第三单元检测（课件PPT）-【艺考一本通】2024高考英语小题量检测

英 语 精简 全面 专业 高效 -‹#›- 第三单元检测 第一部分　一轮单元检测 第三单元检测 -‹#›- 第三单元检测 By now it’s almost common knowledge that spending time in nature is good for you. Areas with more trees tend to be less polluted, so spending time there allows you to breathe easier. Spending time outdoors has been linked with reduced blood pressure and stress and seems to motivate people to exercise more. “So it’ll come as no surprise that there’s research showing that spending time in nature is good. There are dozens of papers showing that.” University of Exeter Medical School researcher Mathew P.White said.“We get this idea-patients are coming to us and they are asking, ‘Doctor, how long should I spend? ’And the doctor is saying,‘I don’t really know.’” -‹#›- 第三单元检测 　So White and his team decided to find out by using data collected from nearly 20,000 people in England through the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey. And their answer? Two hours a week. People who spent at least that much time in nature either all at once or totaled over several shorter visits were more likely to report good health and psychological well-being than those with no nature exposure. 　Remarkably, the two-hour standard applied to men and women, to older and younger folks, to people from different ethnic backgrounds, occupational groups, socioeconomic levels, and so on. Even people with long-term illnesses or disabilities benefited from time spent in nature-as long as it was at least 120 minutes per week. -‹#›- 第三单元检测 　While the findings are based on a vast number of people, White cautions that it’s really just a correlation. Nobody knows why or how nature has this benefit, or even if the findings will stand up to more strict investigation. 　“I want to be really clear about this. This is in very early stages.We’re not saying everybody has to do 120. This is really to start the conversation, saying, what would a threshold look like? What research do we need to take this to t