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
62
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
InfluenzaandVaccinesThereisnospecificcureforinfluenza.Recommendedtreatmentusuallyconsistsofbedrestandincreased
NarratorListentopartofatalkinahistoryclass.Nowgetreadytoanswerthequestions.Youmayuseyournotestohelpyou
ComingSoon:theNextGreatFluFpidemicThevirusfirstcametoofficials’attentioninabagofdeadchickens.EarlyinMarch
Doyouagreeordisagreewiththefollowingstatement?Face-to-facecommunicationisbetterthanothertypesofcommunication,s
PeriodsofArecessionandcurrencyovervaluationBiswhencountriesareClikelytoestablishDprotectivetariffs.
Althoughhispeopledidnot______hisefforts,hekepttrying.
It’scommonlyacknowledgedthatinfantmortalityhasdeclinedbecauseofrecentmedical______andahigherstandardofliving.
Ted’sgrandmotherseemsoutoftheordinary;sheissometimesobservedbehavinginanunconventionalmanner.
Inancienttimes,judgesoftenresortedtotrialbyordealincaseswherenoconcreteevidencewasavailableoneitherside.
随机试题
这个标志是何含义?
第一胎,妊娠40周,1个月前血压正常,近1周出现头昏,眼花,视力模糊,血压160/100mmHg,尿蛋白(+),尿雌三醇10mg/24小时,胎心好,下列处理哪项最合适
合并双侧肾动脉狭窄的高血压患者降压不宜首选
行政处理()。
我国国有企业改革的方向是建立______制度。
一般来说,技术基础雄厚的大型企业,大都采用的创新模式是()。
那些唉声叹气、_________的,我们暂时把他们称为“南郭先生”吧。他们加入公务员队伍的目的,现在是再明显不过了,那就是_________的生活,让人艳羡的日子。那些勤劳肯干的公务员,他们压根就没有时间唠叨出这些_________。当然,我们都是凡夫俗子
假设使用一种加密算法,它的加密方法很简单:将每一个字母加5,即a加密为f,b加密为g,这种算法的密钥就是5,那么它属于()。
Tomthoughtthatthesummerholidayends______toosoon.
ToPacificpeoplethecoconutpalmistileTreeofLife,andlifeitselfoftendependsonitspresence.Thisversatileandubiqu
最新回复
(
0
)