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
2023-03-07
87
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.
According to the passage, "Scribbler50" believes that _____.
选项
A、people drinking in the bar do not care about others’ smoking
B、people drinking in the bar hope to ban smoking
C、people walk into the bar without knowing others’ smoking there
D、people smoking in the bar do not worry about drinking
答案
A
解析
由第2段倒数第二句的反问可知,他认为人们并没有意识到二手烟的危害,所以才会到充斥着二手烟的地方去。这些地方自然也包括酒吧这类场所,所以可推出A“在酒吧里喝酒的人不在乎其他人吸烟”正确。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/NXcD777K
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
"Juststicktoscience."ThisisacommonadmonitionthatSciencereceiveswhenwepublishcommentariesandnewsstoriesonpoli
Inthepast20yearsalone,threecoronaviruseshavecausedmajordiseaseoutbreaks.FirstcametheoriginalSARSvirusin2002.
Countriesmustcreativelycomplementtheuseoffossilfuelsandrenewableenergyintheinterimpendingwhenrenewableenergyc
TheInternetaffordsanonymitytoitsusers,ablessingtoprivacyandfreedomofspeech.Butthatveryanonymityisalsobehind
Peoplewhousuallychowdownonchillipeppersmayliveforlongerandhaveasignificantlyreducedriskofdyingfromcardiovas
HarlanCobenbelievesthatifyou’reawriter,you’llfindthetime;andthatifyoucan’tfindthetime,thenwritingisn’tap
Ittookdecadestoprovethatcigarettesmokingcausescancer,heartdisease,andearlydeath.Ittook【C1】________yearstoestab
Everyoneknowsthatthefirstruleofdrivingisnevertakingyoureyesofftheroad.Teendrivers【C1】________beingcareful,bu
InJanuary2009,duringthefirstweeksofasix-monthstayattheChildren’sHospitalofPhiladelphiaforleukemia(白血病)treat
TherearestoriesabouttwoU.S.presidents,AndrewJacksonandMartinVanBuren,whichattempttoexplaintheAmericanEnglish
随机试题
β受体阻断药药理作用为
下列关于小儿上呼吸道解剖特点的描述,错误的是()。
根据《1990年国际贸易术语解释通则》,以FOB价格条件成交的买方应承担相应的责任,根据此规定,以下各项中不属于买方责任的是()。
案例七:彭教授准备将自己多年来的学术成果交给一家出版社出版,预计稿酬所得为18000元。根据案例七,回答下列题目:按照上题的系列丛书方案来出版,能节税( )元。
期货从业人员违反有关法律、法规、政策规定向投资者承诺或保证收益的,情节严重的,由中国期货业协会()。
学校社会工作如何指导学生选择适宜的生活方式?()
钟强在王华过生日时送了一部手机给王华,王华后来将手机卖给了同学罗刚,获得现金1800元,则下列说法正确的是()。
华某系江塘市某化工厂制剂车间工艺员,负责工艺流程管理和记录,兼做清洗参观服等工作,2006年3月26日午休时,华某提水桶到蒸气阀口处接热水时,被蒸气烫伤,经诊断,华某全身烫伤22%。同年5月17日,华某父亲向江塘市劳动和社会保障局提出工伤认定申请,同年7月
2008年人口自然增长数量最少的是()。
Itwasnotsolongagothatparentsdroveateenagertocampus,saidatearfulgoodbyeandreturnedbackhometo【M1】______wait
最新回复
(
0
)