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
If asked, "What are health decisions?", most of us would answer in terms of hospitals, doctors and pills. Yet we are all making
If asked, "What are health decisions?", most of us would answer in terms of hospitals, doctors and pills. Yet we are all making
admin
2011-01-05
118
问题
If asked, "What are health decisions?", most of us would answer in terms of hospitals, doctors and pills. Yet we are all making a whole range of decisions about our health which go beyond this limited area; for example, whether or not to smoke, exercise, drive a motorbike, or drink alcohol really. The ways we reach decisions and form attitudes about our health are only just beginning to be understood.
The main paradox is why people consistently do things which are known to be very hazardous. Two good examples of this are smoking and not wearing seat belts. Both these examples underline elements of how people reach decisions about their health. Understanding this process is crucial. We can then more effectively change public attitudes to hazardous, voluntary activities like smoking.
Smokers run double the risk of contracting heart disease, several times the risk of suffering from chronic bronchitis and at least 25 times the risk of lung cancer, as compared to non-smokers. Despite extensive press campaigns ( especially in the past 20 years) , which have regularly told smokers and car drivers the grave risks they are running, the number of smokers and seat belt wearers has remained much the same. Although the number of deaths from road accidents and smoking are well publicised, they have aroused little public interest.
If we give smokers the real figures, will it alter their views on the dangers of smoking? Unfortunately not. Many of the "real figures" are in the form of probabilistic estimates, and evidence shows that people are very bad at processing and understanding this kind of information.
The kind of information that tends to be relied on both by the smoker and seat belt non-wearer is anecdotal, based on personal experiences. All smokers seem to have an Uncle Bill or an Auntie Mabel who has been smoking cigarettes since they were twelve, lived to 90, and died because they fell down the stairs. And if they don’t have such an aunt or uncle, they are certain to have heard of someone who has. Similarly, many motorists seem to have heard of people who would have been killed if they had been wearing seat belts.
Reliance on this kind of evidence and not being able to cope with "probabilistic" data form the two main foundation stones of people’s assessment of risk. A third is reliance on press-publicised dangers and causes of death. American psychologists have shown that people overestimate the frequency (and therefore the danger) of the dramatic causes of death (like aeroplane crashes)and underestimate the undramatic, unpublicised killers (like smoking) which actually take a greater toll of life.
What is needed is some way of changing people’s evaluations of and attitudes to the risks of certain activities like smoking. What can be done? The "national" approach of giving people the "facts and figures" seems ineffective. But the evidence shows that when people are frightened, they are more likely to change their estimates of the dangers involved in smoking or not wearing seat belts. Press and television can do this very cost-effectively. Programmes like Dying for a Fag (a Thames TV programme) vividly showed the health hazards of smoking and may have increased the chances of people stopping smoking permanently.
So a mass-media approach may work. But it needs to be carefully controlled. Overall, the new awareness of the problem of health decisions and behaviour is at least a more hopeful sign for the future.
For answers 51-55, mark
Y (for YES) if the statement agrees with the information given in the passage;
N (for NO) if the statement contradicts the information given in the passage;
NG (for NOT GIVEN) if the information is not given in the passage.
Usually, smokers assess the dangers of smoking according to ______ , not the publicized data.
选项
答案
anecdotes(personal experiences)
解析
参见第五段第一句。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/rK8K777K
本试题收录于:
A类竞赛(研究生)题库大学生英语竞赛(NECCS)分类
0
A类竞赛(研究生)
大学生英语竞赛(NECCS)
相关试题推荐
NEWYORKMay26,(Reuters)—AttorneyDennisKeniganjustspentaweekrisingatdaybreaktoanswere-mailsandfieldconferencec
NEWYORKMay26,(Reuters)—AttorneyDennisKeniganjustspentaweekrisingatdaybreaktoanswere-mailsandfieldconferencec
Thegovernmentismakingeveryeffortto______aneconomiccrisis,butitseemsnothingcouldhelp.
Doctorsoftentellpatientstotakeacertainkindofmedicineinorderto【D1】______anillness.Forexample,apatientmaynee
Doctorsoftentellpatientstotakeacertainkindofmedicineinorderto【D1】______anillness.Forexample,apatientmaynee
Doctorsoftentellpatientstotakeacertainkindofmedicineinorderto【D1】______anillness.Forexample,apatientmaynee
Doctorsoftentellpatientstotakeacertainkindofmedicineinorderto【D1】______anillness.Forexample,apatientmaynee
Doctorsoftentellpatientstotakeacertainkindofmedicineinorderto【D1】______anillness.Forexample,apatientmaynee
SeveralresearchgroupsintheUnitedStatesareconductinggeneticresearchaimedatretardingaging.Ifthebreakthroughsofr
Thepolicemanlookedme______severaltimesandobviouslydislikedwhathesaw.
随机试题
下列有关劳动生产率的说法正确的是()
从第一次鸦片战争到辛亥革命前夕,先进的中国人是如何探寻救过救民真理的?
女患者,产后28天,恶露不止,量较多,色淡红,质稀,小腹空坠,神倦懒言,面色白,舌淡,脉缓弱。选方
论表见代理的构成要件和法律效力。[中山大学2011年研;北大2006年研]
证券的票面要素有( )。
党对公安机关的组织领导的实现途径是()
旅鼠啃食植物,其数量增长。植物遭破坏后,会引起旅鼠外迁或因饥饿而死或遭到捕食。旅鼠的减少,使植物量增多,为存活的旅鼠提供了充足的食物,旅鼠的数量又逐渐增长,旅鼠的这种增长现象是______。
下列犯罪中,属于特殊犯罪主体的是()。
用链表表示线性表的优点是_______。
A、NelsonRockfeller.B、AlbertEinstein.C、LeonardoDaVinci.D、ThomasGefferson.DWhichofthefollowingpeopleisnotmentioned
最新回复
(
0
)