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
51
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
非营利性组织
Investorssaidtheywere"surprisedandencouraged"bythesentiment,althoughothershareholdersseemed______tohavingProsse
Althoughherinitialsuccesswas______bythefactthatshewasthedaughterofafamousactor,thecriticslateracclaimedher
Shehadastrong______togiveatalkaboutherexperiences,becauseshedidn’tlikethelimelight.
Ironically,theproperuseoffigurativelanguagemustbebasedonthedenotativemeaningofthewords,becauseitisthefailur
The______companyhasanexcellentreputation-whichisunderstandable,sinceit’sbeeninbusinessfortwentyyearsandhastho
Althoughanydestructionofvitaminscausedbyfoodirradiationcouldbe______theuseofdietsupplements,theremaybenopro
Everymemberofsocietyhastomakea______tostruggleforthefreedomofthecountry.
Generouspublicfundingofbasicsciencewould______considerablebenefitsforthecountry’shealth,wealthandsecurity.
Turkeys(thebirds)areoriginallyfromtheAmericas.TheEuropeansknewasimilarlookingandtastingbird,knownnowadaysasG
随机试题
教育目的
“不破楼兰终不还”一句运用的修辞手法是()
下列哪项对于治疗糖尿病酮症酸中毒不宜
深反射亢进为上运动神经元_______的重要体征。
成本是企业为生产产品、提供劳务而发生的各种耗费,因而企业发生地各项费用都是成本。()
税务机关在查处甲企业税收违法行为过程中,发现其可能涉嫌逃税罪,于是在对甲企业处以罚款2万元后,按照法律规定,将案件移送公安机关处理,公安机关的下列做法中,符合法律规定的是()。
玻璃的特点是人们可以透过玻璃看清楚室内各个角落的情况,结合管理学的知识,谈谈你的看法。
下面的程序(a)________和程序(b)________运行后,y和c的值分别是(53)________。程序(a):#definef(x)x*xmain(){intx=2;floaty;v=x/f(x);
homebynight.
Whichofthefollowingstatementsistrueaccordingtowhatyouhaveheard?
最新回复
(
0
)