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
50
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, _____ is NOT caused by smoking.
选项
A、miscarriage
B、pollution
C、lung disease
D、heart attack
答案
B
解析
由第5段第2句可知,吸烟的危害包括引发肺癌(对应C)、心脏病(对应D),以及对孕妇产生危害(对应A“流产”),而B“污染”则无提及,故选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/bHuO777K
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
TheChacoPhenomenonP1:Betweenabout900to1150AD,amysteriousStoneAgeculturearose,flourished,andthenvanishedinth
TheEarlyHistoryofMotionPicturesP1:Thetechnologythatmadepossibletheprojectionandexhibitionofphotographedmoving
_____onatwo-laneroad,youshouldpassonlyontheleftsideofthevehicle.
IssuessurroundingAthedistributionofBincomeareamongCmostcontroversialinDeconomics.
AlthoughAbotharesimilarinsizeandbehavior,theredsquirrelcanbeidentifiedbyBitscoat,Cwhichisbrighterandredder
Themeasureofexcellenceforsystemsdesignersisthesimplicityoftheirconcepts.Simplicitycomesfromconceptualunity,whe
Howdoestheprofessordevelopthetopicoftheviolinfamily?Choosetwoanswers.
Whydoesthestudentspeakwiththeman?
AAnumberofimportantservicesBareprovidedbyabank,whichCaremorethanjustasafeplaceDtostoremoney.
ItwasallsmilesasPakistanForeignMinisterShahMahmoodQureshiandhisIndiancounterpartPranabMukherjeeemergedfroman
随机试题
消费者信息的主要来源有()
某女性病人,因急性肾功能衰竭人院,测血压为130/80mmHg,体温37℃,脉搏80次/分,呼吸16次/分,意识丧失,压迫眼眶有躲避反应,没有言语应答,无意识的自主动作,瞳孔对光反射、吞咽反射、角膜反射存在,此时病人处于( )。
患者,男,40岁。主诉近5年来出现右手骨间肌,小鱼际肌的瘫痪并有不同程度的萎缩。此时最合理的治疗是
下列外文缩写的中文译意,错误的是
安全出口标志灯和疏散标志灯的安装高度分别以下列何者为宜?Ⅰ.安全出口标志灯宜设在距地高度不低于1.5m处;Ⅱ.安全出口标志灯宜设在距地高度不低于2.0m处;Ⅲ.疏散标志灯宜设在离地面1.5m以下的墙面上;Ⅳ.疏散标志灯宜设在离地面1.0m以下的墙面
背景资料:某新建办公楼工程,地下2层,地上20层,框架剪力墙结构,建筑高度87m。建设单位通过公开招标选定了施工总承包单位并签订了工程施工合同。基坑深7.6m,基础底板施工计划网络图见图2。基坑施工前,基坑支护专业施工单位编制了基坑支
修改下列句子(1)几个工人日报的记者,来我厂了解工会活动情况。(2)发展农业必须走现代化。
地方党委对公安工作事关重大的问题有权作出决策,其具体内容包括()。
[*]
Whatoursocietysuffersfrommosttodayistheabsenceofconsensusaboutwhatitandlifeinitoughttobe.Suchconsensusca
最新回复
(
0
)