It is a tall tale（夸张的故事）that terrifies most young children. Swallow a piece of chewing gum and it will remain in your body for seven years before it is digested. An even worse tale is that swallowed（吞） gum can wrap itself around your heart.

    But what does happen if you should accidentally eat a stick of gum? Chewing gum is made out of gum base, sweeteners, coloring and flavoring. The gum base is pretty indigestible(难消化的)—it is a mixture of different ingredients (成分) that our body can't absorb.

    Most of the time, your stomach really cannot break down the gum the way it would break down other foods. However, your digestive system has another way to deal with things you swallow. After all, we eat lots of things that we are unable to fully digest. They keep moving along until they make it all the way through the gut (肠子) and come out at the other end one or two days later.

    The saliva (唾液) in our mouths will make an attempt at digesting chewing gum as soon as we put it in our mouths. It might get through the shell（壳） but many of gum's base ingredients are indigestible. It's then down to our stomach muscles—which contract(收缩) and relax, much like the way an earthworm moves—to slowly force the things that we swallow through our systems.

    Swallowing a huge piece of gum or swallowing many small pieces of gum in a short time can cause a blockage within the digestive system, most often in children, who have a thinner digestive tube than adults—but this is extremely rare.

    Hold your smartphone, smile at the front camera, and click! You get a selfie. There is no doubt that this photo is yours. But if a monkey takes a selfie, does the camera owner have the right to decide how to use it?

    Recently, this question has caused a problem between Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization, and British wildlife photographer David J. Slater.

    In 2011, Slater was visiting a park in Indonesia when a macaque(猕猴) got hold of one of his cameras. “They were quite naughty, jumping all over my equipment,” Slater told The Telegraph, “and it looked like they were already posing for the  camera when one hit the button.” The result was hundreds of monkey selfies. The best of images was a female macaque grinning toothily into the lens.

    This week, the grinning monkey selfie returned to the news when Wikimedia refused Slater's request to take the photos down from Wikimedia Commons, a website that is run by the organization and offers free images.   5

According to Wikimedia, anyone who downloads the monkey selfie, or any of the millions of images on the site, can “copy and use any works here freely as long as they follow what the author says.” The question that arose here was whether Slater, who had not held the camera, set up the shot, or pressed the shutter(快门) button, could be considered the photographer of the monkey selfie. Wikimedia's position on this was clear: as the work of a non-human animal, this photo has no human author who owns the copyright.”

    Only authors of creative works, like a piece of writing or a song, own copyrights. In terms of photos, US copyright law says whoever pushes the button on the camera owns the copyright to the image produced, which means that if tourists ask you to take a photo of them, and you happen to hit the shutter button at the exact moment that Justin Bieber, a Canadian singer, made faces behind them. You, as the photographer, would have the photo's copyright and sell it. The tourists, who own the camera on which the photo was taken and asked you to take the photo don't get the right to use it without you allowing them to. All this has been complicated by the appearance of surveillance cameras(监控摄像头), smart phones, and large-scale photography projects for which assistants often press the shutter button to produce works whose copyrights belong to their boss.

    Slater seems to be thinking along these lines. He says that buying the cameras, spending thousands of pounds to transport himself to Indonesia, and allowing the monkeys to “steal” his cameras makes him the author of the image, regardless of who pushed the button. “In law, if I have an assistant then I still own the copyright,” he told the “Today” Show. “I believe in this case, the monkey was my assistant.”

    If that seems unfair, think about this. If a person left her laptop in a café, and a poet picked it up, opened up a word-processing program, and typed out a poem which turned out to be the best poem of this generation, could she ask for much more than her laptop back?

When bicycle-sharing company oBike pulled out of Singapore abruptly last year, it left the city with unattended bicycles everywhere. Myanmar businessman Mike Than Tun Win saw the perfect opportunity to turn trash (垃圾) into treasure. "What if these bicycles could be distributed to poor students in villages so they can cycle to school? " he thought.

Mr Than, 33, grew up in Mandalay, where he used to walk to school as a student. While traveling through rural (乡村的) areas in Myanmar over the last few years he saw things had not changed. Long lines of children in rural villages continue to walk 30 minutes to an hour just to get to school. "I thought if we could just reduce the time they take, they could spend more time studying, gain more knowledge and increase their chances of getting out of poverty (贫困), " he said.

With that, he started a movement called Lesswalk with the intention of buying bicycles from bike-sharing firms oBike and ofo—which have stopped operations in Singapore — and shipping them to Yangon. He would renew the bicycles before distributing them to teenagers and families living in rural villages in Myanmar, beginning with villages in Mandalay and Sagaing areas.

Over the last three months, the businessman has bought 10, 000 bicycles in Singapore and Malaysia. He paid for 5, 000 of the bicycles out of his own pocket, with other sponsors paying for the rest.

Mr Than plans to modify (修改) the bicycles so that they can better suit the needs of the children in villages. Most of the time they ride around with their little brothers and sisters. "I'm planning to add an extra seat at the back so that they can go to school together," he said. He also plans to remove the digital locks and give each a new one that works better in villages.

Including the cost of shipping, modification and distribution, Mr Than thinks each bicycle might cost him around US $35 to US $40. "I might have to spend more money, but it is better that these bicycles are going to help some people rather than going to waste," he said.

Earlier this year Rodney Smith Jr. made headlines when he drove eight hours from his home in Huntsville. Alabama, to cut the lawn for an elderly soldier in North Carolina who couldn't find anyone to help him with his yard work.

That wasn't the first time the twenty-nine-year-old Bermuda native had gained such attention. To do his good deeds, Rodney often finds leads for those in need through social media.

Back to one August afternoon in 2015, Rodney Smith Jr. was driving home. That's when Rodney saw an elderly man struggling to mow his lawn. He would take a couple of shaky steps, using the handle to stabilize himself, pause, then slowly push the mower again. Rodney decided to help. Mr. Brown thanked him greatly, and Rodney went home feeling satisfied.

Sitting at his computer to do his homework, Rodney couldn't get Mr. Brown out of his mind. There must be many Mr. Browns out there. He went online and posted that he would mow lawns for free for senior citizens. Messages flooded in.

One day a cancer-battling woman said she wasn't having a good day. Rodney decided to do more than mowing lawns. After he finished mowing, he knocked on her door. "You're going to win this fight, Madam", he said. Then he asked folks to pray for her on social media.

Word of Rodney's mission spread. A grandmother in Ohio said he'd encouraged her 12-year-old grandson to mow lawns. He got a letter from a seven-year-old boy in Kansas. "Mr. Rodney, I would like to be a part of your program, and I'll make you proud," he wrote.

That gave Rodney an idea. In 2017, he decided to establish a programme Raising Men Lawn Care Service to make a national movement for young people. The kids learn the joy of giving back.

Yard work seems like a small, simple thing, but taking care of the lawn means a lot to the people they do it for. "When we mow their yards for free, they can use the money for healthcare and food etc. It means more than you would think," Rodney said.

注意：词数100左右

Spending all day glued to your smartphone probably isn't doing you any favors. Too much phone use has been linked with a range of concems, including sleep issues, joint pain and even relationship problems. But if it's radiation you're worried about, experts say you don't have to ditch your phone. 

"There's no risk of anything hazardous or dangerous with radiation from cellphones, "said Gayle Woloschak, an associate dean and professor of radiology at the Northwesterm Univerity Feinberg School of Medicine. As with all cellphones, along with Wi-Fi networks, radio stations, remote controls and GPS, smartphones do send out radiation, said Emily Caffrey, an assistant professor of health physics at the University of Alabama at Birningham. They use invisible energy waves to transmit voices, texts, photos and emails to nearby cell towers, which can carry them to almost anywhere in the world. But nearly three decades of scientific research has not linked such exposures to medical issues like cancer, health authorities including the Food and Drug Administration say. Here's what we know. 

"Radiation"describes many types of energy, some of which do carry risks, explained Dr. Howard Fine, director of the Brain Tumor Center at NewYork —Presbyterian Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York City, "It is often sent out from radioactive substances", Atomic bombs, or, to a far lesser degree, X-ray machines, send out energy called ionizing radiation that in high enough or frequent enough amount can damage DNA and cause cancer, Dr. Fine said. 

But smartphone energy falls into a category called non-ionizing radiation, Dr. Caffrey said, which isn't powerful enough to cause this damage. "A lot of people think‘radiation is radiation, 'but it's not all the same, "Dr. Woloschak said. "There's no DNA damage seen from cellphone use. "

Most experts and health authorities like the F. D. A. and World Health Organization agree that there's no evidence that smartphone radiation causes health problems. Still, several studies over the years have made headlines for suggesting their links to brain diseases. Many of these studies have since been proved to be false, Dr. Fine said, including those focused on fifth-generation.