[2021] Trường THPT Trần Quý Cáp Lần 2 - Đề thi thử THPT QG năm 2021 môn Tiếng Anh

I read the contract again and again

The life

After a lot of difficulty, he

When she

He attempted to

I'm not keen on

His comments

I would sooner you

As the drug took

I've got a very high opinion

He went

I enjoyed seeing that film. It was rather sad,

There are courts for tennis and badminton and the

It's high time you let your

- "I think we should use public transport to protect the environment."

- “

Son: "Your shirt is terrific. The colour quite suits you." - Huong:"

Is organic food safer and more (26)

Many farmers and consumers believe it is. They think agricultural chemicals can cause serious illnesses like cancer, but there isn't much evidence proving this is true. However, recent studies have shown that eating organically-grown produce (27 your chances of developing heart disease. Many doctors think it's more important to stop dangerous bacteria from contaminating foods. These bacteria can contaminate both organic and non-organic fruit and vegetables, and doctors recommend washing them carefully before eating them. Meat, fish and chicken can also become contaminated, so washing your hands before handling these foods is also very important. Many doctors also believe we should reduce the amount of sugar in our diets, and there is a lot of evidence to support this idea. They recommend carefully checking the list of ingredients on processed food and drinks for all the words that really mean sugar, like glucose, sucrose and fructose. And they remind us that the aim of most big food companies is (28 lots of money, even if they damage our health while doing so. This means processed foods that are called "organic" can also be very (29 if they contain lots of sugar.

Most people agree that naturally grown food tastes better. Is tastier food worth the extra money? That's a matter of opinion. Whether organic food is healthier or not is still not clear, (30 more research is needed. However, consumers of organic food often say "better safe than sorry" when it comes to what we eat.

(26)......................

Is organic food safer and more (26)

Many farmers and consumers believe it is. They think agricultural chemicals can cause serious illnesses like cancer, but there isn't much evidence proving this is true. However, recent studies have shown that eating organically-grown produce (27 your chances of developing heart disease. Many doctors think it's more important to stop dangerous bacteria from contaminating foods. These bacteria can contaminate both organic and non-organic fruit and vegetables, and doctors recommend washing them carefully before eating them. Meat, fish and chicken can also become contaminated, so washing your hands before handling these foods is also very important. Many doctors also believe we should reduce the amount of sugar in our diets, and there is a lot of evidence to support this idea. They recommend carefully checking the list of ingredients on processed food and drinks for all the words that really mean sugar, like glucose, sucrose and fructose. And they remind us that the aim of most big food companies is (28 lots of money, even if they damage our health while doing so. This means processed foods that are called "organic" can also be very (29 if they contain lots of sugar.

Most people agree that naturally grown food tastes better. Is tastier food worth the extra money? That's a matter of opinion. Whether organic food is healthier or not is still not clear, (30 more research is needed. However, consumers of organic food often say "better safe than sorry" when it comes to what we eat.

(27)......................

Is organic food safer and more (26)

Many farmers and consumers believe it is. They think agricultural chemicals can cause serious illnesses like cancer, but there isn't much evidence proving this is true. However, recent studies have shown that eating organically-grown produce (27 your chances of developing heart disease. Many doctors think it's more important to stop dangerous bacteria from contaminating foods. These bacteria can contaminate both organic and non-organic fruit and vegetables, and doctors recommend washing them carefully before eating them. Meat, fish and chicken can also become contaminated, so washing your hands before handling these foods is also very important. Many doctors also believe we should reduce the amount of sugar in our diets, and there is a lot of evidence to support this idea. They recommend carefully checking the list of ingredients on processed food and drinks for all the words that really mean sugar, like glucose, sucrose and fructose. And they remind us that the aim of most big food companies is (28 lots of money, even if they damage our health while doing so. This means processed foods that are called "organic" can also be very (29 if they contain lots of sugar.

Most people agree that naturally grown food tastes better. Is tastier food worth the extra money? That's a matter of opinion. Whether organic food is healthier or not is still not clear, (30 more research is needed. However, consumers of organic food often say "better safe than sorry" when it comes to what we eat.

(28)......................

Is organic food safer and more (26)

Many farmers and consumers believe it is. They think agricultural chemicals can cause serious illnesses like cancer, but there isn't much evidence proving this is true. However, recent studies have shown that eating organically-grown produce (27 your chances of developing heart disease. Many doctors think it's more important to stop dangerous bacteria from contaminating foods. These bacteria can contaminate both organic and non-organic fruit and vegetables, and doctors recommend washing them carefully before eating them. Meat, fish and chicken can also become contaminated, so washing your hands before handling these foods is also very important. Many doctors also believe we should reduce the amount of sugar in our diets, and there is a lot of evidence to support this idea. They recommend carefully checking the list of ingredients on processed food and drinks for all the words that really mean sugar, like glucose, sucrose and fructose. And they remind us that the aim of most big food companies is (28 lots of money, even if they damage our health while doing so. This means processed foods that are called "organic" can also be very (29 if they contain lots of sugar.

Most people agree that naturally grown food tastes better. Is tastier food worth the extra money? That's a matter of opinion. Whether organic food is healthier or not is still not clear, (30 more research is needed. However, consumers of organic food often say "better safe than sorry" when it comes to what we eat.

(29).....................

Is organic food safer and more (26)

Many farmers and consumers believe it is. They think agricultural chemicals can cause serious illnesses like cancer, but there isn't much evidence proving this is true. However, recent studies have shown that eating organically-grown produce (27 your chances of developing heart disease. Many doctors think it's more important to stop dangerous bacteria from contaminating foods. These bacteria can contaminate both organic and non-organic fruit and vegetables, and doctors recommend washing them carefully before eating them. Meat, fish and chicken can also become contaminated, so washing your hands before handling these foods is also very important. Many doctors also believe we should reduce the amount of sugar in our diets, and there is a lot of evidence to support this idea. They recommend carefully checking the list of ingredients on processed food and drinks for all the words that really mean sugar, like glucose, sucrose and fructose. And they remind us that the aim of most big food companies is (28 lots of money, even if they damage our health while doing so. This means processed foods that are called "organic" can also be very (29 if they contain lots of sugar.

Most people agree that naturally grown food tastes better. Is tastier food worth the extra money? That's a matter of opinion. Whether organic food is healthier or not is still not clear, (30 more research is needed. However, consumers of organic food often say "better safe than sorry" when it comes to what we eat.

(30)........................

We're always being urged to stay safe online. But in an era where the internet is part of our everyday lives - for work, fun, study, shopping, even managing finances - it's not always easy to spot the dangers. Web safety expert, Amanda Knox, explores some of the issues lurking in cyberspace.

Her first piece of advice is to install software and a firewall to protect your computer from viruses, hackers and criminals who want to steal your data or financial information. "Think of these as your first line of defense," says Amanda.

So much for protecting yourself against intruders, but what about other problems? Say you've accidentally deleted an important file or you've been at the mercy of a natural disaster. Katy Marsh runs an online photography business from home and when a fire destroyed part of her house it could easily have spelled ruin for her business too. "Luckily I keep a regular back-up of my data so it wasn't a catastrophe."

Whilst most of us are aware of the need to protect our computers, it seems we're more lax when it comes to looking out for ourselves, at least according to a recent web awareness survey. Web safety specialists say better personal awareness is needed and this is due in part to the rise of 'Social Networking' sites like 'Bebo', 'MySpace' and 'Facebook', which allow us to connect with people around the world with similar interests and professional backgrounds.

This brings us to other potential pitfalls. Are the people you meet online who they really claim to be? Can you be sure the person you're chatting with is in fact a 22-year-old Maths undergraduate from London and not someone merely masquerading as a student to win your trust?

When networking and joining online communities it's better to be cautious about the amount of personal information you share. For example, it isn't always necessary to use your real name as a username when registering for a service. You could instead use a pseudonym, or a name that doesn't give away your real identity to other users. And is it really important to tell the world details about your school, college or any local clubs you're a member of?

If you do experience problems from another user be prepared to report them for misusing the service. You'll be doing other users a favour too. And if all else fails, check to see if it is easy to delete your account and leave the service if you choose to and that you have the option to delete all your details.

A general rule of thumb is not to post any information about yourself that you would not be happy for the world to know - not just now but in years to come. This includes photographs of yourself, particularly embarrassing shots of you at that party which you may later regret! It's not always easy to remove information after it's been posted so you - not to mention your future employer - may have an unpleasant surprise a few years down the line.

The effect of the fire was

We're always being urged to stay safe online. But in an era where the internet is part of our everyday lives - for work, fun, study, shopping, even managing finances - it's not always easy to spot the dangers. Web safety expert, Amanda Knox, explores some of the issues lurking in cyberspace.

Her first piece of advice is to install software and a firewall to protect your computer from viruses, hackers and criminals who want to steal your data or financial information. "Think of these as your first line of defense," says Amanda.

So much for protecting yourself against intruders, but what about other problems? Say you've accidentally deleted an important file or you've been at the mercy of a natural disaster. Katy Marsh runs an online photography business from home and when a fire destroyed part of her house it could easily have spelled ruin for her business too. "Luckily I keep a regular back-up of my data so it wasn't a catastrophe."

Whilst most of us are aware of the need to protect our computers, it seems we're more lax when it comes to looking out for ourselves, at least according to a recent web awareness survey. Web safety specialists say better personal awareness is needed and this is due in part to the rise of 'Social Networking' sites like 'Bebo', 'MySpace' and 'Facebook', which allow us to connect with people around the world with similar interests and professional backgrounds.

This brings us to other potential pitfalls. Are the people you meet online who they really claim to be? Can you be sure the person you're chatting with is in fact a 22-year-old Maths undergraduate from London and not someone merely masquerading as a student to win your trust?

When networking and joining online communities it's better to be cautious about the amount of personal information you share. For example, it isn't always necessary to use your real name as a username when registering for a service. You could instead use a pseudonym, or a name that doesn't give away your real identity to other users. And is it really important to tell the world details about your school, college or any local clubs you're a member of?

If you do experience problems from another user be prepared to report them for misusing the service. You'll be doing other users a favour too. And if all else fails, check to see if it is easy to delete your account and leave the service if you choose to and that you have the option to delete all your details.

A general rule of thumb is not to post any information about yourself that you would not be happy for the world to know - not just now but in years to come. This includes photographs of yourself, particularly embarrassing shots of you at that party which you may later regret! It's not always easy to remove information after it's been posted so you - not to mention your future employer - may have an unpleasant surprise a few years down the line.

According to the web awareness survey, our attitude to our personal safety is rather

We're always being urged to stay safe online. But in an era where the internet is part of our everyday lives - for work, fun, study, shopping, even managing finances - it's not always easy to spot the dangers. Web safety expert, Amanda Knox, explores some of the issues lurking in cyberspace.

Her first piece of advice is to install software and a firewall to protect your computer from viruses, hackers and criminals who want to steal your data or financial information. "Think of these as your first line of defense," says Amanda.

So much for protecting yourself against intruders, but what about other problems? Say you've accidentally deleted an important file or you've been at the mercy of a natural disaster. Katy Marsh runs an online photography business from home and when a fire destroyed part of her house it could easily have spelled ruin for her business too. "Luckily I keep a regular back-up of my data so it wasn't a catastrophe."

Whilst most of us are aware of the need to protect our computers, it seems we're more lax when it comes to looking out for ourselves, at least according to a recent web awareness survey. Web safety specialists say better personal awareness is needed and this is due in part to the rise of 'Social Networking' sites like 'Bebo', 'MySpace' and 'Facebook', which allow us to connect with people around the world with similar interests and professional backgrounds.

This brings us to other potential pitfalls. Are the people you meet online who they really claim to be? Can you be sure the person you're chatting with is in fact a 22-year-old Maths undergraduate from London and not someone merely masquerading as a student to win your trust?

When networking and joining online communities it's better to be cautious about the amount of personal information you share. For example, it isn't always necessary to use your real name as a username when registering for a service. You could instead use a pseudonym, or a name that doesn't give away your real identity to other users. And is it really important to tell the world details about your school, college or any local clubs you're a member of?

If you do experience problems from another user be prepared to report them for misusing the service. You'll be doing other users a favour too. And if all else fails, check to see if it is easy to delete your account and leave the service if you choose to and that you have the option to delete all your details.

A general rule of thumb is not to post any information about yourself that you would not be happy for the world to know - not just now but in years to come. This includes photographs of yourself, particularly embarrassing shots of you at that party which you may later regret! It's not always easy to remove information after it's been posted so you - not to mention your future employer - may have an unpleasant surprise a few years down the line.

In the final paragraph, the writer advises people

TV has transformed politics in the USA by changing the way in which information is _disseminated_, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen's patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television diminished the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen's focus on character rather than issues.

TV has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The _stump speech_, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 3/2 to 2 hours, which characterized nineteenth-century political discourse, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second "sound bite" in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not _that_ standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a snippet of the speech on the news.

In these abbreviated forms, much of what constituted the traditional political discourse of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In snippets, politicians assert but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate medium, speaking through it require a changed political style that was more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a word in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television's pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events, called pseudo-event, designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.

The word "_disseminated_" in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to

TV has transformed politics in the USA by changing the way in which information is _disseminated_, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen's patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television diminished the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen's focus on character rather than issues.

TV has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The _stump speech_, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 3/2 to 2 hours, which characterized nineteenth-century political discourse, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second "sound bite" in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not _that_ standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a snippet of the speech on the news.

In these abbreviated forms, much of what constituted the traditional political discourse of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In snippets, politicians assert but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate medium, speaking through it require a changed political style that was more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a word in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television's pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events, called pseudo-event, designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.

It can be inferred that before the introduction of television, political parties

TV has transformed politics in the USA by changing the way in which information is _disseminated_, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen's patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television diminished the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen's focus on character rather than issues.

TV has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The _stump speech_, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 3/2 to 2 hours, which characterized nineteenth-century political discourse, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second "sound bite" in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not _that_ standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a snippet of the speech on the news.

In these abbreviated forms, much of what constituted the traditional political discourse of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In snippets, politicians assert but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate medium, speaking through it require a changed political style that was more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a word in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television's pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events, called pseudo-event, designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.

The author mentions the "_stump speech_" in paragraph 2 as an example of

TV has transformed politics in the USA by changing the way in which information is _disseminated_, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen's patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television diminished the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen's focus on character rather than issues.

TV has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The _stump speech_, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 3/2 to 2 hours, which characterized nineteenth-century political discourse, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second "sound bite" in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not _that_ standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a snippet of the speech on the news.

In these abbreviated forms, much of what constituted the traditional political discourse of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In snippets, politicians assert but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate medium, speaking through it require a changed political style that was more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a word in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television's pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events, called pseudo-event, designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.

The word "_tha_t" in paragraph 2 refers to

TV has transformed politics in the USA by changing the way in which information is _disseminated_, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen's patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television diminished the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen's focus on character rather than issues.

TV has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The _stump speech_, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 3/2 to 2 hours, which characterized nineteenth-century political discourse, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second "sound bite" in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not _that_ standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a snippet of the speech on the news.

In these abbreviated forms, much of what constituted the traditional political discourse of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In snippets, politicians assert but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate medium, speaking through it require a changed political style that was more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a word in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television's pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events, called pseudo-event, designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.

According to the passage, as compared with televised speeches, traditional political discourse was more successful at

TV has transformed politics in the USA by changing the way in which information is _disseminated_, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen's patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television diminished the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen's focus on character rather than issues.

TV has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The _stump speech_, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 3/2 to 2 hours, which characterized nineteenth-century political discourse, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second "sound bite" in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not _that_ standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a snippet of the speech on the news.

In these abbreviated forms, much of what constituted the traditional political discourse of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In snippets, politicians assert but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate medium, speaking through it require a changed political style that was more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a word in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television's pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events, called pseudo-event, designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.

According to paragraph 5, staged political events are created so that politicians can