Daily Reading Comprehensions For CAT 03 September 2026

One night in 2000, Allan Basbaum was at the Pierre Hotel on Central Park, wearing a tuxedo after presenting a neuroscience award to one of his colleagues before a roomful of scientists, Nobel laureates among them. His wife, Carol, a cancer biologist, had accompanied him from San Francisco, where they both ran laboratories at the University of California. Late that night, he was struck by agonising stomach pain. Alarmed, they went to the emergency room at Lenox Hill Hospital, where the waiting area was jammed and hours passed before anyone could see him.

‘So I’m out in the waiting room; I’m periodically screaming,’ Basbaum says. After two hours, Carol went to the bathroom, leaving him alone. Finally, a man came over and began speaking to him, gently prodding him. ‘He checks my pulse, he asks: “Does this hurt?”’ Basbaum says. As the man attended to him, ‘the pain really started to get much better,’ and Basbaum relaxed. When Carol returned, he told her about the long-awaited treatment. ‘She says: “Allan, he’s one of the patients. He’s been doing that to everybody here.” But finally, someone was taking care of me.’ And that brought relief.

By then, Basbaum had spent three decades studying the physiology of pain, mapping the neural circuits that carry signals from the body toward the brain. He wanted to understand how those signals become pain. His experience brought to life the questions he’d been marvelling at for years: how do fear, context and expectation shape the body’s most urgent alarm? How do placebos work? And how could someone relieve his pain, just by paying attention?

Basbaum understood the Gordian knot at the heart of pain: the brain could influence pain before a person consciously felt it. His work over the past 50 years has been to untangle that loop, following signals through the spinal cord to the brain and back again.

Basbaum likens pain to the experience of beauty. Take Piet Mondrian. One person sees a painting of coloured bars and squares, and thinks: I could do that. Another, steeped in the history and meaning of the work, is moved to tears. The image on the retina may be much the same; the experience is not. Pain, Basbaum argues, works in a similar way. There is no such thing as an inherently painful stimulus, only stimuli that, in most people, under most conditions, will produce pain.

A truly subjective experience, pain can seem ephemeral. Yet, like all bodily sensations, it arises from the interactions of molecules and cells. At age 78, still at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) leading one of the nation’s most prolific pain research groups, Basbaum’s aim remains unchanged: unravel the signal to find ways of treating pain.

The brain is not where Basbaum wants treatment to begin. ‘My bias is to understand how the information gets to the brain and look for places along the way, preferably way out in the periphery, that I think are important drivers to initiate the whole process,’ he says.

Q1. In Paragraph 5, Allan Basbaum compares the experience of pain to the experience of viewing a Piet Mondrian painting. Which of the following scenarios best exemplifies the underlying principle of this analogy? Correct Option A … Explanation: Basbaum's Mondrian analogy illustrates that two individuals receiving the same physical input experience completely different realities because cognitive context, expectation, and interpretation shape the final perception. Option A mirrors this directly: identical physical damage yields vastly different subjective pain experiences because of the contrasting mental/contextual interpretation of the injury. Option B describes a physical signal block, eliminating the stimulus rather than demonstrating how context/interpretation alters the subjective experience of an existing stimulus. Option C describes objective measurement, whereas the Mondrian analogy highlights subjective experience. Option D describes a simple reflex arc, ignoring the top-down cognitive context and subjective framing that Basbaum emphasizes. Hence, option A.Q2. Based on the anecdote in Paragraphs 1–3, what central insight about the physiology of pain did Basbaum's ER experience physically demonstrate? Correct Option B … Explanation: In the ER anecdote, Basbaum's severe pain eased simply because he believed he was receiving care and attention from an attending clinician (who turned out to be another patient). Paragraph 3 explicitly connects this experience to his research questions: how fear, context and expectation shape the body's most urgent alarm and how someone can relieve his pain, just by paying attention. Option B accurately captures this inference about top-down psychological modulation of pain. Option A is contradicted by the fact that the person treating him was not a certified professional, yet his pain improved. Option C makes a false physiological claim; pain signals still travel through neural circuits, but top-down processing modulates them. Option D is contradicted by Basbaum himself, a world-renowned neuroscientist, experiencing the placebo/attentional relief effect. Hence, option B.Q3. Based on Paragraph 7, what is Allan Basbaum's primary therapeutic strategy for developing new pain treatments, and why? Correct Option D … Explanation: Paragraph 7 explicitly states Basbaum's strategic preference: the brain is not where Basbaum wants treatment to begin — his bias is to understand how the information gets to the brain and look for places along the way, preferably way out in the periphery, that are important drivers to initiate the whole process. This directly supports Option D. Option A directly contradicts Paragraph 7, which explicitly states the brain is not where he wants treatment to begin. Option B ignores his cellular and molecular neural mapping approach in favor of pure psychiatry. Option C overgeneralizes his ER anecdote into a universal treatment strategy, ignoring his core laboratory work on molecular and cellular mechanisms. Hence, option D.Q4. Which of the following best captures the overall structural flow and thematic arc of the passage? Correct Option D … Explanation: The passage opens with a compelling personal story in Lenox Hill Hospital (Paragraphs 1–2), transitions to Basbaum's 50-year scientific career mapping neural circuits and the "Gordian knot" of pain (Paragraphs 3–4), uses the Piet Mondrian analogy to explain the subjective nature of pain stimuli (Paragraph 5), and concludes with his age, current work at UCSF, and strategic preference for targeting peripheral pathways (Paragraphs 6–7). Option D outlines this structure accurately. Options A, B, and C introduce completely fabricated themes (legal regulations, bat echolocation, spinal cord surgery guides) that do not reflect the text. Hence, option D.