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
考研
Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more
Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more
admin
2017-11-28
59
问题
Can electricity cause cancer? In a society that literally runs on electric power, the very idea seems preposterous. But for more than a decade, a growing band of scientists and journalists has pointed to studies that seem to link exposure to electromagnetic fields with increased risk of leukemia and other malignancies. The implications are unsettling, to say the least, since everyone comes into contact with such fields, which are generated by everything electrical, from power lines and antennas to personal computers and micro-wave ovens. Because evidence on the subject is inconclusive and often contradictory, it has been hard to decide whether concern about the health effects of electricity is legitimate — or the worst kind of paranoia.
Now the alarmists have gained some qualified support from the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency. In the executive summary of a new scientific review, released in draft form late last week, the EPA has put forward what amounts to the most serious government warning to date. The agency tentatively concludes that scientific evidence "suggests a casual link" between extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields — those having very long wave lengths — and leukemia, lymphoma and brain cancer. While the report falls short of classifying ELF fields as probable carcinogens, it does identify the common 60-hertz magnetic field as " a possible , but not proven, cause of cancer in humans. "
The report is no reason to panic — or even to lost sleep. If there is a cancer risk, it is a small one. The evidence is still so controversial that the draft stirred a great deal of debate within the government, and the EPA released it over strong objections from the Pentagon and the White House. But now no one can deny that the issue must be taken seriously and that much more research is needed.
At the heart of the debate is a simple and well-understood physical phenomenon: When an electric current passes through a wire, it generates an electromagnetic field that exerts forces on surrounding objects. For many years, scientists dismissed any suggestion that such forces might be harmful, primarily because they are so extraordinarily weak. The ELF magnetic field generated by a video terminal measures only a few milligauss, or about one-hundredth the strength of the earth’s own magnetic field. The electric fields surrounding a power line can be as high as 10 kilo volts per meter, but the corresponding field induced in human cells will be only about 1 millivolt per meter. This is far less than the electric fields that the cells themselves generate.
How could such minuscule forces pose a health danger? The consensus used to be that they could not, and for decades scientists concentrated on more powerful kinds of radiation, like X-rays, that pack sufficient wallop to knock electrons out of the molecules that make up the human body. Such "ionizing" radiations have been clearly linked to increased cancer risks and there are regulations to control emissions.
But epidemiological studies, which find statistical associations between sets of data, do not prove cause and effect. Though there is a body of laboratory work showing that exposure to ELF fields can have biological effects on animal tissues, a mechanism by which those effects could lead to cancerous growths has never been found.
The Pentagon is far from persuaded. In a blistering 33-page critique of the EPA report, Air Force scientists charge its authors with having "biased the entire document" toward proving a link. "Our reviewers are convinced that there is no suggestion that (electromagnetic fields) present in the environment induce or promote cancer," the Air Force concludes. "It is astonishing that the EPA would lend its imprimatur on this report." Then Pentagon’s concern is understandable. There is hardly a unit of the modern military that does not depend on the heavy use of some kind of electronic equipment, from huge ground-based radar towers to the defense systems built into every warship and plane.
What do you think ordinary citizens may do after reading the different arguments?
选项
A、They are indifferent.
B、They are very worried.
C、The may exercise prudent avoidance.
D、They are shocked.
答案
C
解析
推理判断题。第一段第四句指出,电磁场与疾病有关的暗示让人不安,因为我们每个人都与这种磁场存在联系,比如使用电器、电线、天线、电脑和微波炉都会产生磁场。由此可推断,普通人在读了这篇文章后,可能会担心自己所使用的电器会导致疾病,从而会注意减少对电器的使用,故答案为[C]项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/iaua777K
本试题收录于:
翻译硕士(翻译硕士英语)题库专业硕士分类
0
翻译硕士(翻译硕士英语)
专业硕士
相关试题推荐
恐怖袭击
西方列强
TheDecLarationofIndependencewasadoptedbythe________ContinentalCongressonJuly4,________.
Shehadastrong______togiveatalkaboutherexperiences,becauseshedidn’tlikethelimelight.
Studentsfroma______backgroundhaveanadvantageatuniversity.
Thisyearsometwenty-threehundredteenagersfromallovertheworldwillspendabouttenmonthsinU.S.homes.Theywillatte
The______ofsmokingamongwomen,formerlynegligible,hasgrowntosuchadegreethatlungcancerhasbecomethechiefcauser
The______thatdemocraciesdonotfighteachotherisbasedonatinyhistoricalsample.
We______theletteryesterday,butitdidn’tarrive.
Morethan1,000housesanddozensofotherbuildingsandcarsweredamagedordestroyed,andcracksandotherdamagewerefound
随机试题
异相型游梁式抽油机与常规型游梁式抽油机的主要不同点之一是将减速箱背离支架后移,形成了较大的()。
在构成生产力系统的诸因素中,属于非实体性因素的是()。
根据《水利工程施工安全管理导则》SL721—2015,下述内容中,属于施工单位一级安全教育的是()。
商品经济产生和发展所需的经济条件包括()。
有三个班级,每个班级选出一个学生,他们的名字是:李丽丽(女)、张芳芳(女)、王超(男)。学生的班主任是王老师、张老师和陈老师;班长是杜威、宋文和梁亮。对于这个三班级,已知:(1)王老师班和宋文班的同学(非班长)都参加了少年女子游泳队。(
地球上很多国家和地区闹水荒。对其原因的分析有误的是()。
防范是社会治安综合治理的首要环节,是落实综合治理其他措施的前提条件。()
给出一个单车道的简易桥,如图8—4所示。车流如箭头所示。桥上不允许有两车交会,但允许同方向车依次通行(即桥上可以有多个同方向的车)。该桥最大可载重5辆汽车。用P,V操作实现交通管理,以防桥上交通堵塞。
勇于实践、艰苦奋斗是实现理想的根本途径。对艰苦奋斗理解正确的是
设随机变量(X,Y)的分布函数为F(x,y),边缘分布为FX(x)和FY(y),则概率P{X>x,Y>y}等于()
最新回复
(
0
)