TOEFL, iBT, Independent Writing, Smoking cigarettes should become illegal. - rewrite -

Writing Topic

Some people think that smoking cigarettes should become illegal, since it provides little benefit and a great deal of health risk, others feel that individuals should be free to smoke cigarettes if they choose to do so. Do you think cigarette smoking should be stopped by making it illegal or should it remain legal?

☆Writing Topic with hints: The question itself is simple: Should cigarette smoking be illegal or not? However, before the question, this topic has hints for you to consider. You could either discuss the topic focusing on the hints or add your own view point, although it might be wise to take up either of them as counter-argument. In this topic, the point of the hints is the choice between prioritizing individuals’ health and respecting freedom and personal responsibility. In other words, this question can be translated as follows: Should cigarette smoking be illegal to protect one’s health or legal to respect one’s freedom and personal responsibility?

☆ Hints for points

♦Cigarette smoking should be illegal because …

1. it is toxic and causes cancer and other serious diseases.

2. it is addictive.

3. there is the problem of second-hand smoke/smoking.

- Counterarguments: 1) There are measures to take to prevent second-hand smoke such as separate-smoking and ban on smoking in public areas. (Smoking will remain legal while smoking in certain areas will be illegal.) ⇔ These measures are not practical because there are many smokers who do not comply with the rules and you cannot catch or shut up smoke completely. 2) Banning smoking will undermine the economy. ⇔ Some estimate shows that the smoking related loss, mainly medical costs, surpasses the loss caused by tobacco ban. Even though the estimate is not flawless given other factors such as unhealthy lifestyle and environmental pollution, it is intuitively convincing, since fixing something costs more than destroying it in general.

- Conclusion: To protect public health, individual freedom can be limited.

♦Cigarette smoking should not be illegal because …

1. you have the right to do whatever you want to do even if it endangers your health.

2. other dangerous things such as alcoholic drinks or mountain climbing are not illegal.

3. smoking is a necessary evil like drinking and gambling because

a) it helps smokers release stress

b) it is an established part of economy. If cigarettes are banned, the economy will be affected. e.g the tobacco industry, coffee shops, music clubs, etc. and tax revenue (1 trillion yen in 2009 to 23 billion yen in 2010: 63% decrease after tobacco tax raise) Cigarette industry would go underground if banned. As in the case of cannabis, making it available to the public will reduce the number of addicts and dealers.

- Counterargumens: Secondhand smoke harms other people. ⇔ Only public smoking should be banned.  - Conclusion: As long as measures are taken to prevent second-hand smoking, the choice between health and fun should be left to each individual.

☆Sample essay structures

Sample essay structure 1

【Main Idea = Outline】Cigarettes should be made illegal to protect younger generations and to solve the problem of passive smoking.

【Reason 1】 Smoking harms one’s health badly.

【Reason 2】 The number of those who start smoking can be greatly reduced.

【Counterargument & Counter-counterargument】It is true that individuals have the right to choose to do what they want to do, even potentially dangerous things, but smoking harm other individuals and should be restricted to protect the public good.

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】I am convinced that cigarette smoking should be banned because it will improve public health, especially that of the next generation.

Sample essay structure 2

【Main Idea = Outline】It is more dangerous to ban smoking than to make public totally smoke-free.

【Reason 1】 Smoking ban would harm democracy.

【Reason 2】 Making smoking illegal would just stir the society.

【Counterargument & Counter-counterargument】It is true that smoking provides little benefit and a great deal of health risk. However, the government should not force people a lifestyle, even though it can recommend it. Also, there are measures to protect other individuals from secondhand smoke.

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】Even though objectively it does no good, smoking should stay legal.

Your Sample Essay Structure

【Main Idea = Outline】 I agree/disagree with --- because …

【Reason 1】

【Reason 2】

【Counterargument-treatment】It is understandable that some people think that smoking cigarettes should become illegal, since it provides little benefit and a great deal of health risk / I partly agree with the feeling that that individuals should be free to smoke cigarettes if they choose to do so. However,

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】

☆ Essay for Ideas and Expressions

A heavy smoker’s family loses him twice. Long before he dies of a disease which seems to be related to this unhealthy habit, when they realize that they are helpless in making him quit smoking, they start a silent but desperate mourning of his early death. It is the sadness of seeing him die day by day. Still, this is actually a minor aspect of the tragedy of tobacco. Even though it might be difficult to put in practice because of smokers’ feelings and economic circumstances, cigarettes should be made illegal to protect younger generations and to solve the problem of second-hand smoke.

By making smoking illegal, the number of those who start smoking can be greatly reduced. Smokers find it difficult, and many of them believe it unnecessary, to quit smoking even though it has been scientifically proved that smoking causes lung cancer and other diseases. This is because smoking is addictive. When some toxic substance is addictive, making it illegal is one of the effective ways to reduce its harm. This is especially effective in preventing those who are not addicted, mostly the young, from initiating the use, since people usually stay away from things that are illegal.

Smoking seems to be a necessary evil and a matter of self-responsibility just like drinking and gambling, but the problem of second-hand smoke separates it from other indulgences. Cigarette smoke directly harms those who are around the smoker. Children of smokers are more susceptible to respiratory diseases than those of non-smokers. Many people are sensitive to cigarette smoke and feel ill when they inhale it. Although separate-smoking and public smoking ban are promoted, many smokers do not conform to the rules and it is impossible to block the contaminated air completely. Also, it is difficult to provide the evidence of unwanted exposure to smoke once the smoker puts it off and walks away. When some toxic fumes are around in everyday scenes, it is natural for the government to regulate them.

Banning smoking is difficult but possible. It seems that cigarettes stay legal because their social influence is not as big as that of drugs and they support the economy. Cigarettes do not make the user dangerous the way drugs do and smokers can keep functioning for decades. Also, the cigarette industry is an established part of economy and produce tax money, so that it is very difficult to terminate it. However, efforts toward changes necessary for public health have been made in the past. Coal was replaced by oil, which is cleaner than coal, and now oil is being replaced by much cleaner energy sources. Cigarettes themselves were a replacement, advocated by the government, for chewing tobacco, which was found to be contributing to the transmission of tuberculosis through saliva spat on the ground by the users. When the public health is at risk, the government should and can take measures.

Society is ultimately to be totally smoke-free to protect the health of citizens, especially younger generations, although care should be taken for smokers and those involved in the industry.

国際教養AO入試 reference, how to translate data

受動喫煙と肺がんに関するJTコメントへの見解
2016年9月28日　　国立研究開発法人国立がん研究センター
http://www.ncc.go.jp/jp/information/20160928.html

国際教養AO入試 reference, death sentence

死刑を廃止すべきか (その1)
児玉聡 | 京都大学大学院文学研究科准教授   2016年9月25日 9時0分配信http://bylines.news.yahoo.co.jp/satoshikodama/20160925-00062234/

Pre-TOEFL writing, It is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big city.

Writing Topic

It is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big city. Do you agree or disagree?. Use specific reasons and examples to develop your essay.

☆Let’s Think

Many people prefer to live in the suburbs when they have children because they have both the good points of the countryside and a big city, mainly access for both nature and good education. This writing topic, however, does not allow you to choose it. Instead, it presents the idea that it is the countryside rather than a big city that is a better choice in terms of child-rearing. If you have to choose, would you rather choose the countryside than a big city?

☆Hints for Points

Brainstorming characteristics of each choice point by point

	life in the countryside	life in a big city
environment	full of nature, good for the health	constantly changing, noisy, polluted
lifestyle	relaxing, slow-paced, monotonous	exciting, fast-paced
convenience	low prices, automobile society, safer	many means of transportation, hospitals, schools, and cultural facilities
relationship	intimate, warm, strong ties	dry, individualistic, freer
people	carefree, relaxed, conservative	many strangers, ambitious, progressive

☆Sample Body Structures

Here are two samples of many ways of dealing with choices in the writing topic to make a framework of the body of your full essay.

Sample Essay Structure 1  Point by point comparison of choices

   (1) Point 1: Comparison of the environment

   (2) Point 2: Comparison of the educational activities

   (3) Your decision

【Introduction = Outline】I would agree with the opinion that it is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big city. Two things should be mainly considered: the environment and education.

【Point 1】Good environment is vital to the mental and physical growth of children. The countryside provides plenty of nature and carefree people which nurture healthy and relaxed children. Many children growing up in a big city often suffer from diseases related to pollution or nervous breakdown due to noise and dry human relationships. My sister had asthma and was absent from school for a long time when my family lived in Tokyo. Then we moved to the country to cure her and she got well in a month.

【Point 2】It is necessary for children to receive a good education. Many good schools concentrate in big cities. Also, educational facilities and good transportation system are abundant in a big city. The countryside has only a few schools, and you are lucky if there is a library within a walking distance.

【My choice】In my opinion, the countryside is better than a big city for the grow of children. Good educational environment can be provided through other means such as the Internet or schooling during vacation while good natural environment is hard to provide if you do not live in the countryside. Moreover, physical strength is the most important to perform well in almost anything.

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】Although a big city has many appealing points, I believe that the country is better than a big city for rearing a child.

Sample Essay Structure 2  Developing images of each choice (You write about each choice separately)

    (1) About growing up in the countryside

    (2) About growing up in a big city

    (3) Your decision

【Introduction = Outline】Although I myself have grown up in a suburban city and have had no problem with it, I disagree with the statement that it is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a big city.

【Point 1】Growing up in the countryside would be good for the child’s health. The air is clean and there are not many people who spread viruses. People are friendly and enjoy intimate relationships. The child would grow up to be a healthy person with a positive mindset.

【Point 2】Although city life may be tough for a child, it offers a lot of opportunity. First of all, the opportunity of education is great in a big city. From kindergarten to university, varieties of good institutions are accessible within a 30-minute train ride. In addition, other educational facilities such as museums and libraries are abundant. The active lifestyle of the city and inspiring communication among city dwellers also stimulate mental growth of the city children.

【follow-up】Comparing the life in the countryside and that of a big city, I find it difficult to say that the countryside is definitely better for child growth than a big city, which has many advantages that are too good to be missed just because of lack of nature.

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】If the child is not sickly, taking advantage of the life of a big city is no less a good idea for the growth of the child than benefiting from the good environment in the countryside.

♦Your Sample Essay Structure

【Introduction = Outline】

【Point 1】

【Point 2】

【Point 3/ Follow-up】

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】

早稲田国際教養AO入試 The Jury in America - rewrite -

解答のポイント

主題：アメリカの陪審員制度は全国民を巻き込むので全国民の選挙権と共に民主主義の究極の柱だ。特に民事裁判は全国民に関わる問題であるため、国民主権による自由平等な精神に基づいた民主主義を実現し真の社会人を育てる。

本文該当箇所  前半第1段落 The institution of the jury may be aristocratic or democratic, according to the class form which the jurors are taken; but it always preserves its republican character, in that it places the real direction of society in the hands of the governed, and not in that of the government.. 陪審員制度は陪審員が選ばれる階級によって貴族的な場合もあれば民主的な場合もあるが、政府ではなく国民の手に社会の真の方向性を託すという点において、常に共和制的な性格を保っている。 第2段落 In the United States the same system is applied to the whole people. アメリカ合衆国では同制度（陪審員制度）が国民全体に適用される。The jury system as it is understood in America appears to me to be as extreme a consequence of the sovereignty of the people as the universal right to vote. アメリカで理解されているような陪審員制度は普通選挙権と同じくらい究極の国民主権の結果だと私には思える。 後半第1段落 When the jury acts also on non-criminal cases, its application is constantly visible; it affects all the interests of the community; everyone co-operates in its work: it thus penetrates into all the activities of life, it fashions the human mind to its peculiar forms, and it is gradually associated with the idea of justice itself. 陪審員制度が民事裁判にも適応されると、その適応は常に可視的であり、地域の関係者全てに影響を与え、皆が協力する。従って生活の全ての活動に浸透し、人の精神をその独特の形に作り、次第に正義自体の観点と結び付けられる。

各段落の要旨

前半

第１段落  罪を裁くものは最高権力者なので、陪審員制度は国民主権の実現であり国の方向性を決める。

第2段落  アメリカの陪審員は国民から選ばれるので民主主義の究極の結果だ。

後半

第1段落  特に（国民から選ばれた陪審員制度による）民事裁判は全国民を巻き込み、正義の観念を植え付ける。

第2段落  陪審制度が民事裁判に適応される時、時間や人の攻撃に耐えて自由を守り、国の性格に影響を与え、全国民に自由な組織への強固な準備である裁判官の精神を導入し、裁かれるものへの敬意と人権の観念を全階級の国民に与え、公正の実践を教え、政治参加を意識させ、国民主権の認識と実現に寄与し、自分勝手な考えを減らす。

問１  文章の筆者の主張を自分の言葉で説明してください。

考え方  言い換えを必ずする。 本文該当箇所 上記「主題」と別紙参照。

問２  筆者は刑事裁判と民事裁判における陪審員制度の使用の結果起こるアメリカ社会への影響の違いを説明しています。違いは何ですか。細かく説明してください。

考え方  主に後半の内容（民事裁判の特徴）をまとめる。刑事裁判における陪審員制度の使用は、前半第１段落

本文該当箇所  別紙と以下参照：

刑事裁判

.【国民を裁く立場（主権者の立場）にする】He who punishes the criminal is therefore the real master of society. Now, the institution of the jury raises the people itself, or at least a class of citizens, to the bench of judges. 従って罪人を罰する者は社会の真の主人である。そして陪審員制度は国民そのもの、またはその階級の市民を、裁判官の座に据える。

民事裁判

1.【民主政治を反映する】後半第1段落When the jury acts also on non-criminal cases, its application is constantly visible; it affects all the interests of the community; everyone co-operates in its work: it thus penetrates into all the activities of life, it fashions the human mind to its peculiar forms, and it is gradually associated with the idea of justice itself.

陪審員制度が民事裁判にも適応されると、その適応は常に可視的であり、地域の関係者全てに影響を与え、皆が協力する。従って生活の全ての活動に浸透し、人の精神をその独特の形に作り、次第に正義自体の観点と結び付けられる。

2．【自由を守る】以下全て後半第2段落 The institution of the jury, if limited to criminal cases, is always in danger; but when once it is introduced into non-criminal proceedings, it defies the aggressions of time and man. If it had been as easy to remove the jury from the customs as from the laws of England, it would have died away under the Tudor monarchs; and the non-criminal jury did in reality in the period of history save the liberties of England.

陪審員制度は刑事裁判に限られている場合は常に消滅の危機にある。しかしひとたび民事裁判の過程に導入されると時間と人からの攻撃に反抗する。もしイギリスの陪審員制度を慣習から取り除くのが法律から取り除くのと同じくらい容易であったならチューダー朝君主たちのもとで陪審員制度はなくなっていただろう。そして民事裁判の陪審員制度は実際にその歴史上の期間中イギリスの自由を守ったのだった。

3.【国の性格を決定する力が強い】In whatever manner the jury may be used, it cannot fail to exercise a powerful influence upon the national character; but this influence is greatly increased when the jury is used in non-criminal cases.

陪審員制度がどのような形で使われようが必ず国の性格に強い影響を与えるが、この影響は民事の場合に大幅に増大する。

4.【自由主義国家の基盤となる裁判官の精神を国民に伝える性格が強い】The jury, and especially the non-criminal jury, saves to introduce the spirit of the judges into the minds of all of the citizens; and this spirit; and this spirit, with all of the habits which are associated with that spirit, is the soundest preparation for free institutions.

陪審員、特に民事裁判の陪審員は判事の精神を全国民の精神に導入する。そしてこの精神は関連するすべての習慣と共に自由な組織への最も強固な準備である。

5.【被告の尊厳と人権およびの公正の観念を教える傾向が強い】The jury gives all classes a respect for the thing judges and the concept of human rights. If these two elements were to be removed, the love of independence would become a mere destructive passion. It teaches It teaches men to practice fairness; every man learns to judge his neighbor as he would himself be judged. And this is especially true of the jury in non-criminal cases; for while the number of persons who have the chance of being involved in ca criminal prosecution is small, everyone has the chance of being involved in a non-criminal case.

陪審員制度は裁かれるものに対する敬意と人権の観念を全階級の国民に与える。仮にこの二つの要素が除去された場合、自立への愛は単なる破壊的熱情になるだろう。陪審員は人に公正の実践を教える。自分が裁いて欲しいように隣人を裁くように皆がなるのだ。そしてこれは特に民事裁判の陪審員制度に当てはまる。というのも刑事訴追に関わる可能性の有る人の数は少ない一方で全国民が民事裁判に関わる可能性を有するからである。

6.【政治参加の意識を植え付ける】The jury teaches every man not to reject the responsibility of his own actions and impresses him with that manly confidence towards society and the part which they take in its government.

陪審員制度は全ての人に、自身の行動の責任を拒絶しないことを教え、それなしでは政治的美徳は存在しないあの社会に対する勇ましい自信と政治の中で自身の果たす役割を自分に印象付ける。

7.【国民主権を認識させ、実現する】It invests each citizen with a kind of supremacy; it makes them all feel the duties which they are bound to discharge towards society and the part which they take in its government.

陪審員制度は国民各自にある種の主権を与える。社会に対し行使することになっている義務と政府内で果たす役割を国民全員に感じさせるのだ。 

8.【他者の問題に目を向けさせて自分さえ良ければよいという考えをなくす】By obliging men to turn their attention to other affairs than their own, it rubs off the private selfishness which is the rust of society.

私事以外の問題に意識を向けるよう義務付けることによって、陪審制度は社会の錆である私的自己中心主義をそぎ落とす。

問３  日本政府は現在裁判長と裁判員制度の組み合わせた使用の実験を行っています。第2次大戦後日本は刑事・民事裁判両方で裁判員よりも裁判官に頼ってきました。仮に日本が将来アメリカで使用されているのと同じ陪審員制度を採用することを決定したとしてください。日本は何か問題に遭遇すると思いますか？細かく説明してください。

考え方  この問題は裁判員制度発足以前のもの。裁判員制度は既に開始しているが、刑事裁判のみで実施されている。最終段落にある裁判員制度の特徴と日本の民主主義や日本社会の特徴を照らし合わせながら考えてみる。また、陪審員制度事態の問題点が日本で大きな問題となるかどうかも考えてみる。

解答のポイント例  ☆Many citizens are so apathetic to social issues that in non-criminal cases intensive preparation for the court, especially education of the jury in related matters, may be necessary.

社会問題の知識が低い人が多いので民事裁判では解説等の準備が必要かもしれない。

☆Since Japanese democracy is not deep-rooted but is just regarded as the regime which was replaced with the imperialism after WWII, many of the selected as jury might not have thought or never have the will to think about fairness. responsibility as a citizen or influence on the Japanese society and its future and thus could make a wrong verdict, 

日本では民主主義は深く根づいておらず第2次大戦後帝国主義に取って代わった支配体制とみなされているにすぎないので、裁判員の多くが公正さや市民としての責任、日本社会とその将来への影響などについて考えてみたことがないし考える気もないかもしれず、従って間違った評決を下す可能性がある。

☆Classes, racial or ethnic prejudices might easily affect the verdict depending the proportion of members whose thoughts are potentially affected by such factors in the jury . There is a report that a jury whose members are predominantly white tend to sentence a black defendant to death more often than a less- white jury in the US. In Japan, where foreign residents are extreme minorities and there are deep-rooted discriminations against Korean residents, for example, the accused who is a Korean resident is doomed to lose the case and the whole process will be tremendously affected by how many members can think and act impartially in the jury. 

階級や人種、民族的偏見が裁判員構成の偏りによって評決に影響するかもしれない。アメリカでは白人多数の陪審員はそうでない陪審員よりも頻繁に黒人の被告を死刑にするという報告がある。外国人居住者が極端な少数派であり韓国籍の住民に深く根差した差別がある日本では例えば韓国籍の住民が被告の場合裁判に負ける可能性が高く、裁判の過程全てが偏りなく考え行動できる人が裁判員の中に何人いるかによって非常に大きな影響を受けるだろう。

☆Only those who will sign the form that he can take responsibility in case of death sentence will be in the jury of murder cases, and thus jury of murder cases consists of only those who are at least not against death penalty. This is a serious flaw in the system. Japan has not abolished death sentence and the rates of objection against abolition is very high, so execution rates may go up and unnecessary tragedy may increase. There already are Japanese people who voted for death sentence and realize the cruelty and blame themselves later.  

殺人事件の場合、死刑判決の責任を取る意志を表明する書類に署名した者のみが陪審員になるので、殺人事件の陪審員は少なくとも死刑に反対ではない人のみから成る。これは陪審員制度の欠点である。日本は死刑があり廃止論への反対意見の比率はまだ高い、従って死刑の回数が増えるかもしれないし不要な悲劇が増加するかも知れない。死刑判決を下してその後残酷さを認識し自分を責める日本人が既に存在する。

☆In the case of the security-related law suit, for which some lawyers are preparing for, since nearly 70 percent of the Japanese think it unconstitutional and the way Abe administration passed the law was that of undemocratic, the jury would make a decision problematic to the authorities, although it is not actually a problem to the citizens.

現在弁護士たちが準備中の安全保障関連法案訴訟の場合、国民の70％近くがこの法は違憲であり安倍政権の可決の仕方を非民主的と考えているので、裁判員は当局側にとって問題となる判決を出すだろう。実際のところこれは国民にとって問題ではないが。

Pre-TOEFL writing, a new restaurant in your neighborhood

Writing Topic

It has recently been announced that a new restaurant may be built in your neighborhood. Do you support or oppose this plan? Why? Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.

☆Let’s Think

This topic uses the word, your, and thus you can take some specific conditions in your neighborhood about having a new restaurant built. If your neighbors have missed a restaurant, they would probably welcome it, and vice versa.

☆Sample Essay Structures

Sample Essay Structure 1

【Introduction = Outline】I have little objection against a new restaurant in my neighborhood.

【Point 1】There is no right for the residents to oppose the building of a new restaurant. If it is a new factory or a high-rise condominium, some environmental issues should be considered, but a restaurant is basically harmless. For example, a new chain restaurant came to my town last year, and the neighbors have had not problem with it.

【Point 2】Any new business will liven up my boring town. It will revitalize the economy of my town. New people will come. If the restaurant is not the type that we already have, it would be all the better. We now only have fast food shops. When we have a special occasion, we have to go to the next town now, so if we have a new restaurant, we will be able to have celebrations more easily.

【follow-up】There would be some noise during the construction, but it would be over soon. It took only five weeks when the chain restaurant I wrote about above was built. Many people did not even notice that some construction was going on during the time.

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】I definitely support the plan. I hope a new restaurant in my neighborhood will help make our lives better.

Sample Essay Structure 2

【Introduction = Outline】I cannot be really optimistic about having a new restaurant built in my town.

【Point 1】There are already many establishments in my neighborhood. The competition is strong and most of the new restaurants just come and go. Also, people eat at home more often than before. For example, my family used to go out for dinner every weekend, but now we use restaurants only for special events.

【Point 2】The traffic will be heavier. A lot of people may visit the restaurant by car right after the opening and, if it becomes popular, forever. This will pollute the air and noise and strangers may bother some residents. The incidence of traffic accidents may increase too. Since there are many children and elderly people in my town, the number will be even larger.

【follow-up】Accepting a venture might be a good thing, but accepting a new business knowingly that it will fail or at least it is unwelcome is irresponsible. A new business owner usually has a debt, and the person will almost certainly be unable to pay for it.

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】I may not oppose the plan, but I would rather warn the owner of the new business that it is a losing battle.

♦Your Sample Essay Structure

【Introduction = Outline】

【Point 1】

【Point 2】

【Point 3/ Follow-up】

【Conclusion = Wrap-up】

早稲田国際教養AO入試 Can humans sleep their way to Mars?

科学研究（宇宙開発）と倫理性の問題です。まだずいぶん先の話ですが５０億年後には太陽系の太陽の寿命がつきて地球は消滅することが分かっています。その時まで人類が生き延びている保証はないのですが、もし生き延びていた場合、太陽系外に出ている必要があります。そのために様々な研究がなされていますが、この文章もそういった研究のひとつに関するものです。遠い将来のために必要な研究ですがそのために個人を危険にさらすことは倫理的に問題があるし、そもそも長期人工冬眠の人への適用は生理学的に無意味だという内容です。本文（宇宙開発、人工冬眠、人体実験）関連の記事やビデオをインターネット等で見てこの分野とご自分の世界とのつながりを作っておくと良いと思います。この作業は過去問すべてで行ってください。

1.     本文の内容を理解することに集中すると解きやすくなると思います。〔１〕a part of the brain that controls energy levels, in effect inducing hypothermia （エネルギーレベルを管理する脳の部分を〔１〕し、事実上低体温状態を引き起こす）は実験の説明であると同時に危険性を示唆している部分です。生命はエネルギー（熱）がある状態です。（死んだら冷たくなります）その働きを管理している部分は体温を保っている部分なので「抑制」すると低体温になります。低体温は治療に役立つ良い面もありますが本質的には死に近い状態なのです。

2.     自然のシステムと人工的に誘引された状態、期間の長短、そして体への影響の有無の違いを平易な表現でまとめましょう。特に本文最後のポイントであり問３の判断の根拠のひとつとなる体への影響の有無の違いは必ず書く必要があると思います。ポイントをもれなく要約するためにメモ等を取ってから答案を書くようにしてみてください。

3.     正義感に加えて論理的説明と本文内容や知識による根拠がつくと合格答案になると思います。本文にある根拠（倫理的に無理だと科学者本人が言っている、長期冬眠は人間には生理的に無理）や知識（脳の実験の危険性、人体実験の倫理性等）を出して論証してください。

メモ： ①句読点やスペースは英語のテストではあまり重視されませんが、人格(ルールを守る等)が出る部分なのでAO入試では考慮される可能性があると思います。普段からきちんとした筆記を心がけてください。②強い主張をするときは表現を抑えるとより効果的です。論述では（単なる疑問文ではなく）反語的な疑問文はゼロか最も重要な箇所で１度だけ使うようにしましょう③神経質になる必要はありませんがcan’tのような短縮形は使わないでcannot などとした方が丁寧です。isn’t もis notの方が正式な書き方だとのことです。理由は不明ですが短縮形は口語的だからではないでしょうか。（音読するときは短縮形にして読んで構いません）

解答のポイント

主題：人工冬眠技術研究の火星有人探査への応用が期待されるが非倫理的、非実際的である。

本文該当箇所　第1段落 But for us humans, hibernation has been an unnecessary and impossible goal. Until now. 人類にとって冬眠は不必要で不可能な目標だった。今までは。第2段落 Taking lessons from animal hibernators, scientists are using their tricks for medical therapies and may some day adopt them for space travel. 冬眠する動物から学んで、科学者たちはその技術を内科治療で使用しており、たぶんいつの日か宇宙旅行にその技術を応用するかもしれない。第7段落But that could be a way off, scientists say, given thermal issues. しかし、倫理問題を考えるとそれは行き過ぎだろうと科学者たちは言っている。第9段落  ”I think it’s probably not doable,” he said. 「恐らく実行不可能だと思います。」と彼は言っている。

各段落の要旨

第１段落  冬眠を人間に応用する考えがある。

第2段落  医療だけでなく 宇宙旅行への応用が考えられている。

第3段落  遠い将来宇宙飛行士に応用する。冬眠中の骨・筋肉喪失の予防研究が進んでいる。

第4段落  資金集めの運動も進んでいる。

第5段落  NASAも研究準備を開始した。冬眠の応用により水・食料を節約でき、心理的負担も軽減できる。双子を宇宙ステーションと地球で1年間比較し、長期宇宙旅行における人体保護の為の資料にする。

第6段落  冬眠（超低体温や長期冬眠）のメカニズムを研究し人間に応用する。

第7段落  エネルギー制御をつかさどる脳を抑制すると体温が下がることがブタの実験で分かっているが、人体実験は倫理的に問題がある。

第8段落  冬眠用の生理的メカニズムを人間は持たないので不可能だと冬眠の専門家は言っている。（冬眠する動物は体内で排泄物を再利用し長期冬眠しても筋肉や骨に損傷は出ないが、無重力状態で数か月過ごした宇宙飛行士は地球帰還後歩くのもままならなくなるので宇宙ステーションでは毎日運動しなくてはならない。従って長期冬眠は人体に非常に悪い）

第9段落  冬眠する動物は低温に適応できる体に進化しているが、冬眠しない人間の体は（低体温で短期生存は可能でも）超低温長期の冬眠で機能することは不可能だ。

問１配布プリント参照

問２  誘発された治療用低体温とクマのような動物が経験する冬眠の違いを説明してください。答えを自分の言葉で英語で答案用紙の該当箇所に書いてください。

考え方  本文該当箇所を人工と自然の違いおよび本文の主題を意識して対比させる。期間など具体的な数字を示す。治療用技術と火星への有人飛行への応用技術とを混ぜないように気を付ける。この記事を読んでいない人からこの質問をされたときにどう説明するか考えてみる。

本文該当箇所  Some physicians are employing therapeutic hypothermia－a lowering of the body temperature by a few degrees to induce deep sleep for several day at a time―to help treat patients with brain injuries or conditions such as epilepsy.  内科医の中には、脳にけがをした患者やの癲癇発作のような状態の治療を助けるために治療的低体温（一度に数日間深い眠りを引き起こすために体温を数度下げる）を使用する者もいる。Lowering their body temperature by only a few degrees, they curl up for months without urinating or defecating. Because bears recycle the nitrogen from their waste products, going for months without moving doesn’t seem to affect their bones or muscles. ほんの数度体温を下げることにより、クマたちは排尿排便なしで数か月眠る。クマは老廃物から窒素を再利用するので動かずに何か月も過ごしても骨や筋肉に影響はないらしい。

解答のポイント例 Induced therapeutic hypothermia is an artificial state of low body temperature for medical treatment which causes patients to have a deep sleep for several days while hibernation experienced by animals like bears is a natural system for adaptation to winter months. Hibernators have evolved the body systems that function even after sleeping for several months straight without moving and eating. Bears, for instance, can avoid bone and muscle damage by means of recycling nitrogen from the waste products kept inside their body during hibernation, which is an unattainable trick for non-hibernators including human beings.

問３  マテオ・セッリがしたい研究に健康な人々がボランティア参加するのを政府が許可するのは倫理的だと思いますか。答えを自分の言葉で英語で答案用紙の該当箇所に書いてください。

考え方  マテオ・セッリがしたい研究が何かをまず確認する。セッリの研究は脳を操作して低体温状態を作る実験でブタで行った実験を人間に試すものだ。科学者全般は事故の危険性から実験は非倫理的だと考えている。また本文の主題を考慮すると長期有人宇宙飛行用冬眠技術が実験の目的になるが、冬眠の専門家が冬眠は生理的に人間に不可能だと言っているので、不要な技術の実験にボランティアをさらすことになる。ボランティアやアルバイトを使った新薬などの人体実験は実際に行われているが事故がないわけではない。また、権力による志願への圧力やボランティアの知識不足（実験内容を本当に理解しているのは科学者本人のみ）の問題もある。尚、スペースX計画で2000年代前半の火星植民地化を目指している実業家のイーロン・マスクはCNNのインタビューで、自分が死んでも計画の続行が可能であることが確信できれば最初の火星有人探査に自分で行くと述べている。（https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pPlYpbSMFU&index=25&list=PLGcd4yCVZ_VJX3wmV-E0wn7AR5km70_q2）また、彼の最終目標は太陽の爆発前に人類が太陽系を抜けだせるようにすることである。（The Believer : Andrew Corsello, GQ, The Best American Science and Nature Writing 2010）

本文該当箇所  第7段落 Scientists in Italy have started a clinical trial to lower a pig’s temperature by inhibiting a part of the brain that controls energy levels, in effect inducing hypothermia; inhibiting this region of the brain “seems to work the same way in several different species,” said Matteo Cerri, an assistant professor of physiology at the University of Bologna, who is leading the work. “There is some wishful thinking that the same areas of the brain could work across all mammals.” Cerri and other researchers hope to apply some of these new medical approaches to healthy human volunteers. But that could be a way off, scientists say, given the moral issues. What if something goes wrong? It’s an ethical gulf that perhaps is just as great as the challenge of sending a rocket to Mars.  イタリアの科学者たちはエネルギーレベルを制御する脳の一部を抑制することによってブタの体温を下げ、事実上低体温を誘発する臨床実験を開始した。ボローニャ大学生理学部助教授のマテオ・セッリは「この脳の部位の抑制はいくつかの異なる種で同じように働くようです。脳の同じ部位がすべての哺乳類全般で働くという希望的観測が幾分あります。」セッリと他の研究者たちはこれらの新しい医療方法のいくらかを健康な人間のボランティアに応用できたらと思っている。しかし、倫理問題を考えるとそれは行き過ぎだろうと科学者たちは言っている。何か間違いが起こったらどうするのか？火星にロケットを送る挑戦と同じくらい大きな倫理の深淵だ。第9段落 ”I think it’s probably not doable,” he said.  「おそらく実行不可能だと思います。」と彼は言っている。We can lower body temperature and survive that for a short period of time, it’s unlikely we can allow all of our systems to go to a much lower temperature and continue to function.” 体温を下げて短期間生存することは可能ですが、体のシステム全体をずっと低温にして機能し続けさせられるという事はあり得なさそうです。」

解答のポイント例  Cerri wants to see if the method of inducing hyperthermia by meddling with a part of the brain works on humans based on the idea that what works on pigs could work humans too. Scientists shun the idea because it is obviously morally wrong, implying the possibility of some accidents, which is likely because human brain is much more complex than pig’s and energy-control is vital to life. Even if it is not intrusive, the experiment may disrupt not only the tested region but also the whole brain. In the sense that the brain is a delicate organ, even the tested pig might have been suffering from some damage that is undetectable in the research environment. At the same time, given that the trials are made with a view to applying the skills to astronauts sent to Mars and that the researcher of bear hibernation methodically denies feasibility of human hibernation, there is little rationale for the test.

If the government permits such technology to be applied to volunteers, something foul can be involved in the process. Living-body test is a controversial area of the development of technology torn between progress of human species and morality, and there have been accidents including fatal ones. Moreover, it is usually impossible for volunteers to clearly understand the risk of the test unless they are the researchers who devised the experiment. It is also possible that the people who are tested are not actually volunteers but those who have had to go out considering their position or something else like fame.

It is true that there are people who genuinely want to try new things. Even if they totally understand the risk, they still do it. In this respect, chances are that Cerri and his associates will experiment on themselves before the Italian government notices it. Elon Musk, who is leading Space X program to send humans to Mars in some decades and whose final goal is to help release future humans from the solar system before the sun bursts, said in an interview that he would volunteer to be the first astronaut to land on Mars if conditions allow him to. Curiosity, sense of mission, or belief, which are somewhat like natural elements, make the authority powerless and ethics meaningless.