2. 考研
  3. 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

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

admin2014-06-25  28
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 e-ven transient exposure to tobacco smoke can cause severe health effects like heart disease and lung cancer. For example, last year the surgeon general’s office claimed that "even brief exposure to secondhand smoke can cause cardiovascular disease and could trigger acute cardiac 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 park 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 antismok-ing 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, antismoking 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 第六段第一句指出，禁烟者们(纽约禁令的倡导者们)“夸大事实，以试图让人们相信即便短暂接触二手烟也可能造成致命伤害”的做法存在使其失去科学信任的风险。第二句对第一句作出进一步解释：禁烟者们一直以来都得到科学界的支持，但这次却似乎应了反对禁烟者的指责：禁烟运动是由禁烟者对烟草的盲目憎恨驱动的(即：并不存在科学根据)。段末句进一步指出，这反过来会对反吸烟的主要阵营造成巨大障碍。由此可推知，此次禁烟者夸大其词的做法可能会使认为“反吸烟是偏见驱使行为”的人数增多。因此[C]选项符合文义。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/W6MRFFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)