Texto 3
The lessons Italy has learned about its COVID-19 outbreak could help the rest of the world
Only carefully conducted epidemiological studies will bring to light exactly how and why COVID-19 took off in northern Italy with such speed. But in the midst of the emergency, experts say there are already lessons to be gleaned from Italy's fatal errors — and urgent messages for other parts of the world.
"The biggest mistake we made was to admit patients infected with COVID-19 into hospitals throughout the region," said Carlo Borghetti, the vice- premier of Lombardy, an economically crucial region with a population of 10 million.
"We should have immediately set up separate structures exclusively for people sick with coronavirus. I recommend the rest of the world do this, to not send COVID patients into health-care facilities that are still uninfected."
Already, Italian cities in other regions are doing this, as well as field hospitals in Milan and Bergamo, Lombardy, which are almost complete.
However, the virus was not only spread to "clean" — i.e. infection-free — hospitals by admitting positive patients. In early March, as the number of infected was doubling every few days, authorities allowed overwhelmed hospitals to transfer those who tested positive but weren't gravely ill into assistedliving facilities for the elderly.
"It was like throwing a lit match onto a haystack," said Borghetti, who spoke out against the directive at the time. "Some facilities refused to take in the positive patients. For those that did [take them in], it was devastating."
Along with the tragic misstep of putting infected people under the same roof as clusters of the most physically vulnerable, Borghetti and others point to a deeper structural factor that accelerated the outbreak in northern Italy: a highly centralized health-care system with large hospitals as its focus.
From: shorturl.at/cMRTW. Accesses on 04/09/2020
A) Foi uma decisão acertada.
B) Todos os abrigos cederam espaço para os pacientes.
C) Foi uma decisão desastrosa.
D) Apenas os abrigos do norte da Itália se recusaram receber os pacientes.
E) Foi uma decisão seguida por outros países.
Texto 3
The lessons Italy has learned about its COVID-19 outbreak could help the rest of the world
Only carefully conducted epidemiological studies will bring to light exactly how and why COVID-19 took off in northern Italy with such speed. But in the midst of the emergency, experts say there are already lessons to be gleaned from Italy's fatal errors — and urgent messages for other parts of the world.
"The biggest mistake we made was to admit patients infected with COVID-19 into hospitals throughout the region," said Carlo Borghetti, the vice- premier of Lombardy, an economically crucial region with a population of 10 million.
"We should have immediately set up separate structures exclusively for people sick with coronavirus. I recommend the rest of the world do this, to not send COVID patients into health-care facilities that are still uninfected."
Already, Italian cities in other regions are doing this, as well as field hospitals in Milan and Bergamo, Lombardy, which are almost complete.
However, the virus was not only spread to "clean" — i.e. infection-free — hospitals by admitting positive patients. In early March, as the number of infected was doubling every few days, authorities allowed overwhelmed hospitals to transfer those who tested positive but weren't gravely ill into assistedliving facilities for the elderly.
"It was like throwing a lit match onto a haystack," said Borghetti, who spoke out against the directive at the time. "Some facilities refused to take in the positive patients. For those that did [take them in], it was devastating."
Along with the tragic misstep of putting infected people under the same roof as clusters of the most physically vulnerable, Borghetti and others point to a deeper structural factor that accelerated the outbreak in northern Italy: a highly centralized health-care system with large hospitals as its focus.
From: shorturl.at/cMRTW. Accesses on 04/09/2020
A) Separar unidades hospitalares para tratar exclusivamente de pacientes com a COVID-19 de modo que eles não fiquem junto a pacientes não infectados.
B) Usar hospitais privados exclusivamente para pacientes com sintomas graves da COVID-19.
C) Enfatizar ações de prevenções para evitar a propagação descontrolada do vírus pelo país.
D) Criar um sistema de saúde único para facilitar a troca de informações sobre leitos disponíveis para internação de pacientes infectados pelo corona vírus.
E) Transferir pacientes da COVID-19 com sintomas leves para regiões do país com menos idosos e com poucos casos da doença.
Texto 2
Boris Johnson should have taken his own medicine - The British prime minister tested positive for Covid-19 and went into isolation, but not before doing untold damage and setting a bad example.
Boris Johnson, the prime minister of Britain, on Friday announced that he had tested positive for the coronavirus. In a brief video released on Twitter, he shared the basics: Having developed “mild symptoms — that’s to say, a temperature and a persistent cough” — he underwent testing and received the bad news. He will now be “selfisolating” until the illness has run its course.
Looking mostly healthy, if typically disheveled, Mr. Johnson stressed that he would continue to “lead the national fightback” from his home via teleconferencing. He urged the British public to abide by the three-week lockdown put into place on Monday.
The more effectively people stick with social distancing, the faster the nation and its National Health Service (N.H.S.) will “bounce back,” he said, before closing with the plea, “Stay at home, protect the N.H.S and save lives.” It was a responsible, no- drama message. If only the prime minister had displayed such leadership sooner, he — and who knows how many others — might have been spared this illness.
From: shorturl.at/dKV23. Accessed on 03/27/2020
A) estava abatido, se emocionou bastante e pediu orações aos Britânicos.
B) não conseguiu completar o anúncio devido a suas condições de saúde.
C) não orientou a população a ficar em casa.
D) afirmou que iria continuar trabalhando mesmo em isolamento.
E) falou da crise econômica em vez de soluções para amenizar a contaminação do corona vírus.
Texto 2
Boris Johnson should have taken his own medicine - The British prime minister tested positive for Covid-19 and went into isolation, but not before doing untold damage and setting a bad example.
Boris Johnson, the prime minister of Britain, on Friday announced that he had tested positive for the coronavirus. In a brief video released on Twitter, he shared the basics: Having developed “mild symptoms — that’s to say, a temperature and a persistent cough” — he underwent testing and received the bad news. He will now be “selfisolating” until the illness has run its course.
Looking mostly healthy, if typically disheveled, Mr. Johnson stressed that he would continue to “lead the national fightback” from his home via teleconferencing. He urged the British public to abide by the three-week lockdown put into place on Monday.
The more effectively people stick with social distancing, the faster the nation and its National Health Service (N.H.S.) will “bounce back,” he said, before closing with the plea, “Stay at home, protect the N.H.S and save lives.” It was a responsible, no- drama message. If only the prime minister had displayed such leadership sooner, he — and who knows how many others — might have been spared this illness.
From: shorturl.at/dKV23. Accessed on 03/27/2020
A) A proteção do serviço de saúde.
B) A garantia do equilíbrio econômico da Inglaterra.
C) A proteção dos recursos naturais do país.
D) A preparação dos cidadãos para uma pandemia global.
E) O cuidado com as crianças e com os idosos.
Texto 2
Boris Johnson should have taken his own medicine - The British prime minister tested positive for Covid-19 and went into isolation, but not before doing untold damage and setting a bad example.
Boris Johnson, the prime minister of Britain, on Friday announced that he had tested positive for the coronavirus. In a brief video released on Twitter, he shared the basics: Having developed “mild symptoms — that’s to say, a temperature and a persistent cough” — he underwent testing and received the bad news. He will now be “selfisolating” until the illness has run its course.
Looking mostly healthy, if typically disheveled, Mr. Johnson stressed that he would continue to “lead the national fightback” from his home via teleconferencing. He urged the British public to abide by the three-week lockdown put into place on Monday.
The more effectively people stick with social distancing, the faster the nation and its National Health Service (N.H.S.) will “bounce back,” he said, before closing with the plea, “Stay at home, protect the N.H.S and save lives.” It was a responsible, no- drama message. If only the prime minister had displayed such leadership sooner, he — and who knows how many others — might have been spared this illness.
From: shorturl.at/dKV23. Accessed on 03/27/2020
A) Foi precipitado, pois havia poucos infectados na Inglaterra.
B) Foi impensado, pois a população não teve tempo de ser programar para o isolamento.
C) Poderia ter sido decretado antes para evitar que mais pessoas tivessem sido infectadas.
D) Não surtiu efeito, pois os parques das cidades ficaram cheios de pessoas se exercitando.
E) Boris Johnson antecipou-se e tomou todas as precauções para proteger a população britânica.
Texto 2
Boris Johnson should have taken his own medicine - The British prime minister tested positive for Covid-19 and went into isolation, but not before doing untold damage and setting a bad example.
Boris Johnson, the prime minister of Britain, on Friday announced that he had tested positive for the coronavirus. In a brief video released on Twitter, he shared the basics: Having developed “mild symptoms — that’s to say, a temperature and a persistent cough” — he underwent testing and received the bad news. He will now be “selfisolating” until the illness has run its course.
Looking mostly healthy, if typically disheveled, Mr. Johnson stressed that he would continue to “lead the national fightback” from his home via teleconferencing. He urged the British public to abide by the three-week lockdown put into place on Monday.
The more effectively people stick with social distancing, the faster the nation and its National Health Service (N.H.S.) will “bounce back,” he said, before closing with the plea, “Stay at home, protect the N.H.S and save lives.” It was a responsible, no- drama message. If only the prime minister had displayed such leadership sooner, he — and who knows how many others — might have been spared this illness.
From: shorturl.at/dKV23. Accessed on 03/27/2020
A) Pediu para as pessoas irem trabalhar normalmente.
B) Não se isolou, pois não apresentou sintomas fortes da COVID-19.
C) Sempre acreditou na mortalidade do corona vírus.
D) Solicitou que um porta-voz informasse sobre seu estado de saúde.
E) Deu ele mesmo a notícia de que estava infectado pelo corona vírus.
Texto 1
Part of President Obama’s Speech at Rutgers Commencement 2016
Facts, evidence, reason, logic, an understanding of science — these are good things. These are qualities you want in people making policy. These are qualities you want to continue to cultivate in yourselves as citizens. That might seem obvious. That’s why we honor Bill Moyers or Dr. Burnell. We traditionally have valued those things. But if you were listening to today’s political debate, you might wonder where this strain of anti-intellectualism came from.
So, Class of 2016, let me be as clear as I can be. In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue. It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. That’s not keeping it real, or telling it like it is. That’s not challenging political correctness. That’s just not knowing what you’re talking about.
You know, it’s interesting that if we get sick, we actually want to make sure the doctors have gone to medical school, they know what they’re talking about. If we get on a plane, we say we really want a pilot to be able to pilot the plane. The rejection of facts, the rejection of reason and science — that is the path to decline.
From: shorturl.at/deAIX. Accessed on 04/01/2020
A) Não é formidável não ter conhecimento sobre o que se fala.
B) Líderes políticos não devem espalhar mentiras baseadas em suas impressões pessoais.
C) Políticos precisam respeitar a ciência, a razão, a lógica, os fatos e as evidências.
D) Muitas vezes é preciso desconsiderar evidências e fatos para o benefício da sociedade.
E) O debate político mencionado por Obama mostrou o crescimento anti-intelectualismo.
Texto 1
Part of President Obama’s Speech at Rutgers Commencement 2016
Facts, evidence, reason, logic, an understanding of science — these are good things. These are qualities you want in people making policy. These are qualities you want to continue to cultivate in yourselves as citizens. That might seem obvious. That’s why we honor Bill Moyers or Dr. Burnell. We traditionally have valued those things. But if you were listening to today’s political debate, you might wonder where this strain of anti-intellectualism came from.
So, Class of 2016, let me be as clear as I can be. In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue. It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. That’s not keeping it real, or telling it like it is. That’s not challenging political correctness. That’s just not knowing what you’re talking about.
You know, it’s interesting that if we get sick, we actually want to make sure the doctors have gone to medical school, they know what they’re talking about. If we get on a plane, we say we really want a pilot to be able to pilot the plane. The rejection of facts, the rejection of reason and science — that is the path to decline.
From: shorturl.at/deAIX. Accessed on 04/01/2020
A) eles são responsabilizados judicialmente.
B) eles são apoiados pela população e pela mídia.
C) eles são vaiados ao se pronunciarem.
D) eles são especialistas em ciência.
E) eles não sofrem punição judicial.
Texto 1
Part of President Obama’s Speech at Rutgers Commencement 2016
Facts, evidence, reason, logic, an understanding of science — these are good things. These are qualities you want in people making policy. These are qualities you want to continue to cultivate in yourselves as citizens. That might seem obvious. That’s why we honor Bill Moyers or Dr. Burnell. We traditionally have valued those things. But if you were listening to today’s political debate, you might wonder where this strain of anti-intellectualism came from.
So, Class of 2016, let me be as clear as I can be. In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue. It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. That’s not keeping it real, or telling it like it is. That’s not challenging political correctness. That’s just not knowing what you’re talking about.
You know, it’s interesting that if we get sick, we actually want to make sure the doctors have gone to medical school, they know what they’re talking about. If we get on a plane, we say we really want a pilot to be able to pilot the plane. The rejection of facts, the rejection of reason and science — that is the path to decline.
From: shorturl.at/deAIX. Accessed on 04/01/2020
A) a importância do conhecimento intuitivo das pessoas.
B) o desdém que devem ter pelo conhecimento intuitivo das pessoas.
C) o perigo de desdenhar dos fatos, da razão e da ciência
D) não acreditarem em políticos sem formação acadêmica.
E) como rejeitarem os fatos e confiarem em suas opiniões pessoais.
A) Listen to the other person so that you understand their point of view.
B) Remain calm and make sure to talk one at a time.
C) Come together with the person you are having conflict with.
D) Agree to come up with sensible solutions you both can accept.
E) Brainstorm solutions to resolve your conflict together.
{TITLE}