首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Municipal bans on smoking in restaurants and bars are highly controversial, but history shows they can also be highly effective.
Municipal bans on smoking in restaurants and bars are highly controversial, but history shows they can also be highly effective.
admin
2022-06-18
61
问题
Municipal
bans on smoking in restaurants and bars are highly controversial, but history shows they can also be highly effective. But are all smoking bans equally successful?
The barkeeper and blogger who writes as "Scribbler50" was outraged when, in 2003, New York City enacted one of the first comprehensive smoking bans in bars and restaurants, "How can a guy and some board just kick us in the teeth like this? This smacks of fascism." If people are aware of the consequences of smoking or visiting places with lots of secondhand smoke, should the government really have to tell us what to do? Won’t people just vote with their feet and smoke even more when they’re at home and away from restrictions?
Scribbler50’s post inspired the physician who blogs as "PalMD" last week to look up the research on the effectiveness of smoking bans. He found several studies showing that not only did workers in restaurants and bars show improved health shortly after the bans were put in place, but smokers themselves also reduced the number of cigarettes they smoked.
Overall, however, smoking rates remain persistently high, despite the common workplace smoking bans. Can other government measures help these smokers live healthier lives, or at least prevent people from taking up the habit?
In the U.S., warning messages have been in place on cigarette packages for decades. But the messages are rather clinical, for example: "Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, and May Complicate Pregnancy." What if packages contained more dramatic warnings? In January, psychologist and science writer Christian Jarrett looked at a small study of smokers’ reactions to cigarette warnings. The researchers measured self-esteem in student smokers, then showed them cigarette packages with either death-related warnings ("Smokers die earlier") or esteem-related warnings ("Smoking makes you unattractive"). Students who derived self-esteem from smoking and saw the death-related warnings later viewed smoking more positively than those who saw the esteem-related warnings. For students whose smoking wasn’t motivated by self-esteem, the effect was reversed.
So not all anti-smoking messages are equal: Depending on who the message is directed at, a morbid warning on a cigarette label may actually
backfire
.
Scribbler50 for his part, is now a convert favoring smoking restrictions, at least in his narrow limits as a bartender. His patrons who haven’t quit smoking say they smoke a lot less now that they have to go outside to get a nicotine fix. He doesn’t miss emptying ashtrays, or the holier-than-thou customers who complained every time a fellow patron lit up, or working in a smoke-filled bar all night and going home "smelling like you put out a three-alarm".
Would it be right to enact even more restrictions on smoking in the interest of public health? It’s hard to deny that banning smoking in public, indoor spaces has been a huge success. Why not try out some stronger smoking bans? Parents in some areas are already restricted from smoking in cars with children, but I haven’t seen a study that evaluates the success of those measures. Perhaps a state or municipality could try extending the ban to homes, with provisions for studying the results. It’s also possible that stronger measures would be counter-productive, like the stronger warnings on cigarette labels. Maybe we’ll decide that at some level deciding whether or not to smoke should still be an individual choice. Or maybe in a few generations, it won’t be necessary to regulate smoking: There won’t be any smokers left.
What is the main idea of the passage?
选项
A、Scribbler50’s attitude toward smoking bans.
B、The research on people’s stopping smoking.
C、The effectiveness of smoking bans.
D、Smoking bans in restaurants and bars.
答案
C
解析
本文先讲禁烟令的实施过程中人们的态度,由此引出对禁烟效果的讨论,还探讨了不同提示语的禁烟效果,最后展望未来禁烟的一些可能性,可以看出,禁烟效果是贯穿全文的主题,故C正确。A“Scribbler50对禁烟的态度”、B“关于人们停止吸烟的研究”和D“餐厅和酒吧的禁烟令”均是文章的细节,不足以概括全文。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/7TuO777K
本试题收录于:
CATTI三级笔译综合能力题库翻译专业资格(CATTI)分类
0
CATTI三级笔译综合能力
翻译专业资格(CATTI)
相关试题推荐
TheEarlyHistoryofMotionPicturesP1:Thetechnologythatmadepossibletheprojectionandexhibitionofphotographedmoving
1ThenumberofinsectspeciesonEarthexceedsthatofallotherlifeformscombined.Entomologistsestimatethattherearewel
IssuessurroundingAthedistributionofBincomeareamongCmostcontroversialinDeconomics.
ABecauseanelementaryschoolgirlwhoisproudofherathleticBabilitymayfaceanCadjustmentbythetimeDsheentershighsc
Whydoesthestudentgotoseehisprofessor?
Whatisthelecturemainlyabout?Accordingtotheprofessor,whataretwowaysinwhichnaturalgasispreferabletooilando
Parentsarerequiredbylawtoseethattheirchildrenreceivefull-timeeducation,atschoolorelsewhere,betweentheagesof
However,theformerFedchairmanplayeddownthepracticalimplicationsoftheAIIB,sayingthebankwaslargelysymbolic.
Currentdemographictrends,suchasthefallinthebirthrate,shouldfavor______economicgrowthinthelongrun.
Asaresultthecomposersendeduptakinghometapesofrealperformancesratherthandesperatelystrugglingto______thenotes
随机试题
在冷作工装配工序中,对结构进行定位焊时,也应按照相应的工艺规定来选择焊条,不得随意更换焊条焊接。
传统集合运算不包括()
再生障碍性贫血治疗有效时,下列哪项恢复最困难
用于疟疾病因性预防的首选药是治疗厌氧菌感染的首选药是
检察院立案侦查甲刑讯逼供案。被害人父亲要求甲赔偿丧葬费等经济损失。侦查中,甲因病猝死。对于此案,检察院下列哪一做法是正确的?()
设A,B均为n阶非零矩阵,且AB=0,则R(A),R(B)满足()。
M公司用甲材料生产X产品,甲材料标准价格是100元千克,用量标准为5千克/件,公司所生产的A产品标准工资率为20元/小时,工时标准为1小时/件。假定本月投资A产品10000件,耗用甲材料60000千克,其实际价格为110元/千克;实际支付直接工人工资14万
参与构成谷胱甘肽过氧化物酶的营养素是()。
下列关于法的基本特征的理解,正确的有()。(2016法多21)
BillStoneisnotanastronaut—heistheworld’smostfamouscaver.Leadinglargeinternationalteamsandbackedbysponsorsl
最新回复
(
0
)