Doctors say anger can be an extremely harmful emotion, unless you learn how to deal with it. They warn that angry feeling can lead to heart disease, stomach problems, headaches, emotional problems and possibly cancer.

    Anger is a normal emotion that we all feel from time to time. Some people express anger openly in a calm, reasonable way. Others burst with anger, losing control of themselves. But still other people control their anger. They cannot or will not express it.

    For years many doctors thought that controlling one's anger was more dangerous to a person's health than expressing it. They said that when a person is angry, the brain lets out the same hormones that are produced during tense situations. They speed the heart rate, raise blood pressure, and narrow the blood vessels. In general, the person feels excited and ready to act.

    Doctors said that controlling these feelings only makes the feelings continue. And this can lead to many medical problems. Doctors thought a person could prevent these problems by letting the anger out by expressing it freely. But recently some doctors held a different view. They said that people who express anger too often and violently did become, in fact, more and not less angry. They said this, too, can cause medical problems.

    Some doctors say that both controlling and expressing anger can be dangerous. They believe that those who express anger strongly may be more likely to develop heart disease, and they believe that those who keep their anger inside may face a greater danger of high blood pressure.

    Doctors say the solution is learning how to deal with anger. They say the first step is to admit that you are angry and to recognize the real cause of the anger, then decide if the cause is serious enough to get angry about. If it is, they say, “Do not express your anger while angry. Wait until your anger has cooled down and you are able to express yourself calmly and reasonably.”

    Now Glen doesn't like to think what might have happened had he and his best friends, Ray Wightman and Chris Johnson, picked their usual path along a rocky outcrop－the faster route to Johnson s home on Triangle Mountain. They were heading there after school that day－April 14, 1999－to play street hockey in Johnson's driveway. There were other lucky twists, too: not stopping at the shops to get a cola« as they usually did; hearing the strange cry.

    It was 3:30 pm. The three teens were laughing and talking when suddenly they heard a strange cry coming from the ditch(沟渠) across the road. Crossing to take a look, they found an Adidas gym bag sitting deep in the icy water. They climbed down the steep bank and pulled the bag from the water, expecting to find abandoned cats or dogs inside. Instead, the boys found a trembling newborn girl. Wrapped in an old blanket, wearing a thin nightshirt, she was almost blue, her lips shaking from the cold and her crying.

    The boys couldn't have been more astonished. They knew this one needed to get warm and dry, although they didn't know much about babies. Ray dug through his gym bag and wrapped her in a T-shirt. “We didn't know what to do,” said Glen. “I didn't think any of us had really held a baby before.” So the three stood beside the ditch, dumbfounded, taking turns to hold the baby to their chests to keep her warm.

    “We knew it was no use walking up to Ray's house, because his mum was working and no one would be home. We figured we'd have a better chance just staying by the road and flagging down someone.” So they stood there and waited.

    A car drove by and the boys caught the driver's attention, telling her that they had found a baby. The woman then drove off to get help. When the police and ambulance came 20 minutes later, the teens were told the baby was probably two or three hours old and had perhaps been in the ditch for an hour or more. They were also told that they had saved her life and that given 10-20 minutes more in the cold water, she probably would be drowned.

    I was getting ready to go to bed when the phone rang. This could not be good. My mind raced through the list of family members who might need help, but the voice was hardly familiar.

    "Linda, this is Lesley." I didn't know Lesley well. We did occasionally speak with each other, but to say we were friends was not appropriate. I asked what she needed. Perhaps something really awful caused her to reach someone she barely knew. Instead, she asked me, "Do you have room for a turkey? In your freezer?" We had lots of room in our freezer, and in fact, too much. "Sure," I responded, "did your freezer break down?" "Not exactly," Lesley replied, "but I will explain when I arrive."

    Minutes later came a huge freezer truck. Lesley stepped down and explained the lease (租约) of the grocery store her husband serviced had run out and that they had to empty all the freezers that night. Thinking it was a shame to throw away all this good food, they decided to drop off food to anyone she could think of. Noticing our freezer was pretty empty, Lesley asked to fill it up. Our home was their last stop and anything left would have to be put in our freezer. An hour later, everything finished, I asked her, "When will you come back for all this?" Lesley laughed, "We don't want it back. It is yours! Thanks for helping us out!" Then they waved goodbye and drove away.

    "For helping them out?" We opened our freezer door. Inside were all expensive foods we never bought but often longed to try. We were struggling to buy groceries, yet it was not something we shared with anyone. However, our needs were met in an unexpected way by that call.

    Western conservation groups are seeking stricter laws to deal with trade in endangered wildlife, but Dr. Paul Jepson warns that this isn't the best solution. He highlights the case of the Bali starling (八哥). Bringing in tougher laws created unexpected outcomes, which contributed to the bird's extinction in the wild in 2006.

    He said that the traditional law enforcement (执行) approach that outlawed (宣布……非法) ownership of the Bali starling in the 1980s and 1990s increased rather than reduced the demand for wild-caught Bali starlings. The bird has become a popular gift among the rich of Indonesia, who can gain more status by owning one.

    Instead, a case-by-case analysis might be needed. Last year, he said, a bird association set up a network of breeders (饲养者) among the owners of Bali starling on the island of Java. By introducing a "crowd-breeding" model, it transformed the bird into a species whose price and source of supply were publicly known. This lessened the status of keeping such birds and thereby reduced their profitability to black market suppliers.

    Another case was on Nusa Penida, an island southeast of Bali. A Balinese conservation group planned to release starlings on the island. Critics tried to block the plan, saying the island was outside the birds' native zone. Eventually, the Governor of Bali came up with a proposal. The starlings were given to a local temple as a ceremonial offering before they were released. This gave the Bali starling status as a "sacred bird", giving them protection under customary laws. Now the released starlings established a breeding population on Nusa Penida.

    Dr. Jepson commented, "I do not want to criticize the international approach seeking tighter law enforcement, but this case study shows we should not oversimplify how we respond to the problem of the wildlife trade. There is a growing body of evidence that shows more different approaches are sometimes needed to fit with the local social and political realities. We should tailor solutions on more of a case-by-case basis."

Life in the future will be very different from that today. Between then and now many changes will take place (发生), but what will the changes be?

The population is growing fast. There will be many people in the world and most of them will live longer than people now. Computers will be much smaller and more useful, and there will be at least one in every home. And computer studies will be one of the most important subjects at school then. 

People will work fewer hours than they do now and they will have more free time for sports, watching TV and travelling. Travelling will be much easier and cheaper. And more people will go to other countries for holidays. 

Work in the future will be different too. Robots(机器人) can do dangerous and hard work. Because of this, many people will not have enough work to do. This will be a problem.

As online learning becomes more common and a mass of resources are changed to digital form, some people have suggested that public libraries should be shut down and everyone should be given an iPad with an e-reader subscription (订阅). They believe that it will save local cities and towns money, provide more materials and encourage more people to read.

 However, it would be a serious mistake to replace libraries with tablets (平板电脑). First, digital books and resources are related to less learning and more problems than print resources. A study found that people read 20-30% slower on tablets, keep 20% less information, and understand 10% less of what they read. Additionally, staring too long at a screen has been shown to cause more health problems than reading print does. 

Second, it is incredibly narrow-minded to believe that the only service libraries offer is book lending. Libraries have lots of benefits, and many are only available if the library has a physical location. Some of these benefits include acting as a quiet study space, giving people a way to communicate with their neighbors, holding classes on a variety of topics, providing jobs, answering visitor questions, and keeping the community connected. One neighborhood found that, over a third of residents reported feeling more connected to their community after a series of local library instituted community events. Similarly, a survey conducted in 2015 found that nearly two-thirds of American adults feel that closing their local library would have a major effect on their community.

While replacing libraries with tablets may seem like a simple solution, it would encourage people to spend even more time looking at digital screens and end access to many of the benefits of libraries. In many areas, libraries are such an important part of the community network that they could never be replaced by a simple object.