil behaviour or for harassment in the workplace compared with other genders. A recent observational study of operating room culture evaluated the prevalence and predictors of exposure to disruptive behaviour in the operating room. Disruptive behaviour was described as a range of unacceptable workplace behaviours, including incivility, bullying and harassment. A further definition provided is “interpersonal behaviour (i.e., directed toward others or occurring in the presence of others) that results in a perceived threat to victims and/or witnesses and violates a reasonable person’s standard of respectful behaviour.” The study found that clinicians who are women report more exposure to disruptive behaviour and are substantially less confident or empowered to take action to address incivility in their hospital and university settings. Gender and sexual harassment may be associated with environments that exhibit gender inequity in pay, opportunity and promotion. Disruptive behaviour and overt harassment likely endure within our medical institutions because the offenders are often considered invaluable to the organization for their stature, leadership, productivity or reputation, and are largely not held unaccountable for their actions, which further amplifies gender inequities.


            Ensuring gender equity in medicine is an issue of justice and rights. Having more physicians who are women and more women in health policy leadership also appears to enhance the provision of high-quality patient care. Large, well-conducted observational studies have shown that patients of female clinicians experience better quality of care for diabetes, and significantly lower rates of mortality, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits than those treated by male clinicians. One study considered that reasons for this may include that women spend more time with their patients, are more patient-centred in their approach and provide more evidence-based care. Two recent opinion pieces discuss research showing that female representation on corporate boards, such as hospital boards, results in more socially thoughtful decisions and less corruption. Without gender equity, we risk extinguishing creative solutions to complex health problems and, most importantly, limiting patient access to the best care. 


    From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034331/ CMAJ. 2021 Feb 16; 193(7): E244–E250.

    According to the text, some offenders may get away with punishment because of their 
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa7807d0-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text below and answer the question. 


    Advancing gender equity in medicine


            […]


            The problem of gender inequity in medical leadership is not the result of too few candidates who are not men with the appropriate experience and training to fulfill leadership roles, nor can it be explained by merely suggesting that different genders do not have the same aspirations as men. Gender inequity is largely underpinned by socially constructed gender norms, roles and relations. For example, gender roles explain why female clinicians with children spend 100.2 minutes more per day on household activities and child care than their male counterparts. This makes it more challenging for female clinicians with children to get ahead. Gender norms explain why more men are given leadership opportunities and have stronger letters of reference than other genders. Furthermore, gender relations explain why men have fewer consequences for uncivil behaviour or for harassment in the workplace compared with other genders. A recent observational study of operating room culture evaluated the prevalence and predictors of exposure to disruptive behaviour in the operating room. Disruptive behaviour was described as a range of unacceptable workplace behaviours, including incivility, bullying and harassment. A further definition provided is “interpersonal behaviour (i.e., directed toward others or occurring in the presence of others) that results in a perceived threat to victims and/or witnesses and violates a reasonable person’s standard of respectful behaviour.” The study found that clinicians who are women report more exposure to disruptive behaviour and are substantially less confident or empowered to take action to address incivility in their hospital and university settings. Gender and sexual harassment may be associated with environments that exhibit gender inequity in pay, opportunity and promotion. Disruptive behaviour and overt harassment likely endure within our medical institutions because the offenders are often considered invaluable to the organization for their stature, leadership, productivity or reputation, and are largely not held unaccountable for their actions, which further amplifies gender inequities.


            Ensuring gender equity in medicine is an issue of justice and rights. Having more physicians who are women and more women in health policy leadership also appears to enhance the provision of high-quality patient care. Large, well-conducted observational studies have shown that patients of female clinicians experience better quality of care for diabetes, and significantly lower rates of mortality, hospital readmissions and emergency department visits than those treated by male clinicians. One study considered that reasons for this may include that women spend more time with their patients, are more patient-centred in their approach and provide more evidence-based care. Two recent opinion pieces discuss research showing that female representation on corporate boards, such as hospital boards, results in more socially thoughtful decisions and less corruption. Without gender equity, we risk extinguishing creative solutions to complex health problems and, most importantly, limiting patient access to the best care. 


    From: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8034331/ CMAJ. 2021 Feb 16; 193(7): E244–E250.

    Based on the text, mark the statements below as true (T) or false (F).


    ( ) Gender inequity in medical leadership is due to few women who want to take leading positions.


    ( ) Difference between genders has little effect when disciplining transgressive attitudes at work.


    ( ) Women physicians have been found to improve the quality of health care services.


    The statements are, respectively,

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão fa75747c-73
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the advertisement.

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, Ensino Einstein 2022, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension


    The advertisement uses text and the image of two women astronauts in spacesuits to suggest that both the bath oil “Skin-So-Soft” and the suit

    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão bffb7e12-68
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text to answer question
    Imagem da questão de Inglês, Ensino Einstein 2022, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

        In the late 1960s, following the Apollo 11 Moon landings, the three astronauts were waiting to be picked up inside their capsule floating in the Pacific Ocean — and they were hot and uncomfortable. NASA officials decided to make things more pleasant for their three national heroes. The downside? There was a small possibility of unleashing deadly alien microbes on Earth.
        When humanity first made plans to send probes and people into space in the mid-20th Century, the issue of contamination came up. Firstly, there was the fear of “forward” contamination — the possibility that Earth-based life might accidentally hitch a ride into the cosmos. Spacecraft needed to be sterilised and carefully packaged before launch. If microbes silently moved onboard, it would confuse any attempts to detect alien life. And if there were extra-terrestrial organisms out there, we might end up inadvertently killing them with Earth-based bacteria or viruses. These concerns matter just as much today as they did back in the Space Race era.
       A second concern was “back” contamination. This was the idea that astronauts, rockets or probes returning to Earth might bring back life that could prove catastrophic, either by consuming all our oxygen or outcompeting Earth organisms. What if the astronauts brought back something dangerous? At the time, the probability was not considered high, but still, the scenario had to be explored. “Maybe it’s sure to 99% that Apollo 11 will not bring back lunar organisms,” said one influential scientist at the time, “but even that 1% of uncertainty is too large to be complacent about.”
        NASA put several quarantine measures in place — in some cases, a little reluctantly. Concerned officials from the US Public Health Service argued for stricter measures than initially planned, pointing out that they had the power to refuse border entry to contaminated astronauts. NASA then agreed to install a costly quarantine facility on the ship that would pick up the men from their splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. It was also agreed that the lunar explorers would then spend three weeks in isolation before they could hug their families or shake the hand of the president.

    (Richard Fisher. www.bbc.com, 18.02.2021. Adapted.)
    According to the third and fourth paragraphs, the disputes over the potential risks posed by the return of Apollo 11 from outer space were eventually settled as follows:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão bff8c262-68
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text to answer question
    Imagem da questão de Inglês, Ensino Einstein 2022, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

        In the late 1960s, following the Apollo 11 Moon landings, the three astronauts were waiting to be picked up inside their capsule floating in the Pacific Ocean — and they were hot and uncomfortable. NASA officials decided to make things more pleasant for their three national heroes. The downside? There was a small possibility of unleashing deadly alien microbes on Earth.
        When humanity first made plans to send probes and people into space in the mid-20th Century, the issue of contamination came up. Firstly, there was the fear of “forward” contamination — the possibility that Earth-based life might accidentally hitch a ride into the cosmos. Spacecraft needed to be sterilised and carefully packaged before launch. If microbes silently moved onboard, it would confuse any attempts to detect alien life. And if there were extra-terrestrial organisms out there, we might end up inadvertently killing them with Earth-based bacteria or viruses. These concerns matter just as much today as they did back in the Space Race era.
       A second concern was “back” contamination. This was the idea that astronauts, rockets or probes returning to Earth might bring back life that could prove catastrophic, either by consuming all our oxygen or outcompeting Earth organisms. What if the astronauts brought back something dangerous? At the time, the probability was not considered high, but still, the scenario had to be explored. “Maybe it’s sure to 99% that Apollo 11 will not bring back lunar organisms,” said one influential scientist at the time, “but even that 1% of uncertainty is too large to be complacent about.”
        NASA put several quarantine measures in place — in some cases, a little reluctantly. Concerned officials from the US Public Health Service argued for stricter measures than initially planned, pointing out that they had the power to refuse border entry to contaminated astronauts. NASA then agreed to install a costly quarantine facility on the ship that would pick up the men from their splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. It was also agreed that the lunar explorers would then spend three weeks in isolation before they could hug their families or shake the hand of the president.

    (Richard Fisher. www.bbc.com, 18.02.2021. Adapted.)
    In the second paragraph, “‘forward’ contamination” is explained as contamination which
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão bff62b3a-68
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text to answer question
    Imagem da questão de Inglês, Ensino Einstein 2022, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

        In the late 1960s, following the Apollo 11 Moon landings, the three astronauts were waiting to be picked up inside their capsule floating in the Pacific Ocean — and they were hot and uncomfortable. NASA officials decided to make things more pleasant for their three national heroes. The downside? There was a small possibility of unleashing deadly alien microbes on Earth.
        When humanity first made plans to send probes and people into space in the mid-20th Century, the issue of contamination came up. Firstly, there was the fear of “forward” contamination — the possibility that Earth-based life might accidentally hitch a ride into the cosmos. Spacecraft needed to be sterilised and carefully packaged before launch. If microbes silently moved onboard, it would confuse any attempts to detect alien life. And if there were extra-terrestrial organisms out there, we might end up inadvertently killing them with Earth-based bacteria or viruses. These concerns matter just as much today as they did back in the Space Race era.
       A second concern was “back” contamination. This was the idea that astronauts, rockets or probes returning to Earth might bring back life that could prove catastrophic, either by consuming all our oxygen or outcompeting Earth organisms. What if the astronauts brought back something dangerous? At the time, the probability was not considered high, but still, the scenario had to be explored. “Maybe it’s sure to 99% that Apollo 11 will not bring back lunar organisms,” said one influential scientist at the time, “but even that 1% of uncertainty is too large to be complacent about.”
        NASA put several quarantine measures in place — in some cases, a little reluctantly. Concerned officials from the US Public Health Service argued for stricter measures than initially planned, pointing out that they had the power to refuse border entry to contaminated astronauts. NASA then agreed to install a costly quarantine facility on the ship that would pick up the men from their splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. It was also agreed that the lunar explorers would then spend three weeks in isolation before they could hug their families or shake the hand of the president.

    (Richard Fisher. www.bbc.com, 18.02.2021. Adapted.)
    The first paragraph mentions
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão bff3a85b-68
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Read the text to answer question
    Imagem da questão de Inglês, Ensino Einstein 2022, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension

        In the late 1960s, following the Apollo 11 Moon landings, the three astronauts were waiting to be picked up inside their capsule floating in the Pacific Ocean — and they were hot and uncomfortable. NASA officials decided to make things more pleasant for their three national heroes. The downside? There was a small possibility of unleashing deadly alien microbes on Earth.
        When humanity first made plans to send probes and people into space in the mid-20th Century, the issue of contamination came up. Firstly, there was the fear of “forward” contamination — the possibility that Earth-based life might accidentally hitch a ride into the cosmos. Spacecraft needed to be sterilised and carefully packaged before launch. If microbes silently moved onboard, it would confuse any attempts to detect alien life. And if there were extra-terrestrial organisms out there, we might end up inadvertently killing them with Earth-based bacteria or viruses. These concerns matter just as much today as they did back in the Space Race era.
       A second concern was “back” contamination. This was the idea that astronauts, rockets or probes returning to Earth might bring back life that could prove catastrophic, either by consuming all our oxygen or outcompeting Earth organisms. What if the astronauts brought back something dangerous? At the time, the probability was not considered high, but still, the scenario had to be explored. “Maybe it’s sure to 99% that Apollo 11 will not bring back lunar organisms,” said one influential scientist at the time, “but even that 1% of uncertainty is too large to be complacent about.”
        NASA put several quarantine measures in place — in some cases, a little reluctantly. Concerned officials from the US Public Health Service argued for stricter measures than initially planned, pointing out that they had the power to refuse border entry to contaminated astronauts. NASA then agreed to install a costly quarantine facility on the ship that would pick up the men from their splashdown in the Pacific Ocean. It was also agreed that the lunar explorers would then spend three weeks in isolation before they could hug their families or shake the hand of the president.

    (Richard Fisher. www.bbc.com, 18.02.2021. Adapted.)
    The text discusses
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão bff11c3c-68
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Leia a tira para responder à questão.



    Imagem da questão de Inglês, UNESP 2021, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension



    (https://thebrickinthesky.wordpress.com)

    No trecho do primeiro quadrinho “I guess we should start it over again”, o termo sublinhado pode ser substituído, sem alteração de sentido, por 
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 22121d06-8b
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Leia a tira para responder à questão.



    Imagem da questão de Inglês, UNESP 2021, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension



    (https://thebrickinthesky.wordpress.com)

    From the comic strip, one can say that
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 220f6884-8b
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

    Examine os mapas que apresentam a média de anos de escolaridade para a população de 25 anos ou mais, do ano 2000 e do ano 2017, para responder à questão.


    Mean years of schooling, 2000

    Imagem da questão de Inglês, UNESP 2021, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension



    (https://ourworldindata.org. Adapted.)
    After comparing both maps, one can say that:
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 220cdaf9-8b
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

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


    Educated Americans live longer, as others die younger


    Imagem da questão de Inglês, UNESP 2021, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension


    (Anne Case and Angus Deaton. “Life expectancy in adulthood is falling for those without a BA degree, but as educational gaps have widened, racial gaps have narrowed”. PNAS, 2021. Adaptado.)


       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.) 
    No trecho do terceiro parágrafo “The better-educated earn more, which in turn is associated with”, a expressão sublinhada equivale, em português, a
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 220a61a8-8b
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

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


    Educated Americans live longer, as others die younger


    Imagem da questão de Inglês, UNESP 2021, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension


    (Anne Case and Angus Deaton. “Life expectancy in adulthood is falling for those without a BA degree, but as educational gaps have widened, racial gaps have narrowed”. PNAS, 2021. Adaptado.)


       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.) 
    According to the third paragraph, better-educated people
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 220801fc-8b
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

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


    Educated Americans live longer, as others die younger


    Imagem da questão de Inglês, UNESP 2021, Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension


    (Anne Case and Angus Deaton. “Life expectancy in adulthood is falling for those without a BA degree, but as educational gaps have widened, racial gaps have narrowed”. PNAS, 2021. Adaptado.)


       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.) 
    No trecho do segundo parágrafo “while that of other Americans got shorter”, o termo sublinhado refere-se a
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 2204d619-8b
  • Linguagens

    Inglês

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


    Educated Americans live longer, as others die younger


    Imagem da questão de Inglês, UNESP 2021, Vocabulário | Vocabulary


    (Anne Case and Angus Deaton. “Life expectancy in adulthood is falling for those without a BA degree, but as educational gaps have widened, racial gaps have narrowed”. PNAS, 2021. Adaptado.)


       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.) 
    In the excerpt from the first paragraph “and, strikingly, even fell between 2015 and 2017”, the underlined word means 
    Escolha uma alternativa para a questão 220259a5-8b