Boys’ schools are the perfect place to teach young men to express their emotions and involve them in activities such as art, dance and music．

Far from the traditional image of a culture of aggressive masculinity(男子气概)，the absence of girls gives boys the chance to develop without pressure to be consistent to a stereotype(传统观念)，a US study says．

Boys at single-sex schools were said to be more likely to get involved in cultural and artistic activities that helped develop their abilities to express their emotions，rather than feeling they had to obey the“boy code”of hiding their emotions to be a “real man”．

The findings of the study are against the received wisdom that boys do better when taught alongside girls．

Tony Little，headmaster of Eton，warned that boys were being ignored by the British education system because it had become too focused on girls．He criticized teachers for failing to recognize that boys are actually more emotional than girls．

The research argued that boys often perform badly in mixed schools because they become discouraged when their female peers do better earlier in speaking and reading skills．

But in single-sex schools teachers can adjust lessons to boys’ learning style，letting them move around the classroom and getting them to compete in teams to prevent boredom，wrote the study’s author, Abigail James of the University of Virginia．

Teachers could encourage boys to enjoy reading and writing with “boy-focused” approaches such as themes and characters that appeal to them．Because boys generally have sharper vision，learn best through touch, and are physically more active，they need to be given “hands-on”lessons where they are allowed to walk around．“ Boys in mixed schools view classical music as feminine(女性的)and prefer the modern type in which violence and sexism are major themes.” James wrote．

Single-sex education also made it less likely that boys would feel they had to give in to a stereotype that men should be “masterful and in charge” in relationships．“ In mixed schools boys feel pressed to act like men before they understand themselves well enough to know what that means.” the study reported.

Many foreign students report feeling lonely or unwelcome in Australia. Those feelings are among the reasons why Australia is taking a close look at its international education industry. But wherever international students go，making friends may not always be easy. Elisabeth Gareis of Baruch College in New York surveyed 454 international students. They were attending four－year colleges and graduate schools in the American South and Northeast.

Students from English－speaking countries and from northern and central Europe were more likely to be happy with their friendships. But 38% of the international students said they had no close friends in the United States. And half of the students from East Asia said they were unhappy with the number of American friends they had. Thirty percent said they wished their friendships could be deeper and more meaningful.

Professor Gareis says，“Students from East Asia have cultures that are different on many levels from the culture in the United States. There are also language problems，and maybe some social skills，such as small talks，which are possibly not as important in their native countries，where it’s not as important to start friendships with small talks. Many East Asian students blamed themselves for their limited friendships with Americans，for not speaking the language well enough and for not knowing the culture well enough.”

VOA’s Students Union blogger Jessica Stahl did her own survey to find out how American students and foreign students relate to each other. More than 100 students，about half of them American，answered her online questions. Half of the international students and 60% of the Americans said they related as well or better to the other group than to their own group.

Professor Gareis says，“International students who make friends with host nationals are，overall，more satisfied with their stay in the host country. They have better language skills，better academic performance and better attitudes toward the host country.”

 The newspaper must provide for the reader the facts，pure，unprejudiced，objectively selected facts．But in these days of complex news it must provide more；it must supply interpretation，the meaning of the facts．This is the most important assignment facing American journalists﹣to make clear to the reader the problems of the day，to make international news understandable as community news，to recognize that there is no longer any such thing as"local"news，because any event in the international area has a local reaction in the financial market，political circles，in terms，indeed，of our very way of life．

There is in journalism a widespread view that when you start an interpretation，you are entering dangerous waters，the rushing tides of opinion．This is nonsense．

The opponents of interpretation insist that the writer and the editor shall limit himself to the"facts"．This insistence raises two questions．What are the facts？And：Are the bare facts enough？

As for the first question，consider how a so called"factual"story comes about．The reporter collects，say，fifty facts；out of these fifty，his space being necessarily restricted，he selects the ten which he considers most important．This is Judgment Number One．Then he or his editor decides which of these ten facts shall hold the lead of the piece．This is Judgment Number Two．Then the night editor determines whether the article shall be presented on page one，where it has a large influence，or on page twentyfour，where it has little．Judgment Number Three．

Thus in the presentation of a socalled"factual"or"objective"story，at least three judgments are involved．And they are judgments not at all unlike those involved in interpretation，in which reporter and editor，calling upon their research resources，their general background，and their"news neutralism（中立）"，arrive at a conclusion as to the significance of the news．

The two areas of judgment，presentation of the news and its interpretation，are both objective rather than subjective processes﹣as objective，that is，as any human being can be．If an editor is determined to give a prejudiced view of the news，he can do it in other ways and more effectively than by interpretation．He can do it by the selection of those facts that support his particular viewpoint．Or he can do it by the place he gives a story﹣promoting it to page one or dragging it to page thirty．

Scientists are debating how to limit their newly-discovered power to change genetic structure (结构). Scientists already modify the genes (基因) of farm animals and agricultural plants to make them more productive or stronger. But now they can also change genes in wild animals and plants. These genes would continue into later generations. For example, it may be possible for scientists to remove from existence the kind of mosquitoes, small flying insects, that carry the Zika virus. They might also be able to permanently remove species (物种) of plants and animals that are damaging to other species.

    In a report published last week, the U. S. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) said it supports continued research on this kind of gene control. But it warned that it is not possible to know what will happen when these changed plants and animals are released (释放) into the wild.

   Sixteen biologists, ethicists (伦理学家) and policymakers are on an NAS committee that is examining the issue. They say that there is value to the new technology. But, they say, there is not enough evidence to support the release of modified organisms (生物体) from the laboratory into nature.

   Many people would support stopping mosquitoes and rats from carrying diseases. But scientists say we must understand the possible scientific, ethical, legal and social results of such action before we decide whether to take it. Gene modification is spread through reproduction (繁殖).

  Changed genes will continue to spread as long as an animal or plant continues to reproduce. They cannot be limited to a farm or kept within a country's borders. Scientists are wondering what may happen if a modified organism mates with another species. They are not yet sure how the modified genes would affect the other species. It is possible that those genes could harm those creatures or even lead to their disappearance from our planet.

Your body, which has close relations with the food you eat, is the most important thing you own, so it needs proper treatment and proper nourishment(营养), The old saying” An apple a day keeps the doctor away.” is not as silly as some people think. The body needs fruit and vegetables because they contain vitamin C. Many people take extra vitamins in pill form, believing that these will make them healthy. But a good diet is made up of nourishing food and this gives all the vitamins you need. The body doesn’t need or use extra vitamins, so why waste money on them?

   In the modern western world, many people are too busy to bother about eating properly. They throw anything into their stomachs, eating hurriedly and carelessly. The list of illnesses caused or made worse by bad eating habits is frightening.

Scientists have exactly discovered the set of brain cells involved in making risky decisions, and have been able to control them in rats using targeted light. By changing the activity of the cells they were able to change the behaviour of risk-taking rats to avoid risk, hinting the approach could in future be used to treat people with impulse (冲动) control problems.

Risk-taking is a key part of survival, knowing when to take a chance could pay off—such as moving to a new area to look for food when pickings are slim.

While all animals need an element of risk, the preference towards it varies between individuals. Researchers found this variation, which determines how risk-averse an individual is, is regulated by brain cells in a region of the brain called the nucleus accumbens. This cluster of neurons releases the neurotransmitter dopamine, which regulates the brain’s reward and pleasure centres.

Previous studies have shown that in patients with Parkinson’s disease, taking medication which blocks specific dopamine receptors (DR2) (受体) leads to increased gambling (赌博) behaviour and risk taking behaviour. In studies with rats, researchers were able to use a technique called optogenetics (光遗传学)—which uses light sensitive proteins to change the activity of cells—to modify cells with DR 2 in the nucleus accumbens.

Rats were trained to choose one of two levers, offering them a choice between a “safe” or “risky” choice. The safe option resulted in a small, but consistent amount of a sugar water treat. But the risky choice consistently delivered smaller amounts of sugar water, with the occasional large pay off—essentially encouraging the animals to gamble for a bigger prize. Around two-thirds of the animals weren’t keen on risk, opting for the safe option, but the remaining third were risk-seekers. Brain scans of the animals showed that those with low levels of DR2 consistently went for the gamble.

But using pulses of light to stimulate (刺激) the DR2 cells and improve their activity could cause the risk-takers to play it safe and opt for the guaranteed but less rewarding option. Once the light-pulses stopped, the risk-takers returned to their gambling strategy.

In the risk-averse animals, stimulating the same cells had little to no effect.

Professor Karl Deisseroth, of Stanford University in California, said: “Humans and rats have similar brain structures involved.”And we found a drug known to increase risk preference in people had the same effect on the rats. So every indication is that these findings are relevant to humans. “Risky behavior has its moments where it’s valuable. As a species, we wouldn’t have come as far as we have without it.”

You’re eating too much chocolate. And it’s getting so out of control that the world could be headed towards a disaster if it doesn’t stop.

Chocolate shortages are becoming a regular thing. We are suffering the worst chocolate shortages in more than 50 years. Last year, the world consumed(消耗) 70,000 metric tons more cocoa than it produced. By 2020, that number could increase to 1 million metric tons.

The problem is, for one, a supply issue. Dry weather in West Africa has greatly reduced production in the region. It has wiped out over 30 percent of global cocoa production. Because of this, cocoa farming has proven a very tough business, and many farmers have shifted to more profitable crops, like corn, as a result.

Then there’s the world’s huge appetite for chocolate. China growing love for it is of particular concern. The Chinese are buying more and more chocolate each year. Still, they each only eat about 5 percent of what the average Western European eats. There’s also the rising popularity of dark chocolate, which contains more cocoa than traditional chocolate bars.

For these reasons, cocoa prices have climbed by more than 60 percent since 2012, when people started eating more chocolate than the world could produce. And chocolate makers have, in turn, been forced to adjust by raising the price of their bars.

Efforts to change the growing imbalance have inspired an innovation(革新，创新). Specifically, an agricultural research group is developing trees that can produce up to seven times the amount of beans that traditional cocoa trees can.

In this process, chocolate, like the chicken and strawberries, will go from tasty to forgettable on the road to plenty. It’s unclear whether anyone will mind it if it keeps prices down. And the industry certainly won’t mind, as long as it helps to deal with the shortage.

Luther Gulick was chairman of the physical education department at the School for Christian Workers (nowSpringfield College) in Springfield,Massachusetts. In early December 1891, he instructed physical education teacher James Naismith to invent a new game to entertain the school’s athletes during the winter season.

With an ordinary soccer ball, Naismith asked his class of 18 young men to get together, appointed captains of two nine-player teams, and introduced them to the game of Basket Ball (then two words). Naismith sent someone to find two boxes to be fastened to the balcony at opposite sides of the gymnasium. The man, however, only found two peach baskets, and the game was played with these.

The soccer ball and the peach basket soon gave way to better equipment. For example, in the early days the peach baskets were closed at the bottom. The peach basket was later replaced by a metal rim with a net hanging below, and in 1906 people began opening the netting to let the ball fall through.

The first basketballs were made from panels of leather stitched together with a rubber bladder (球胆) inside. A cloth lining was added to the leather for support. The molded basketball, introduced in about 1942, was a great advancement for the sport. The molded ball, a factory-made ball that had a fixed size and shape, offered better reaction, making play more consistent and the development of individual skills easier.

In Naismith’s original 13 rules, the ball could be hit in any direction with one or both hands, but it could not be dribbled (运球) because players could not move with the ball. At the beginning of1910 aplayer could dribble the ball, but could not shoot after dribbling. It was not until 1916, following heated debate, that players were allowed to shoot after dribbling.

Many studies have shown that the company of pets can help lower blood pressure and raise chances of recovering from a heart attack, reduce loneliness and help control body weight.

Any pet owner will tell you how much joy a pet brings. For some, an animal provides more comfort than a husband/wife. A 2002 study by Karen Allen of the State University of New York measured stress levels and blood pressure in people (half of them were pet owners) while they performed 5 minutes of mental arithmetic (算术) or held a hand in ice water. People completed the tasks alone, with a husband/wife, a close friend or with a pet. People with pets did it best. Those tested with their animal friends had smaller change in blood pressure and returned most quickly to baseline heart rates. With pets in the room, people also made fewer math mistakes than when doing in front of other companions. It seems that people feel more relaxed around pets, says Allen, who thinks it may be because pets don’t judge.

   A study reported last fall suggests that having a pet dog may also have an effect on your body weight. Researchers at Northwestern Memorial Hospital spent a year studying two groups of fat people who were put on a diet-and-exercise program: one group with pet dogs, and the other without. On average, dog owners lost about 11 pounds, or 5% of their body weight; While those without dogs lost about 8 pounds. The pet owners, said researchers, got more exercise overall (mostly with their dogs) and found it worth doing.