阅读下文，回答相关问题。

                                                                                       不容忽视的“镉大米”
       ①人们总是在食品安全中学习化学知识，两年前“10%大米镉超标”的新闻让人们空前关注起“镉”。而最近“广州超过4成大米镉超标”的报道，更让公众群情激愤。
       ②“镉”究竟为何物？镉是一种重金属元素，在冶金、塑料、电子等行业非常重要。它通常通过废水排入沟渠河流，再通过灌溉污染农作物，水稻是典型的“受害作物”。
       ③根据不同的摄取方式来衡量，镉对人体健康有不同的影响。通过大米等食物摄取的，属于“长期小剂量”。这种情况主要危害肾脏和骨骼。目前，国际卫生组织对镉的安全标准就是基于它对肾脏的危害程度建立的，上限是每周每公斤体重7微克。这个安全标准包括所有的镉来源，除了米饭，还有其他食物和饮水。对于大米，我国的安全标准是每公斤0．2毫克。但这只是一个“控制标准”，并不意味着高于这个值的大米才有害，而低于它的大米就“安全”。此外，我们还要吃其他食物，还要喝水，其中也可能含有镉。对于“镉大米”产区的人来说，镉的其他来源就更不能忽视。
       ④长期食用“镉大米”或其他含镉的东西，容易造成慢性镉中毒。它的症状被命名为“痛痛病”。根据目前的研究，痛痛病主要是由镉对肾脏和骨骼的破坏造成的。镉会在肾脏中累积，最后导致肾衰竭，也会导致骨软化和骨质疏松。长期接触剂量是国际卫生组织安全线3倍以上的镉还可能会导致消化道的障碍。在动物实验中，这种剂量的镉还显示了对生殖和发育系统的影响；对人类是否有同样影响，还没有可靠依据。
       ⑤解决“镉大米” 对人身体健康造成危害的根本途径还是治理工业污染，也迫切需要广泛严格地检测大米以及饮水中的镉含量，并且及时公布与处理。对于消费者来说，保护自己的可行途径是增加食谱的多样化。此外，保证自己的食谱中有充足的钙和维生素D，可能有助于增强对镉的抵抗力。                          

                                                                                                                       （摘自新浪网，有删改）

开火车填数

             Parents who help their children with homework may actually be bringing down their school grades. Other forms of prenatal involvement, including volunteering at school and observing a child's class, also fail to help, according to the most recent study on the topic.
The findings challenge a key principle of modern parenting(养育子女) where schools except them to act as partners in their children's education. Previous generations concentrated on getting children to 
school on time, fed, dressed and ready to learn.
       Kaith Robinson, the author of the study, said, "I really don't know if the public is ready for this but there are some ways parents can be 
involved in their kids' education that leads to declines in their academic performance. One of the things that was consistently negative was
 parents' help with homework." Robinson suggested that may be because parents themselves struggle to understand the task." They may 
either not remember the material their kids are studying now, or in some cases never learnt it themselves, but they're still offering advice."
       Robinson assessed parental involvement performance and found one of the most damaging things a parent could do was to punish their children for poor marks. In general, about 20% of parental involvement was positive, about 45% negative and the rest statistically
 insignificant.
      Common sense suggests it was a good thing for parents to get involved because "children with good academic success do have involved
 parents ", admitted Robinson. But he argued that this did not prove parental involvement was the root cause of that success." A big 
surprise was that Asian-American parents whose kids are doing so well in school hardly involved. They took a more reasonable approach, conveying to their children how success at school could improve their lives."