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
Smoking bans in public places are becoming more and more common in many countries. Whether the rights of the non-smokers to brea
Smoking bans in public places are becoming more and more common in many countries. Whether the rights of the non-smokers to brea
admin
2020-09-01
33
问题
Smoking bans in public places are becoming more and more common in many countries. Whether the rights of the non-smokers to breathe in fresh air outweigh those of the smokers to smoke freely is a matter of opinion, manifesting itself in a heated smoking ban debate. In the following excerpt, the author states the effect of the smoking ban. Read the excerpt carefully and write your response in about 300 words, in which you should:
1. summarize briefly the author’s opinion:
2. give your comment.
Marks will be awarded for content relevance, content sufficiency, organization and language quality. Failure to follow the above instructions may result in a loss of marks.
The English smoking ban came into force on July 1, 2007. Smoking is banned in almost all enclosed public spaces, including pubs, restaurants and on public transport. Only places that are "like homes" or are specifically excluded by the health secretary are exempt from the ban. In essence, smoking is only allowed outdoors and in private homes. Posters must be displayed in all workplaces reminding people that smoking is illegal. Individuals who defy the ban face a £50 on-the-spot fine: businesses can be fined £200 for allowing smoking or not displaying the signs.
There are many shocking things about the smoking ban—or, at least, they would be shocking if we were not inured to them.
First, there’s the fact that the flimsy evidence that passive smoking causes any significant harm is taken seriously. According to figures from Action on Smoking and Health(ASH)—Britain’s fundamentalist anti-smoking lobby group—the incidence of lung cancer for non-smokers is about 10 cases per 100,000 people. Regular passive smoking(that is, living with a smoking partner, not just encountering one in bars or restaurants) increases that by about 25 percent—12.6 cases per 100,000. So, even if these figures are correct, passive smoking causes 2.5 cases of lung cancer per 100,000 of the population: to put it another way, these are odds of 40,000-to-one of potentially getting lung cancer from passive smoking. On the basis of these remote risks, a war against smokers has been built.
The second shocking thing is that governments now believe it is their right—even duty—to decide what vices we engage in. In this, the UK is not alone. From Argentina to Zambia, governments and local authorities have been queuing up to make it extremely difficult for people to indulge in filthy habits. Only this week, the Dutch joined the smoking ban club, exactly a year after England’s pubs and restaurants went smoke-free(or "smokefree" to use the single-word, Orwellian Newspeak preferred by the New Labour government). On the same day, patients in England’s mental institutions received the "protection" of the law, too—that is, they will from now on be "protected" from smoke by a super-killjoy ban on smoking even in hospitals for the mentally ill.
Another shocking thing is the way in which the people have been browbeaten into accepting this kind of state intervention. A quarter of the population is actively engaged, at some time or other, in the pastime of smoking: and most of the rest of the population was once happy to tolerate that pastime. Yet a noisy minority, joining forces with governments that are increasingly keen to micromanage our most personal affairs and behaviour, has managed to criminalize a perfectly normal activity. This state of affairs has been accepted with barely a murmur of protest.
The consequences for our everyday life have been profound. Smokers are now marked out as "undesirables" , shunted on to the street or to some other open area to partake in their evil habit. The simple business of socializing has been undermined: alcohol-fueled chatter is persistently interrupted by the disappearance of smokers to the nearest open space. Many people, particularly the elderly, for whom getting up and walking outside every time they want a cigarette is something of an ordeal, are visiting pubs less and less. There is something rather inhumane in the zealous anti-smoking crusade, where the health authorities and their cheerleaders seem happy to make our life worse in the name of "protecting us" from harm.
Write your response on ANSWER SHEET FOUR.
选项
答案
My Views on the Public Smoking Ban The harsh English public smoking ban has been in effect for more than nine years, followed by many facts that some of us cannot understand. Firstly, passive smoking does not cause lung cancer as has been imagined: secondly, it is taken for granted that the governments think it is their duty to prohibit public smoking: and thirdly, even heavy smokers accept the ban naturally without thinking of it as abnormal. It seems that smokers are categorized as " undesirables", with socializing undermined and protection abused. Though some people believe the public smoking ban is an unwarranted infringement upon a person’s right of freedom to choose, and the ban is built on junk science, harms social life and many people’s livelihoods, and affects a country’s revenue, I am 100% in favor of the smoking ban. Firstly, smoking bans originate from medical considerations. Some people think passive smoking is not relevant to lung cancer, but research does show that secondhand smoke is nearly as harmful as smoking itself. Those living in homes with smokers have a 20 to 30 percent higher risk of developing lung cancer than those who do not. Many see it unfair that they have to suffer the effects of secondhand smoke when they socialize with those who smoke. Smoking bans remove these risks for the non-smokers. Secondly, smoking bans are implemented because they raise air quality in such establishments as restaurants and bars as well. Some studies have shown that the indoor air quality in bars and restaurants which are smoke-free is nine times better than those without smoking bans. That’s why we see that in many developed countries many smokers have their pastime on the street or in a fixed spot outside the building. What’s more, in part, the smoking ban may eliminate the chance of fire and other accidents as well. From what has been discussed above, it is safe to come to the conclusion that to restrict smoking in public areas is more than welcome.
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/YzIK777K
0
专业英语八级
相关试题推荐
UnderstandingDepressionI.Misunderstandingofdepression—Mistakenlybelievethatdepressioncomesfrom【T1】______【T1】______—
Therearetwobasicsortsofvisualperspective—aerialperspectiveandlinearperspective.Aerialperspective—and"aerial"just
AdviceforStudents:HowtoTalktoProfessorsI.IntroductionA.Professors:normalpeople,justlikeeveryoneelseB.Student
FiveCommonMistakesinConversationandTheirSolutionsI.NotlisteningA.Problem:mostpeopledon’tlisten—waiteagerlyf
FiveCommonMistakesinConversationandTheirSolutionsI.NotlisteningA.Problem:mostpeopledon’tlisten—waiteagerlyf
Ourerawitnessesmanycaseswhereourownlibertycontradictswithothers’.Hereisanexampletoshowthisdelicateissue.A
如果回归自然,各有不同的方式,后人总是尊重前辈的人生最后一次选择。一位朋友偶然讲起一件事,犹如一篇小小说,听者动容。在新开发的丛林里,一条蜿蜒的小径上,一个衣着素色的女子踽踽独行,径直走向林子里的一棵树。这里许多树大小参差不一,不过都长得很快,新生的树叶嫩
在古罗马,柱子是按照人的比例划分的;到了文艺复兴时期,人就是世界上最美好的尺度。今天的中国城市里,裁弯取直的河渠,向四面八方扩张的交通,膨胀硕大的以便于接纳更多商业行为的城市广场与建筑立面,都在告诉人们建设背后的权力与资本才是审美标准。直到有一天。回过头来
作为中国最早的教育中心和科学研究中心,北京大学聚集了中国优秀的专家学者,不断开拓创新,改造发展,以培养出的高质量人才所做出的高水平科学成果深刻影响和推动着中国高等教育的航程。一百年来,以北京大学为代表的中国现代大学群,在中国走向现代化的历史中起了重要的先锋
我希望你不要拖我的后腿。
随机试题
下列关于操作风险的描述,正确的是()。
酸式滴定管用蒸馏水润洗后,未用标准液润洗,在测定NaOH时碱的浓度偏高。()
假远期信用证的远期汇票利息由()负担。
有关急性水肿性胰腺炎,下列各项中,哪项是错误的
根据《税收征收管理法实施细则》规定,下列有关税务登记证件使用的表述中,正确的有()。
某公司对外转让一项账面净值为35万元的固定资产,取得收入50万元已存入银行,转让时以现金支付转让费3万元和相关税金2万元,此项业务在现金流量表中应()。
教师应提供纸张让3岁幼儿自由涂抹,是因为该阶段幼儿美术发展所处的时期是()
在Word中删除文本或图形对象后,下列说法正确的是()。
Youmustshineyourshoes.
Thereis___________orangeintheglass.Ican’tgiveyouany.
最新回复
(
0
)