New York City Council passed the ban on smoking in its parks and on its beaches on the principle that a nonsmoker shouldn’t have

admin2021-11-29  2

问题     New York City Council passed the ban on smoking in its parks and on its beaches on the principle that a nonsmoker shouldn’t have to inhale even a tiny amount of secondhand smoke, whether in a bar or a Central Park meadow. But while there is a strong public-health case for banning smoking indoors, the case for banning it outdoors is much weaker—particularly when it runs the risk of a backlash that could undermine the basic goals of the antismoking movement.
    True, there is evidence that being near someone smoking, even outdoors, can result in significant secondhand smoke exposure. Researchers at Stanford found that levels of tobacco smoke within three feet of a smoker outside are comparable to inside levels. But no evidence demonstrates that the duration of outdoor exposure — in places where people can move freely about — is long enough to cause substantial health damage.
    But that hasn’t stopped many opponents of smoking. Citing new research, they have argued that even transient exposure to tobacco smoke can cause cardiovascular disease and could trigger acute cardia events, such as heart attack, and that inhaling even the smallest amount of tobacco smoke can also damage your DNA, which can lead to cancer.
    However, the surgeon general’s statement confuses the temporary negative effects of secondhand smoke on the circulatory system, which have been shown to occur with short-term exposure, with heart disease, a process that requires repeated exposure and recurring damage to the coronary arteries. It also confuses one-time DNA damage, which occurs with any carcinogenic exposure, with cancer risk, which likewise generally requires repeated exposure.
    Moreover, bans like New York’s may actually increase exposure by creating smoke-filled areas near part entrances that cannot be avoided.
    To make matters worse, in trying to convince people that even transient exposure to secondhand smoke is a potentially deadly hazard, smoking opponents risk losing scientific credibility. The antismoking movement has always fought with science on its side, but New York’s ban on outdoor smoking seems to fulfill its opponents’ charge that the movement is being driven instead by an unthinking hatred of tobacco smoke. That, in turn, could Jeopardize more important fronts in the antismoking fight, in particular the 21 states that still allow smoking in bars and restaurants.
    A ban on outdoor smoking may provide a symbolic victory. But from a public health perspective, it’s pointless. Instead, anti-smoking organizations should focus on extending workplace protections, already enjoyed by millions of New Yorkers, to the 100 million Americans still denied the right to work without having to breathe in secondhand smoke.
New York’s ban might cause more people to________.

选项 A、be convinced of the dangers of smoking
B、realize the nature of the antismoking movement
C、regard antismoking activities as prejudice-driven
D、feel hatred toward tobacco smokers

答案C

解析 细节题。答案定位在倒数第二段,unthinking hatred of tobacco smoke,即禁烟可能是由对烟草的不理智的厌恶情绪所驱动,不能让人们认识到禁烟的本质。B说法错误。C中prejudice-driven与unthinking hatred是同义替换,故C为正确选项。D是对这句话的曲解,将原因与结果倒置了,故排除。第五、六两段讲述了室外禁烟引起的系列反驳效应,抽烟行为可能会加重,无法说服人们认识到抽烟的危害,因此A错误。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/ssH3777K
0

最新回复(0)