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
2019-09-17
53
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
错误排除。第五段第二句讲的是烟盒上的警示语“Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease,and May Complicate Pregnancy”,其中,选项A、C、D均有,故选B。【知识拓展】错误排除属于正误判断,但其需要根据原文与选项一一排除提到过的内容,因此,准确定位原文表达最重要,然后建议把提到过的选项划去,便于快速确定答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/uMwO777K
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
NarratorListentopartofatalkinahistoryclass.Nowgetreadytoanswerthequestions.Youmayuseyournotestohelpyou
NarratorListentopartofaconversationbetweentostudents.Nowgetreadytoanswerthequestions.Youmayuseyournotesto
Question:Doyouagreeordisagreewiththefollowingstatement?Now,theaveragehumanlifespanisbecominglonger.Usespecifi
FightinginNatureInnature,fightingissuchanever-presentprocessthatitsbehaviormechanismsandweaponsarehighlydevel
NarratorListentoatalkbetweentwostudents.Nowgetreadytoanswerthequestions.Youmayuseyournotestohelpyouanswer
Whataresomeofthequalitiesofagoodparent?Usespecificdetailsandexamplestoexplainyouranswer.
Doyouagreeordisagreewiththefollowingstatement?Dancingplaysanimportantroleinaculture.Usespecificreasonsandex
DinosaursandParentalCareP1:"Parentalcare"referstothelevelofinvestmentprovidedbyamotherandfathertoinsurethe
Whattheynevertakeintoaccountisthefrazzledwomanwhoisleadinga______life--tryingtobeagoodmotherwhilehaving
Alargepartofeffectiveleadershipisdependentonsomethingcalled"style".Butstyleisdifficulttoteach,andwhatmakes
随机试题
国家信息中心近日发布的《中国信息社会发展报告2015》显示,2015年全国信息社会指数达到0.4351。从四个重点领域看,数字生活发展最快,2015年全国数字生活指数达到0.5038,同比增长9.79%。资料显示,2015年西部地区各类指数与
A.大、中、小、微血管炎细胞浸润B.小、微血管坏死性肉芽肿血管炎C.中、小动脉局灶性全层坏死性血管炎D.弹力动脉节段性增生和纤维化E.坏死性血管炎伴嗜酸性细胞浸润白塞病的基本病理改变为
利多卡因一次的最大用量为
根据个人所得税法及其实施细则的规定,可以免征个人所得税的奖金有()。
因西花村附近的华能金陵电厂要扩建,政府向村民征用了土地,虽然已经按规定向村民发放了补偿款。但部分村民仍不满意,要求提高补偿标准增加补偿费,在没有及时得到答复的情况下他们就到镇政府门口聚集闹事,堵塞交通,领导让你去处理此事,你会怎么办?
亚历山大帝国的历史意义
专门的关系运算不包括下列中的()。
打开窗体后,下列事件中首先发生的是
Whichofthefollowingwordscanbeusedtoconnecttwoclausesinacomplexsentence?
Technically,anysubstanceotherthanfoodthataltersourbodilyormentalfunctioningisadrug.Manypeoplemistakenbelieve
最新回复
(
0
)