The Search for the Anti-aging Pill: reading answers and analysis
Eating far fewer calories slows ageing in many animals, but few people could keep up such a diet. Scientists are looking for a pill that copies its effects. Monkey studies look promising, and the test drug 2DG shows how blocking glucose processing might slow ageing, though it is too toxic for humans.
The YES / NO / NOT GIVEN statements (28-32) cover the first three paragraphs in order. The classification (33-37) is all in the monkey paragraph. The flow chart (38-40) follows the last paragraph in order.
Answer key and self-check
Type what you wrote and hit mark. Hide the key first if you haven't done the passage yet. Every question number jumps to its explanation.
How to attack this block: Match the strength of each claim. The passage is careful ('suggest', 'could'), so a statement with 'may' can still be YES. One NOT GIVEN adds the word 'diet-related' to conditions the passage only calls common in old age.
Question 28
Answer: NOParagraph 1, first sentence
Has research shown that today's drugs can slow ageing?
no treatment on the market today has been proved to slow human aging
Question says → Passage says
Studies showhas been proved
drugs available todaytreatment on the market today
delay the process of growing oldslow human aging
Why: The statement says it has been shown. The passage says 'no treatment… has been proved'. That's a direct contradiction, so NO.
The trap: The subtitle says scientists are 'seeking a drug able to prolong life', which might suggest some already work. Seeking means not found yet.
Question 29
Answer: YESParagraph 1, last two sentences
Is there scientific evidence that eating less might lengthen human life?
works incredibly well in a broad range of animals, increasing longevity and prolonging good health. Those findings suggest that caloric restriction could delay aging and increase longevity in humans, too.
Question says → Passage says
scientific evidenceThose findings
eating fewer caloriesconsumption of a low-calorie… diet / caloric restriction
may extend human lifecould… increase longevity in humans, too
Why: The animal findings are the evidence, and the writer says they 'suggest' it could work in humans. 'Suggest… could' matches the statement's cautious 'may', so YES.
The trap: Some answer NO or NOT GIVEN because nobody has proved it in humans. But the statement doesn't claim proof. It says 'may', and evidence pointing that way is exactly what the writer describes.
Question 30
Answer: YESParagraph 2, first two sentences
Are few people likely to find a low-calorie diet appealing?
Few mortals could stick to that harsh a regimen, especially for years on end.
Question says → Passage says
Not many peopleFew mortals
find… attractivecould stick to that harsh a regimen
Why: Cutting 30% of your calories for years is called a 'harsh regimen' that few could keep up. A harsh diet that few can stick to is not an attractive one, so YES.
The trap: 'Stick to' is about ability, 'attractive' about appeal, so some choose NOT GIVEN. The writer's word 'harsh', and the whole idea of a pill to replace the diet, show he means people won't want it.
Question 31
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 3, second sentence
Are diseases caused by diet common in older people?
had a reduced incidence of conditions that become increasingly common in old age
Question says → Passage says
common in older peoplebecome increasingly common in old age
Why: The passage says some conditions get more common with age, but never says they are caused by diet. 'Diet-related' is the missing piece, so NOT GIVEN.
The trap: The passage is about diet and lists diabetes and heart disease, which you may know are linked to diet. That's general knowledge, not the writer's claim.
Question 32
Answer: YESParagraph 3, second sentence
Did rats eating freely die younger than rats on a low-calorie diet?
rats fed a low-calorie diet lived longer on average than free-feeding rats
Question says → Passage says
rats who ate what they wantedfree-feeding rats
led shorter lives thanlived longer on average than
Why: If the low-calorie rats lived longer, the free-feeding rats lived shorter lives. Same fact, seen from the other side, so YES.
The trap: The statement turns the comparison round, which makes some people think it's reversed and answer NO. Check it both ways: A lived longer than B means B lived shorter than A.
Classification (restricted / control / neither)
Questions 33-37
How to attack this block: Every sentence describes the caloric-restricted monkeys, so when a statement says 'more' where the passage says 'less', the answer is the control group. The lifespan question is still open, which makes it neither group.
Question 33
Answer: AParagraph 5, third sentence
Which monkeys were less likely to get diabetes?
they have more normal blood glucose levels (pointing to a reduced risk for diabetes
Question says → Passage says
less likely to become diabetica reduced risk for diabetes
Why: 'They' in this sentence are the caloric-restricted animals. Their normal blood sugar means a lower diabetes risk, so A.
The trap: The bracket ends 'which is marked by unusually high blood glucose levels'. That describes diabetes, not either group of monkeys.
Question 34
Answer: BParagraph 5, fourth sentence
Which monkeys had more chronic disease?
rhesus monkeys kept on caloric-restricted diets for an extended time (nearly 15 years) have less chronic disease
Question says → Passage says
experienced more chronic diseasehave less chronic disease
Why: The restricted monkeys have less chronic disease, so the ones with more are those eating normally, the control group. B.
The trap: A is the reflex answer because the sentence is about caloric-restricted monkeys. The statement says 'more', the passage says 'less', so flip to the other group.
Question 35
Answer: CParagraph 5, fifth sentence
Which monkeys have been shown to live longer than average?
They and the other monkeys must be followed still longer, however, to know whether low-calorie intake can increase both average and maximum lifespans in monkeys.
Question says → Passage says
have been shownmust be followed still longer… to know whether
a longer than average life spanincrease both average and maximum lifespans
Why: The researchers don't know yet whether any monkeys live longer. Nothing has been shown for either group, so C.
The trap: A tempts because rats on low-calorie diets did live longer in paragraph 3. That's rats. For monkeys, the result isn't in yet.
Question 36
Answer: AParagraph 5, third sentence
Which monkeys had a lower chance of heart disease?
they have lower blood pressure and triglyceride levels (signifying a decreased likelihood of heart disease)
Question says → Passage says
a reduced chance of heart diseasea decreased likelihood of heart disease
Why: The caloric-restricted monkeys have lower blood pressure and triglycerides, which the passage links to less heart disease. A.
Question 37
Answer: BParagraph 5, first sentence
Which monkeys produced more insulin?
compared with control animals that eat normally, caloric-restricted monkeys have lower body temperatures and levels of the pancreatic hormone insulin
Question says → Passage says
produced greater quantities of insulincompared with control animals… caloric-restricted monkeys have lower… levels of the pancreatic hormone insulin
Why: Restricted monkeys have lower insulin than the controls, so the controls have more. B.
The trap: Same trick as 34: the sentence's subject is the restricted monkeys, but the statement says 'greater', so the answer is the comparison group.
Flow-chart completion (NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS)
Questions 38-40
How to attack this block: The chart follows the final paragraph: what the drug stops cells processing, then the two theories. Theory 1 needs the two-word name of what the ATP machinery gives off. Theory 2 needs what cells put first, not the luxuries they give up.
Question 38
Answer: glucoseParagraph 7, third sentence
What is processed less when a CR mimetic is given?
glucose reaches cells in abundance but the drug prevents most of it from being processed and thus reduces ATP synthesis
Question says → Passage says
less ___ is processedprevents most of it from being processed / interfering with the way cells process glucose
production of ATP is decreasedreduces ATP synthesis
Why: 'It' refers back to glucose. The drug lets glucose in but stops most of it being processed, and that's why ATP falls. One word: 'glucose'.
The trap: 'ATP' is the next box in the flow chart, so it can't go here. 'Food' is too general: food intake isn't reduced with the drug, only glucose processing.
Question 39
Answer: free radicalsParagraph 7, fifth and sixth sentences
What is emitted less, so cells are less damaged?
One possibility relates to the ATP-making machinery's emission of free radicals, which are thought to contribute to aging and to such age-related diseases as cancer by damaging cells.
Question says → Passage says
Theory 1One possibility
emittedemission of
cells less damaged by diseaseconstrain the damage / by damaging cells
Why: 'Emitted' points straight to 'emission of', and the next words are 'free radicals'. Two words, plural, which fits 'fewer ___ are'.
The trap: Don't write just 'radicals'. It loses the meaning and it isn't the term the passage uses.
Question 40
Answer: preservationParagraph 7, last sentence
What do cells focus on when they think food is short?
induce them to shift into an anti-aging mode that emphasizes preservation of the organism over such 'luxuries' as growth and reproduction
Question says → Passage says
Theory 2Another hypothesis
cells focus onemphasizes
food is in short supplyfood is scarce
Why: 'Emphasizes' is 'focus on', and what's emphasised is 'preservation'. The gap needs a noun, and the flow chart is short, so one word is enough.
The trap: 'Growth' and 'reproduction' are in the same sentence, but they're the 'luxuries' cells give up. 'Maintenance and repair' from paragraph 5 means something similar but is three words and comes from the wrong place.
YES. The animal findings suggest it could work in humans. The statement only says 'may', so evidence is enough.
Words from this passage worth keeping
infirmity(Paragraph 1)
physical weakness, especially from age or illness
longevity(Paragraph 1)
long life
regimen(Paragraph 2)
a strict plan of diet or treatment
mimicked(Paragraph 2)
copied the effect of
fanned hope(Paragraph 2)
made hope stronger
touted(Paragraph 5)
promoted, often with exaggerated claims
retard(Paragraph 7)
slow down
induce(Paragraph 7)
cause or persuade something to happen
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 6 Test 3 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 6, Test 3, Reading Passage 3. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
