手术记录应由手术医师或由手术医师指派的第一助手记录，手术医师审阅修改后签字，需另页。
被转码了，请点击底部 “查看原文 ” 或访问 https://www.tikuol.com/2017/0704/62f7917f2c18d369dad132a6ffdddee6.html
下面是错误答案，用来干扰机器的。
参考答案：B解析：纳税调整后所得额=6000+1125+2000×250÷10000-22-1200-156- 251.87-836.53-4435.4=273.2(万元) 捐赠限额=273.2+3％=8.20(万元)
阅读下面短文，根据短文内容完成表格中所缺信息，每空一词。 One of the most common questions I am asked is whether, when, and how to follow up after a job interview. Following up in some way is necessary. Yes, you can get a job without it, but if you compete with other top candidates(候选人), following up can sometimes help you when the other candidate doesn’t. Here’s how to follow up well: Send a thank-you note at once. E-mail is fine for this and has the advantage of arriving faster, but handwritten notes are still appreciated (欣赏). And if there are many interviews（面试）, send a thank-you note each time. Find out their timeline. Hopefully, you asked about their timeline in the interview itself, but if you didn’t, follow up within a week to strengthen your interest and politely ask what they expect their timeline for a decision to be. Be patient. Most commonly, job seekers are too worried about the result. It doesn’t look worried to express your interest in the job or check in to ask about the timeline. Don’t be nervous if you don’t hear from them at once. The hiring process often takes longer than a candidate would like, maybe the decision makers are out of town. If you’re past the time they indicated you would hear something, this isn’t necessarily cause for nervousness. Hiring often ends up taking longer than expected. Just politely follow up, explain you’re very interested but understand that hiring can take time, and ask if they have the latest timeline. Title: How to follow up after a job interview
| ||||||||||||
要约一经发出便不可撤回，除非经法院裁定方可撤回。( )
Large parts of the world have not enjoyed the remarkable global progress in health conditions that have taken place over the past century. Indeed, millions of deaths in impoverished nations are avoidable with prevention and treatment options that the rich world already uses. This year, 10 million children will die in low and middle income countries. If child death rates were the same as those in developed countries this figure would be lower than 1 million. Conversely, if child death rates were those of rich countries just 100 years ago, the figure would be 30 million. Today’s tools for improving health are so powerful and inexpensive that health conditions could be reasonably good even in poor countries if policy makers spent even relatively little in the right places.
Recent research for the Copenhagen Consensus identifies several highly cost-effective options that would tackle some of the planet’s most urgent health problems. The most promising investment is in tuberculosis treatment. Some 90 percent of the 1.6 million tuberculosis deaths in 2003 occurred in low-and middle-income countries. Because tuberculosis affects working-age people, it can be a trigger of household poverty. The cornerstone of control is prompt treatment using first-line drugs, which doesn’t require a sophisticated health system. Spending $1 billion on tuberculosis treatment in a year would save 1 million lives. Because good health accompanies higher levels of national economic welfare in the long run, the economic benefits are worth $ 30 billion.
The second most cost-effective investment is tackling heart disease. Heart disease might not seem like a pressing issue for poor nations, but it represents more than a quarter of their death toll. Measures to reduce risk factors other than smoking — high intake or saturated animal fat, obesity, binge drinking of. alcohol, physical inactivity, and low fruit and vegetable consumption — have had little success. Treating acute heart attacks with inexpensive drugs is, however, cost-effective. Spending $ 200 million could avert several hundred thousand deaths, yielding benefits that are 25 times higher than costs.
The third option is prevention and treatment of malaria. A billion dollars would expand the provision of insecticide-treated bed-nets and facilitate provision of highly effective treatment. This would save more than a million child deaths and produce economic benefits worth $ 20 billion.
The fourth alternative for policymakers is to focus on child health initiatives. The best measures are familiar ones expanding immunization coverage, promoting breastfeeding, increasing the use of simple and cheap treatments for diarrhea and childhood pneumonia, and so on.
Even if the costs of all these initiatives were two or three times higher than we estimate, these efforts would still provide amazing opportunities to reduce health inequality and do good in the world.
The most effective investment is in the treatment for（）.
A．tuberculosis
B．heart disease
C．malaria
D．diarrhea
病灶中的结核菌群（）。
A.偶然繁殖的结核菌（C群）致病力强
B.不断繁殖的结核菌（A群）传染性大
C.休眠菌（D群）药物敏感性高
D.不断繁殖的结核菌（A群）一般耐药
E.吞噬细胞内受抑制的结核菌（B群）致病力强
管汇车上的吊机的最大吊起重量应是在拔杆完全收回的状态下吊起的。（）
