It is hardly surprising that clothing manufacturers(生产商) follow certain uniform standards for different features of clothes. What seems strange, however, is that the standard used for women is the opposite of the one for men. Take a look at the way your clothes button. Men's clothes tend to button from the right, and women's from the left. Considering most of the world's population—men and women—are right-handed, the men's standard would appear to make more sense（更有道理） for women. So why do women's clothes button from the left?

    History really seems to matter here. Buttons first appeared only on the clothes of the rich in the 17th century, when rich women were dressed by servants. For the mostly right-handed servants, having women's shirts button from the left would be easier. On the other hand, having men's shirts button from the right made sense, too. Most men dressed themselves, and a sword（剑） drawn from the left with the right hand would be less likely to get caught in the shirt.

    Today women are seldom dressed by servants, but buttoning from the left is still the standard for them. Is it interesting? Actually, a standard, once it is set, resists change. At a time when all women's shirts buttoned from the left, it would have been risky for any single manufacturer to offer women's shirts that buttoned from the right. After all, women had grown so used to shirts which buttoned from the left and would have to develop new habits and skills to switch. Besides, some women might have found it socially awkward to appear in public wearing shirts that buttoned from the right, since anyone who noticed that would believe they were wearing men's shirts.

    In the rush to get to school, you drop a piece of toast on the floor. Do you throw it away or decide it's still OK to eat? If you're like most people, you eat it. Maybe you follow the “5-second rule”, which says foods are safe to eat if you pick them up within 5 seconds after dropping them. But you might want to think again. Scientists now say that 5 seconds is all it takes for foods to become polluted with enough bacteria to make you sick.

    Bacteria can cause many kinds of illnesses. Some kinds of bacteria can grow on food. If you eat foods on which these bacteria are growing, you can become sick.

    One of these food-borne bacteria is Salmonella. It makes 1.4 million people sick every year. Salmonella is often found in raw eggs and chicken. Cooking kills these bacteria, which is why it is so important to cook eggs, chicken, and other foods thoroughly.

    But how long does it take these bacteria to pollute food? A team of scientists in South Carolina did an experiment. First, they placed an amount of Salmonella on three surfaces: wood, tile, and carpet. They placed a piece of bread and a piece of sausage on each surface for 5, 30, or 60 seconds. After just 5 seconds, both the bread and the sausage picked up enough bacteria to make you sick.

    So, forget the 5-second rule. If your toast drops on the floor, throw it away and get another piece of clean toast. And next time, be careful not to drop it!

    The Internet has opened up a whole new on-line world for us to meet, chat and go where we've never been before.

    But just as in face-to-face communication, there are some basic rules of behavior that should be followed when online. The basic rule is simple: treat others in the same way you would want to be treated. Imagine how you'd feel if you were in the other person's shoes.

    For anything you're about to send: ask yourself, "Would I say this to the person's face?" If the answer is no, rewrite and reread. Repeat the process till you feel sure that you'd feel comfortable saying the words to the person's face.

    If someone in the chat room is rude to you, your instinct is to fire back in the same manner. But try not to do so. You should either ignore the person, or use your chat software to block their messages. If it was caused by a disagreement with another member, try to fix the situation by politely discussing it. Remember to respect the beliefs and opinions of others in the chat room.

    Everyone was new to the network once. Offer advice when asked by newcomers, as they may not be sure what to do or how to communicate．When someone makes a mistake whether it's a stupid question or an unnecessarily long answer, be kind about it. If it's a small mistake, you may not need to say anything. Even if you feel strongly about it, think twice before saying anything. Having good manners yourself doesn't give you license to correct everyone else.

    If you do decide to tell someone about a mistake, point it out politely. At the same time, if you find you are wrong, be sure to correct yourself and apologize to those that you have offended.

    It is not polite to ask others personal questions such as their age, sex, and marital status. Unless you know the person very well, and you are both comfortable with sharing personal information, don't ask such questions.

    From roller coasters to adventure tours performances to experiments, there are plenty of exciting attractions in the UK. Here is our pick of the best attractions that children can visit.

    The Natural History Museum

Why go: This really is the grandfather of all London museums—the beauty of the building and the amazing exhibits. Look out for the whale skeleton(骨架) occupying the entry hall, but don't miss the largest piece of gold (or a model of it) in the minerals gallery. You can easily spend a day here—tasty steaks, sandwiches and pizzas. Try to avoid weekends, because the crowds are larger

    Best for: Children aged 5 and over. If time is limited, families should go quickly and directly towards the dinosaur gallery, because it's really wonderful.

    Details: Entry is free, although there is a charge for some temporary exhibitions

    Legoland

    Why go: Some 80 million Lego bricks have gone into the creation of this colourful park. There are thrilling rides and countless ways to spend money in shops. Yes, the queues can be long (unless you pay extra for the queue-jumping equipment, which is useful though it does not cover all rides)

    Best for: Legoland is aimed at children under10s, with pre-schoolers particularly well catered for in Duplo Valley

    Details: ￡32 per person; under 3s go free. 25 per cent discount for booking online more than seven days in advance.

Warner Bros. Studio Tour London —The Making of Harry Potter

    Why go: You've read the books, you've watched the films, but no Harry Potter fan will want to miss the chance to go behind the scenes at the film studios where all eight of the movies were made. Sharing the secrets behind the most successful film series of all time and yet still managing to keep the sense of magic alive, this studio tour gives visitors access to two locations filled with original sets and costumes

    Best for: Children aged 7 and over, and anyone with an interest in filmmaking

    Details: ￡39 adults; ￡31 children; under 4s go free

    For several decades, there has been an organized campaign intended to produce distrust in science, funded by those whose interests are threatened by the findings of modern science. In response, scientists have tended to stress the success of science. After all, scientists have been right about most things, from the structure of the universe to the relativity of time and space.

    Stressing successes isn't wrong, but for many people it's not persuasive. An alternative answer to the question "Why trust science?" is that scientists use the so-called scientific method. But what is called the scientific method isn't what scientists actually do. Science is dynamic: new methods get invented; old ones get abandoned; and at any particular point, scientists can be found doing many different things. False theories sometimes lead to true results, so even if an experiment works, it doesn't prove that the theory it was designed to test is true.

    If there is no specific scientific method, then what is the basis for trust in science? The answer is the methods by which those claims are evaluated. A scientific claim is never accepted as true until it has gone through a long process of examination by fellow scientists. Scientists draft the initial version of a paper and then send it to colleagues for suggestions. Until this point, scientific feedback is typically fairly friendly. But the next step is different: the revised paper is submitted to a scientific journal, where things get a whole lot tougher. Editors deliberately send scientific papers to people who are not friends or colleagues of the authors, and the job of the reviewer is to find errors or other faults. We call this process "peer review" because the reviewers are scientific peers—experts in the same field—but they act in the role of a superior who has both the right and the responsibility to find fault. It is only after the reviewers and the editor are satisfied that any problems have been fixed that the paper will be printed in the journal and enters the body of "science."

    Some people argue that we should not trust science because scientists are "always changing their minds." While examples of truly settled science being overturned are far fewer than is sometimes claimed, they do exist. But the beauty of this scientific process is that science produces both creativity and stability. New observations, ideas, explanations and attempts to combine competing claims introduce creativity; transformative questioning leads to collective decisions and the stability of scientific knowledge. Scientists do change their minds in the face of new evidence, but this is a strength of science, not a weakness.

    Not many years ago, a wealthy and rather strange old man named Johnson lived alone in a village in the south of England. He had made a lot of money in trading with foreign countries. When he was seventy – five, he gave $ 60,000 to the village school to buy land and equipment for a children's ground.

    As a result of his kindness, he became famous. Many people came to visit him. Among them was a newspaperman. During their talk, Johnson remarked that he was seventy-five and expected to live to be hundred. The newspaperman asked him how he managed to be healthy at seventy-five. Johnson had a sense of humor. He liked whisky and drank some each day. "I have an injection (注射) in my neck each evening," he told the newspaperman, thinking of his evening glass of whisky.

    The newspaperman did not understand what Johnson meant. In his newspaper he reported that Johnson was seventy-five and had daily injection in his neck. Within a week Johnson received thousands of letters from all over Britain, asking him for the secret of his daily injection.