2. 外语
  3. 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.

admin2019-09-17  49
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 Christian Jarrett, which of the following signs can make a student motivated by self-esteem stop smoking?
选项 A、Cherish Your Health and Stop Smoking.
B、Smoking Makes Your Heart Stop Beating Earlier.
C、Enjoy a Cigarette and Regret a Whole Life.
D、You Look More Charming Without a Cigarette.
答案D
解析    细节识别。第五段末尾提到不同警示语的效果，根据“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”可知，有的学生从吸烟中获得了自尊，所以吸烟会致死的警示语对他们无效，但吸烟有损魅力的警示语却能击中要害，所以更有效。因此，选项D符合题意。【知识拓展】本题涉及实验的结论，这种比较类的长句表述对于多数读者而言略显费解。如本题“解析”所引原文“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”，其大意为从吸烟中获得自尊感的学生，看到吸烟致死的警示语时，对吸烟持正面看法；而当看到吸烟有损自尊的警示语时，其对吸烟的态度会消极得多。换言之，对于以吸烟获取自尊感的学生而言，吸烟会致死的警示语对他们警示效果甚微；但看到吸烟有损魅力的警示语时，才会认真对待，考虑是否减量或戒烟。所以本题还考查复杂语言理解和推理能力等较高级思维能力，是细节识别类题型中综合性较高的题型。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/wMwO777K
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
随机试题
最新回复(0)