Questões de Inglês

Text II

India is now both rich and poor, and this is the way it is likely to stay. The world’s largest economies in the future—India, China, Brazil—will contain large numbers of poor people, as India does today. It also has many super-rich, like Sunil Mittal, who in the 1970s was running a little factory in Punjab making bicycle parts. In 1995 Mittal launched a telecom company, Airtel, which now has 223 million subscribers across 19 countries, giving him an estimated net worth of $8 billion.

India’s economic rise is not eating American jobs, as I learned while researching my book. Trade happens in many directions, and the attraction of cheap labor overseas is only part of the story. When Airtel needed to expand fast during the early years of the cell-phone revolution, Mittal realized he would not be able to build infrastructure fast enough to keep up with demand. So he reverse-outsourced, giving work to foreign companies like Nokia, IBM, and Ericsson.

India’s contradictions are less confusing to Indians than they are to foreigners. New technology is not really regarded as alien or ―Western,‖ and tends to quickly become indigenous since India is a flexible and adaptive society. K. Radhakrishnan, the head of the Indian Space Research Organization, learned of his appointment while stripped to the waist, performing rituals as a pilgrim at a Hindu temple.

Women in India are usually portrayed as oppressed—and often they are—but in some circumstances can have opportunities that they would not have elsewhere. Leading financial institutions in India, like HSBC, RBS, JPMorgan Chase, ICICI, and UBS, are all run by women. Big political names like Sonia Gandhi are not alone. Mayawati Kumari, the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, represents a grassroots revolution: one of nine children, she was raised on the edge of Delhi in a poor family of former ―untouchables.‖ She now rules a state with a population nearly equal to that of Brazil.

Source: Newsweeek (Adapted from: http://www.newsweek.com/,June/2011)

Text I

The problem with most health food is that nobody likes it — not least your own stomach. New research suggests that the stomach signals less satisfaction after eating "health food," regardless of the actual fat and calories consumed. In contrast, foods that people perceive as indulgent and sinful produce a greater sense of fullness and gratification, even if they are actually much lower in calories. For their study, Yale psychologists led by Alia Crum recruited 46 participants who were told that the researchers were testing the body's response to two milkshakes that were designed with varying nutritional content. In reality, the two milkshakes were exactly the same, but one was described as being high-fat and containing 620 calories; it was labeled "indulgent" and offering "decadence you deserve." The other shake was described as low-fat with only 140 calories. Its label promised "guilt-free satisfaction." Participants were asked to taste the milkshakes one week apart, so they were unable to directly compare the experiences. Each milkshake actually contained 380 calories.

Blood samples showed that gut levels of ghrelin — a hormone that rises in response to hunger and falls with fullness — declined rapidly when participants believed they were consuming a sumptuous treat. When participants thought they were getting health food, however, ghrelin levels stayed stable, meaning that their bodies did not signal the appropriate feeling of fullness after drinking the shake.

The research offers a possible clue as why diets fail so often: when we believe that we will be deprived by eating food that is lower in calories, our guts will psych us out with more hunger and less satiety. It also presents a challenge for food manufacturers: accurately labeling health food as such may make it less satisfying, but how do you tell consumers that the products have fewer calories without evoking this effect? Maybe food makers' annoying habit of shrinking packages without telling us may actually serve a good purpose after all.

Source: Time Magazine (Adapted from http://healthland.time.com/, May/2011)

Text I

The problem with most health food is that nobody likes it — not least your own stomach. New research suggests that the stomach signals less satisfaction after eating "health food," regardless of the actual fat and calories consumed. In contrast, foods that people perceive as indulgent and sinful produce a greater sense of fullness and gratification, even if they are actually much lower in calories. For their study, Yale psychologists led by Alia Crum recruited 46 participants who were told that the researchers were testing the body's response to two milkshakes that were designed with varying nutritional content. In reality, the two milkshakes were exactly the same, but one was described as being high-fat and containing 620 calories; it was labeled "indulgent" and offering "decadence you deserve." The other shake was described as low-fat with only 140 calories. Its label promised "guilt-free satisfaction." Participants were asked to taste the milkshakes one week apart, so they were unable to directly compare the experiences. Each milkshake actually contained 380 calories.

Blood samples showed that gut levels of ghrelin — a hormone that rises in response to hunger and falls with fullness — declined rapidly when participants believed they were consuming a sumptuous treat. When participants thought they were getting health food, however, ghrelin levels stayed stable, meaning that their bodies did not signal the appropriate feeling of fullness after drinking the shake.

The research offers a possible clue as why diets fail so often: when we believe that we will be deprived by eating food that is lower in calories, our guts will psych us out with more hunger and less satiety. It also presents a challenge for food manufacturers: accurately labeling health food as such may make it less satisfying, but how do you tell consumers that the products have fewer calories without evoking this effect? Maybe food makers' annoying habit of shrinking packages without telling us may actually serve a good purpose after all.

Source: Time Magazine (Adapted from http://healthland.time.com/, May/2011)

Text I

The problem with most health food is that nobody likes it — not least your own stomach. New research suggests that the stomach signals less satisfaction after eating "health food," regardless of the actual fat and calories consumed. In contrast, foods that people perceive as indulgent and sinful produce a greater sense of fullness and gratification, even if they are actually much lower in calories. For their study, Yale psychologists led by Alia Crum recruited 46 participants who were told that the researchers were testing the body's response to two milkshakes that were designed with varying nutritional content. In reality, the two milkshakes were exactly the same, but one was described as being high-fat and containing 620 calories; it was labeled "indulgent" and offering "decadence you deserve." The other shake was described as low-fat with only 140 calories. Its label promised "guilt-free satisfaction." Participants were asked to taste the milkshakes one week apart, so they were unable to directly compare the experiences. Each milkshake actually contained 380 calories.

Blood samples showed that gut levels of ghrelin — a hormone that rises in response to hunger and falls with fullness — declined rapidly when participants believed they were consuming a sumptuous treat. When participants thought they were getting health food, however, ghrelin levels stayed stable, meaning that their bodies did not signal the appropriate feeling of fullness after drinking the shake.

The research offers a possible clue as why diets fail so often: when we believe that we will be deprived by eating food that is lower in calories, our guts will psych us out with more hunger and less satiety. It also presents a challenge for food manufacturers: accurately labeling health food as such may make it less satisfying, but how do you tell consumers that the products have fewer calories without evoking this effect? Maybe food makers' annoying habit of shrinking packages without telling us may actually serve a good purpose after all.

Source: Time Magazine (Adapted from http://healthland.time.com/, May/2011)

Text I

The problem with most health food is that nobody likes it — not least your own stomach. New research suggests that the stomach signals less satisfaction after eating "health food," regardless of the actual fat and calories consumed. In contrast, foods that people perceive as indulgent and sinful produce a greater sense of fullness and gratification, even if they are actually much lower in calories. For their study, Yale psychologists led by Alia Crum recruited 46 participants who were told that the researchers were testing the body's response to two milkshakes that were designed with varying nutritional content. In reality, the two milkshakes were exactly the same, but one was described as being high-fat and containing 620 calories; it was labeled "indulgent" and offering "decadence you deserve." The other shake was described as low-fat with only 140 calories. Its label promised "guilt-free satisfaction." Participants were asked to taste the milkshakes one week apart, so they were unable to directly compare the experiences. Each milkshake actually contained 380 calories.

Blood samples showed that gut levels of ghrelin — a hormone that rises in response to hunger and falls with fullness — declined rapidly when participants believed they were consuming a sumptuous treat. When participants thought they were getting health food, however, ghrelin levels stayed stable, meaning that their bodies did not signal the appropriate feeling of fullness after drinking the shake.

The research offers a possible clue as why diets fail so often: when we believe that we will be deprived by eating food that is lower in calories, our guts will psych us out with more hunger and less satiety. It also presents a challenge for food manufacturers: accurately labeling health food as such may make it less satisfying, but how do you tell consumers that the products have fewer calories without evoking this effect? Maybe food makers' annoying habit of shrinking packages without telling us may actually serve a good purpose after all.

Source: Time Magazine (Adapted from http://healthland.time.com/, May/2011)

Text I

The problem with most health food is that nobody likes it — not least your own stomach. New research suggests that the stomach signals less satisfaction after eating "health food," regardless of the actual fat and calories consumed. In contrast, foods that people perceive as indulgent and sinful produce a greater sense of fullness and gratification, even if they are actually much lower in calories. For their study, Yale psychologists led by Alia Crum recruited 46 participants who were told that the researchers were testing the body's response to two milkshakes that were designed with varying nutritional content. In reality, the two milkshakes were exactly the same, but one was described as being high-fat and containing 620 calories; it was labeled "indulgent" and offering "decadence you deserve." The other shake was described as low-fat with only 140 calories. Its label promised "guilt-free satisfaction." Participants were asked to taste the milkshakes one week apart, so they were unable to directly compare the experiences. Each milkshake actually contained 380 calories.

Blood samples showed that gut levels of ghrelin — a hormone that rises in response to hunger and falls with fullness — declined rapidly when participants believed they were consuming a sumptuous treat. When participants thought they were getting health food, however, ghrelin levels stayed stable, meaning that their bodies did not signal the appropriate feeling of fullness after drinking the shake.

The research offers a possible clue as why diets fail so often: when we believe that we will be deprived by eating food that is lower in calories, our guts will psych us out with more hunger and less satiety. It also presents a challenge for food manufacturers: accurately labeling health food as such may make it less satisfying, but how do you tell consumers that the products have fewer calories without evoking this effect? Maybe food makers' annoying habit of shrinking packages without telling us may actually serve a good purpose after all.

Source: Time Magazine (Adapted from http://healthland.time.com/, May/2011)