ARTICLE · 1044007
雅思阅读精读|考场真题Part2: Will Eating Less Make You Live Longer 节食与长寿
上期我们留的表达是：
draw on 借鉴；利用（经验、知识、研究等）
参考答案：
Researchers can draw on previous studies to design better experiments.
研究人员可以借鉴以往研究来设计更好的实验。
常见错误：❌ draw previous studies✅ draw on previous studies表达“借鉴、利用”时，on不能省略；后面接经验、知识、研究等资源。
好，今天继续精读 ↓
Will Eating Less Make You Live Longer?｜节食与长寿
The latest in a conflicting series of studies suggests calorie restriction could potentially slow ageing in humans
Reading Passage 2｜（考场真题）
Questions 14–19：段落信息匹配题
Questions 20–23：人名匹配
Questions 24–26：summary填空题
建议：先限时20m完成整篇，再回来一起逐段精读。
两项研究结果不一致 → 回看相同的30%热量削减 → 发现对照组摄入量与食物组成不同 → 三位研究者给出解释 → 明确共同点，并合作研究寿命问题。
阅读抓住三个区别：更健康 ≠ 更长寿；相同比例 ≠ 相同基准；某位研究者的判断 ≠ 两项研究的共同结论。
Calorie restriction, or ‘semi-starvation’ as some refer to it, has been proven to extend lifespan in many living organisms from yeast to mice, but the picture for primates, including humans, is not so clear. Research published by a team at the University of Wisconsin in the United States shows that rhesus monkeys also live longer on a calorie-restricted diet. But those findings disagree with research by the National Institute on Aging (NIA) in Maryland, also in the United States. Rozalyn Anderson, of the Wisconsin team, says the research is not intended as a recommendation of calorie restriction. ‘I find the idea monumentally unattractive!’ she says. ‘We study it because it is so effective at delaying ageing and the onset of age-related disease. It’s a way to tease out what it is that creates increased disease vulnerability as a function of age.’
段落大意：限制热量对一些生物的寿命有影响，但灵长类研究存在分歧；Anderson把它当作研究衰老的工具，而非饮食推荐。
calorie restriction 热量限制；限制摄入的能量。
extend lifespan 延长寿命。
primates 灵长类动物。
rhesus monkeys 恒河猴。
be intended as 旨在作为；意在成为。
monumentally unattractive 极其没有吸引力的。
the onset of ……的开始／发生。
tease out 细致地梳理、弄清。
vulnerability 易受影响性；此处指患病的易感性。
研究某种方法，不等于推荐大家采用它。
原文先用but the picture … is not so clear缩小结论范围：酵母、小鼠的结果，不能直接变成对灵长类的确定结论。
I find the idea monumentally unattractive!表达Anderson对亲自采用这种饮食方式的负面态度。
We study it because …解释的是研究价值：延缓衰老与相关疾病的发生，帮助弄清年龄增长与疾病易感性之间的关系。
两句话并不矛盾。解题时把“个人愿不愿意采用”和“为什么研究它”分开。
Q18｜A
定位证据： I find the idea monumentally unattractive!
negative opinion对应monumentally unattractive。研究者是Rozalyn Anderson；她不愿采用这种饮食，并不妨碍她认可其研究价值。
Q22｜A
定位证据： It’s a way to tease out what it is that creates increased disease vulnerability as a function of age.
选人物A：Rozalyn Anderson。a method of finding out对应a way to tease out；health issues connected with ageing对应随年龄增加的疾病易感性。此题问研究目的，而不是对饮食是否喜爱的态度。
热量限制——有些人称之为“半饥饿”——已被证实能够延长许多生物的寿命，从酵母到小鼠都是如此，但对包括人类在内的灵长类动物来说，情况并不那么明确。美国威斯康星大学一个团队发表的研究显示，恒河猴采用限制热量的饮食也能活得更久。但这些发现与同样位于美国、地处马里兰州的国家老龄化研究所（NIA）的研究不一致。威斯康星团队的Rozalyn Anderson表示，这项研究并不是在推荐限制热量。“我觉得这个想法极其没有吸引力！”她说，“我们研究它，是因为它在延缓衰老和年龄相关疾病的发生方面非常有效。这是一种弄清究竟是什么使疾病易感性随年龄增加而上升的方法。”
Both groups started long-term trials on rhesus monkeys in the late 1980s to determine whether calorie restriction would extend the lifespan of primates. In mice, many experiments had come to the same finding: feed them a diet with 30% fewer calories and see a lifespan extension of 40%. The monkey trials were set up in a similar way: researchers took the calorie content of a standard monkey diet, cut it by 30% (while continuing to supply all essential nutrients) and monitored whether those monkeys lived longer, healthier lives than those on the standard diet.
段落大意：两组团队从20世纪80年代末开始猴子试验，借鉴小鼠实验，将饮食热量减少30%，同时保证必需营养素。
long-term trials 长期试验。
determine whether 确定是否……。
a lifespan extension 寿命的延长。
be set up 被设置／建立。
calorie content 热量含量。
cut … by 30% 把……减少30%。
essential nutrients 必需营养素。
monitor 监测；持续观察。
两个百分比，指向两件事。
30% fewer calories：小鼠饮食热量的减少幅度。
a lifespan extension of 40%：文中所述小鼠实验中寿命的延长幅度。
The monkey trials were set up in a similar way把猴子试验与前面的小鼠实验连接起来；similar指都采用30%的热量削减，不是说猴子寿命也延长了40%。
while continuing to supply all essential nutrients说明营养供应仍得到保证。不要把实验条件简化成“随便少吃30%”。
Q14｜B
定位证据： The monkey trials were set up in a similar way
前文小鼠饮食减少30%热量，随后猴子试验也cut it by 30%。same level对应相同削减比例；different animals对应mice与monkeys。40%是小鼠寿命增幅，不是热量减少比例。
两组团队都在20世纪80年代末开始对恒河猴进行长期试验，以确定限制热量是否会延长灵长类动物的寿命。在小鼠身上，许多实验都得出了同样的发现：让它们的饮食热量减少30%，便能观察到寿命延长40%。猴子试验采用了类似的设置：研究人员以标准猴子饮食的热量为基础，将其减少30%（同时继续提供全部必需营养素），并监测这些猴子是否比采用标准饮食的猴子活得更久、更健康。
In 2009, with the monkeys approaching old age, preliminary findings of the two trials started coming in. For the Wisconsin monkeys, calorie restriction seemed to be working. Compared to well-fed control animals, the lean monkeys were living longer and suffering less from the diseases of ageing: diabetes, heart disease and brain diseases. However, in 2012 the NIA results emerged with a dramatically different conclusion: their monkeys were not living any longer than the controls, although they were healthier.
段落大意：威斯康星研究观察到猴子更健康且寿命更长；NIA研究则发现猴子更健康，但寿命没有延长。
approach old age 接近老年。
preliminary findings 初步发现。
control animals 对照组动物。
lean 瘦的；脂肪少的。
suffer less from 较少遭受……。
diabetes 糖尿病。
emerge 出现；显现。
a dramatically different conclusion 截然不同的结论。
although后面的让步，不能覆盖主句的否定。
their monkeys were not living any longer than the controls, although they were healthier.
主句：这些猴子并没有比对照组活得更久。
让步：尽管它们更健康。
Wisconsin：更长寿＋更少患病；NIA：更少患病，但没有更长寿。两组分歧在寿命，不是在所有健康指标上都相反。
冒号后diabetes, heart disease and brain diseases列出具体病种，正是信息匹配中examples的典型落点。
Q17｜C
定位证据： diabetes, heart disease and brain diseases
题目要健康问题的具体例子，不只是“疾病减少”。冒号后列出糖尿病、心脏病、脑部疾病；suffering less from对应less likely to get。I段虽也提fewer diseases，却没有列举病种。
2009年，随着猴子接近老年，两项试验的初步结果开始陆续出现。对威斯康星研究中的猴子而言，限制热量似乎起了作用。与进食充足的对照组动物相比，较瘦的猴子活得更久，也较少患上衰老相关疾病：糖尿病、心脏病和脑部疾病。然而，2012年公布的NIA结果得出了截然不同的结论：尽管它们的猴子更健康，却并没有比对照组活得更久。
The Wisconsin group’s latest results confirm that their calorie-restricted monkeys are living longer than the controls. They also offer a possible explanation of why the two groups’ findings don’t agree, and that lies in the treatment of the control group. The Wisconsin study began with monkeys in early adulthood. Initially, all the monkeys were allowed to eat as much as they liked. A few months into the trial, the monkeys were placed into one of two groups: the controls (who continued to be fed as much as they wished) and the calorie-restricted monkeys (who were given an individualised diet of 30% less than they were previously eating).
段落大意：威斯康星团队认为差异可能来自对照组设置：成年早期的猴子先自由进食，再分为继续自由进食与按个体原摄入量减少30%的两组。
confirm 证实；确认。
lie in 在于……。
the treatment of 对……的处理／安排；此处不是治疗疾病。
control group 对照组。
early adulthood 成年早期。
initially 最初。
as much as they liked 想吃多少就吃多少。
individualised 个体化的。
先看起点，再看分组。
The Wisconsin study began with monkeys in early adulthood.回答“猴子处于哪个人生阶段”，不是“研究在哪一年开始”。
Initially：所有猴子自由进食。
A few months into the trial：一组继续自由进食；另一组在自己先前摄入量的基础上减少30%。
than they were previously eating限定比较基准。individualised也提醒我们，这不是每只猴子都吃完全相同的热量。
Q19｜D
定位证据： The Wisconsin study began with monkeys in early adulthood.
commenced对应began；the stage in the monkeys’ lives对应early adulthood。B段late 1980s说的是日历年代，不是猴子的生命阶段。
威斯康星团队的最新结果确认，他们限制热量的猴子比对照组活得更久。他们还对两组研究结果为何不一致提出了一种可能的解释，关键在于对照组的处理方式。威斯康星研究开始时，猴子正处于成年早期。最初，所有猴子都可以想吃多少就吃多少。试验进行几个月后，猴子被分入两组之一：对照组（继续按自己的意愿进食）和限制热量组（采用个体化饮食，比各自先前的摄入量少30%）。
The NIA study differed in two ways. First, the control group of monkeys were not allowed to eat as much as they wished. They were given a diet considered to represent a normal calorie count, while the calorie-restricted monkeys were fed 30% less than that. Second, whereas the Wisconsin monkeys were given highly processed food high in sucrose, making it easy to standardise, the NIA diet was based on whole grains, fish oils, and was very low in sugar. These different settings for the normal control diet may provide an explanation of why the two groups showed different results.
段落大意：NIA对照组本身就有限定摄入量，而且食物低糖、以全谷物和鱼油为基础；这些差异可能影响两项研究的结果。
differ in 在……方面不同。
a normal calorie count 正常的热量摄入量。
whereas 而；却，用于对照。
highly processed food 高度加工食品。
sucrose 蔗糖。
standardise 使标准化。
whole grains 全谷物。
be based on 以……为基础。
First与Second，是两条独立差异。
First：NIA对照组不是想吃多少就吃多少，而是吃研究者认为正常的热量；限制组在这个基准上再减30%。
Second：Wisconsin用高蔗糖的高度加工食品，NIA以全谷物、鱼油为基础且含糖量很低。
whereas把第二条差异中的两种食物设置直接对照。Q16问types of food，应优先锁定Second，而不是只找到30%就停。
may provide an explanation保留了可能性；这是对结果差异的解释，不等于已经排除了所有其他原因。
Q16｜E
定位证据： the NIA diet was based on whole grains, fish oils, and was very low in sugar.
Second引出食物组成差异：Wisconsin是高蔗糖的高度加工食品，NIA以全谷物、鱼油为基础且低糖。段尾different settings … different results把食物差异与结果不同连接起来，完整对应题意。
NIA研究在两个方面有所不同。首先，对照组猴子并不能想吃多少就吃多少。它们得到的饮食被认为代表正常的热量摄入量，而限制热量组猴子的摄入量则比这一标准少30%。其次，威斯康星的猴子吃的是蔗糖含量高、便于标准化的高度加工食品，而NIA的饮食以全谷物、鱼油为基础，含糖量很低。对于正常对照饮食的这些不同设置，或许可以解释为什么两组研究得出了不同结果。
The Wisconsin group may in effect have studied the effects of ‘overeating’. Their control animals weighed up to 10% more than average for their age and gender. Compared to them, the calorie-restricted animals not only suffered fewer diseases, they lived longer. Julie Mattison, head of the NIA study, observes that an overweight person who goes to a fast food restaurant every day will obviously benefit if their calories are cut back by 30%.
段落大意：威斯康星对照组偏重，因此限制组的优势也可能是在纠正过量进食；Mattison用超重且常吃快餐的人作类比。
in effect 实际上；实质上。
overeating 过量进食。
up to 多达；最高达到。
compared to 与……相比。
overweight 超重的。
observe that 指出；评论说。
benefit 获益。
cut back 减少；削减。
这里质疑的是“相对于谁”的好处。
The Wisconsin group may in effect have studied the effects of ‘overeating’.
may … have studied表示对已开展研究的一种可能解释：对照组比同年龄、同性别平均体重高出最多10%，限制组的优势可能与这个偏高基准有关。
Mattison的例子限定了overweight和每天吃快餐这两个条件。题目把它概括成people who have unhealthy diets。
不要将这个类比扩展成“任何人只要减少30%热量都一定获益”；那超出了她在此处的表述。
Q23｜B
定位证据： an overweight person who goes to a fast food restaurant every day will obviously benefit if their calories are cut back by 30%.
选人物B：Julie Mattison。unhealthy diets概括每天吃快餐；positive effect对应benefit；calorie reduction对应calories are cut back。保留超重、快餐的语境，不扩大为所有人。
威斯康星团队实际上可能研究的是“过量进食”的影响。他们的对照组动物比相同年龄和性别的平均体重高出最多10%。与这些动物相比，限制热量的动物不仅患病更少，而且活得更久。NIA研究负责人Julie Mattison指出，一个每天都去快餐店的超重者，如果热量摄入减少30%，显然会从中受益。
The NIA study fed their control monkeys what they considered a ‘standard’ caloric intake and saw that longevity for monkeys that were fed 30% less was the same. But in Anderson’s view, the NIA control monkeys were not fed enough; the NIA was calorie restricting both groups of animals. Their older female control monkeys, for example, weighed nearly 20% less than the national average. Indeed, Anderson points out that several of the NIA control monkeys have lived past the age of 40, far exceeding the 27-year average lifespan for captive rhesus monkeys. ‘That’s the maximum lifespan ever detected for the species, so the idea that their intervention is doing nothing is really at odds with the data,’ says Anderson.
段落大意：Anderson认为NIA对照组本来就摄入偏少；它们体重偏低、部分寿命很长，因此不能简单说干预没有作用。
caloric intake 热量摄入量。
longevity 长寿；寿命。
in someone’s view 在某人看来。
point out 指出。
far exceed 远远超过。
captive 圈养的。
intervention 干预。
be at odds with 与……不一致／相矛盾。
谁的判断？用in Anderson’s view划清归属。
NIA认为对照组吃的是标准摄入量；Anderson却认为它们已经吃得不够多，所以两组其实都处于热量限制之下。
她举了两类证据：年长雌性对照猴比全国平均体重低近20%；若干对照猴活过40岁，远超圈养恒河猴27岁的平均寿命。
That’s the maximum lifespan …中的That回指前面提到的高龄记录，不是说所有NIA猴子都活过40岁。
be at odds with the data表示“与数据不一致”：她反驳的是干预doing nothing这一解释。
Q15｜G
定位证据： several of the NIA control monkeys have lived past the age of 40, far exceeding the 27-year average lifespan for captive rhesus monkeys.
some control monkeys对应several of the NIA control monkeys；older … than normal对应40岁以上与27岁平均寿命的比较。必须同时看到对照组和年龄比较，不能只凭longer定位。
NIA研究给对照组猴子提供了他们认为“标准”的热量摄入量，并发现少吃30%的猴子寿命与对照组相同。但在Anderson看来，NIA对照组猴子没有得到足够食物；NIA实际上对两组动物都进行了热量限制。例如，较年长的雌性对照组猴子的体重比全国平均值低近20%。事实上，Anderson指出，NIA对照组中有几只猴子已活过40岁，远远超过圈养恒河猴27岁的平均寿命。“这是这个物种有记录以来达到的最高寿命，因此，认为他们的干预毫无作用，确实与数据不一致。”Anderson说。
However, neither group had the right notion of a standard diet according to Leonie Heilbronn, who researches calorie restriction and healthy ageing at the University of Adelaide in Australia. Heilbronn points out that the NIA controls were a very healthy set of monkeys and leaner than a control monkey should be. On the other hand, she notes, the Wisconsin controls were a little bigger than they had to be. On balance, Heilbronn agrees with the Wisconsin researcher’s argument. ‘I think these studies suggest calorie restriction definitely will increase lifespan,’ she says.
段落大意：Heilbronn同时指出NIA对照组偏瘦、威斯康星对照组偏重，但综合来看更赞同限制热量能延长寿命的观点。
notion 概念；理解。
according to 据……所说。
a set of 一组……。
on the other hand 另一方面。
on balance 总的来说；权衡之后。
agree with 同意……。
argument 论点；论证。
definitely 肯定地；明确地。
批评双方设置，不等于最终两边都不支持。
neither group had the right notion of a standard diet：Heilbronn认为两组对于标准饮食的理解都不恰当。
NIA：对照猴比应有的状态更瘦。
Wisconsin：对照猴比必要的状态更大／更重。
On balance引出权衡后的立场：她更赞同Wisconsin研究者的论点。
definitely will increase lifespan是Heilbronn引语中的判断，不能当作两项研究已经共同确认的结论。
Q21｜C
定位证据： neither group had the right notion of a standard diet
选人物C：Leonie Heilbronn。Neither study对应neither group；typical diets对应standard diet。她分别指出NIA偏瘦、Wisconsin偏大，说明批评涉及双方。
然而，在澳大利亚阿德莱德大学研究热量限制与健康衰老的Leonie Heilbronn看来，两组对于标准饮食的理解都不正确。Heilbronn指出，NIA对照组是一群非常健康的猴子，而且比对照猴应有的状态更瘦。另一方面，她注意到，威斯康星对照组的体型又比必要的程度大了一点。综合来看，Heilbronn赞同威斯康星研究者的论点。“我认为，这些研究表明，限制热量肯定会延长寿命。”她说。
Both studies agree that cutting calories is beneficial to health — in both cases the calorie-restricted monkeys had fewer diseases related to ageing. As to the question of whether calorie restriction extends lifespan in primates, Anderson and Mattison are currently working together to compare the two studies’ raw data. They plan to co-publish a joint analysis. The current data conflict will ultimately provide deeper insights into ageing, Anderson predicts. ‘The fact the two studies were set up differently, asking the same question in different ways — I think we will gain maximally from that.’
段落大意：两项研究同意限制热量对健康有益，但寿命问题仍需联合分析；Anderson认为设计差异反而能带来更多认识。
be beneficial to 对……有益。
be related to 与……相关。
as to 至于；关于。
raw data 原始数据。
a joint analysis 联合分析。
data conflict 数据之间的冲突／不一致。
ultimately 最终。
deeper insights into 对……更深入的认识。
段尾不是“分歧消失”，而是“分歧值得继续研究”。
Both studies agree …先交代共同点：限制热量组的猴子较少患上衰老相关疾病。
As to the question of whether …转到仍需比较数据的问题：是否延长灵长类寿命。
The current data conflict …中的conflict是名词；摘要可改成there is a conflict between …。
Anderson最后把set up differently与gain maximally联系起来：不同方法研究同一问题，能够带来更多认识。这是她对研究差异的正面评价。
Q20｜A
定位证据： The fact the two studies were set up differently, asking the same question in different ways — I think we will gain maximally from that.
选人物A：Rozalyn Anderson。dissimilar approaches对应set up differently／different ways；It is good由gain maximally体现。题目问谁赞赏不同研究方法，不是问研究在哪段。
Q24｜ageing
定位证据： the calorie-restricted monkeys had fewer diseases related to ageing.
associated with对应related to；the ageing process表示衰老过程。只填ageing，不填age-related或整串diseases related to ageing。
Q25｜lifespan
定位证据： whether calorie restriction extends lifespan in primates
increases primates’ lifespan对应extends lifespan in primates。空格在所有格之后，需要名词；按原文取lifespan，不把本句改写成“已经证明延寿”。
Q26｜conflict
定位证据： The current data conflict will ultimately provide deeper insights into ageing
a conflict between the two sets of data对应data conflict；reach a better understanding对应provide deeper insights。conflict在这里是单数名词，符合a后的语法，也满足ONE WORD ONLY。
两项研究都认同，减少热量摄入对健康有益——两项研究中，限制热量的猴子患上衰老相关疾病的情况都更少。至于限制热量是否能延长灵长类动物的寿命，Anderson和Mattison目前正合作比较两项研究的原始数据。她们计划共同发表一份联合分析。Anderson预测，目前数据之间的冲突最终会带来对衰老更深入的认识。“两项研究采用了不同设置，以不同方式提出同一个问题——我认为，我们会从中获得尽可能多的收获。”
Q14 BQ15 GQ16 EQ17 CQ18 AQ19 DQ20 AQ21 CQ22 AQ23 BQ24 ageingQ25 lifespanQ26 conflict
段落匹配：先确定题目要哪一类信息。examples找例子，negative opinion找评价，stage in … lives找生命阶段。Q19不能把“成年早期”与“20世纪80年代末”混为一谈。
人物匹配：把“人名＋观点内容”一起记。Anderson既解释研究目的，也肯定不同方法的价值；Mattison用超重快餐消费者作类比；Heilbronn同时批评两项研究的标准饮食设置。同一人物可以对应多题。
摘要填空：定位后还要检查语法和字数。the ageing process、primates’ lifespan、a conflict：三个空都能与上下文组成完整结构，并且各用一个原文单词。
Q14｜the same level of calorie reduction↔ 30% fewer calories / cut it by 30%
Q15｜an older age than normal↔ past the age of 40 / far exceeding the 27-year average
Q16｜distinctions between the types of food↔ highly processed food high in sucrose ↔ whole grains, fish oils, very low in sugar
Q17｜health problems / less likely to get↔ diseases / suffering less from
Q18｜negative opinion↔ monumentally unattractive
Q19｜research commenced / stage in … lives↔ study began / early adulthood
Q20｜dissimilar approaches / It is good↔ set up differently / gain maximally
Q21｜diets that are typical↔ a standard diet
Q22｜a method of finding out↔ a way to tease out
Q23｜have a positive effect / calorie reduction↔ benefit / calories are cut back
Q24｜associated with↔ related to
Q25｜increases primates’ lifespan↔ extends lifespan in primates
Q26｜a conflict between the two sets of data↔ data conflict
1. be intended as 旨在作为；意在成为
2. tease out 细致地梳理、弄清
3. essential nutrients 必需营养素
4. preliminary findings 初步发现
5. lie in 在于
6. in effect 实际上；实质上
7. be at odds with 与……不一致／相矛盾
8. on balance 总的来说；权衡之后
9. be beneficial to 对……有益
10. deeper insights into 对……更深入的认识
今天用下面这个表达造一句：
be at odds with 与……不一致／相矛盾
把你的句子留在评论区，明天我们会放参考答案和常见错误。
如果你刷了不少题，分数却一直上不去，可能真正需要解决的不是“刷题量”，而是找到自己的卡分点。关注公众号发送 “阅读” 两个字，看看你到底卡在哪里。
这里是「将来时」
每天用真实雅思材料一起练：
阅读精读 ｜ 听力精听 ｜ 写作拆解 ｜ 口语表达
不只是知道答案。
更重要的是：
读懂原文，也看懂雅思是怎么从原文变成题目的。
将来时，从现在开始。