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
2022-06-18
45
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
由第5段第2句可知,吸烟的危害包括引发肺癌(对应C)、心脏病(对应D),以及对孕妇产生危害(对应A“流产”),而B“污染”则无提及,故选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/rSwYFFFM
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
TheEarlyHistoryofMotionPicturesP1:Thetechnologythatmadepossibletheprojectionandexhibitionofphotographedmoving
Tarragonhaslongbeencultivatedforitsleaves,______forflavoringvinegar,sauces,andsoups.
AWhenMarconidemonstratedhisBwirelesstelegraph,heCwasthinkingnotaboutbroadcastingDbutthoughtaboutrapidcommunicati
Howdoestheprofessordevelopthetopicoftheviolinfamily?Choosetwoanswers.
_____AbrahamLincolnwasthegreatestAmericanpresidentwastheunanimousvoteofagroupofprominenthistorians.
IfAteacherscommunicatetheexpectationBthatcertainstudentswillCbehaveinacertainmanner,thosestudentsactuallyDdidb
Whydoesthestudenttalktohisadviser?
Mineralsreleasedbydecayarequicklyabsorbedbymultitudinousshallow,finetreefeederrootsandstoredinplanttissues.Th
Complimentsalwaystakeherbysurprise.
TheysaidthatEnglandwaspaying______forhavingbeenthefirstcountrytoexperiencetheindustrialrevolution.
随机试题
两家工厂生产相同规格的运动上衣和运动裤,A厂每月用12天生产运动上衣,18天生产运动裤,每月总共可生产8640套运动服。B厂每月用16天生产运动上衣,14天生产运动裤,每月能够生产6720套运动服。两家厂商为提高效率联合生产后,每月(按30天计算)最多能够
A.胞浆B.肝脏C.线粒体D.肾脏E.乳腺糖的有氧氧化第一阶段的反应是在哪里进行的
乙公司得知甲公司正在就某合同项目与丙公司谈判,乙公司本来并不需要这个合同项目,但为排挤甲公司,就向丙公司提出了更好的条件。甲公司退出后,乙公司也借故中止谈判,给丙公司造成了损失。乙公司的行为应定性为()。
根据《金融企业呆账核销管理办法(2015年修订版)》,下列不属于财产追偿证明或清收报告内容的是()。
保险业因为其行业的特殊性,一般不被人用来洗钱。()
甲有限公司(以下简称“甲公司”)20×2及20×3年发生了以下交易事项:(1)20×2年4月1日,甲公司以定向发行本公司普通股2000万股为对价,自乙公司取得A公司30%股权,具有重大影响。当日,甲公司发行股份的市场价格为5元/股,另支付中
Anextracurricularactivitylikeraisingafundof$300,000isriskybecausemoststudentleadersAmericanstudentsjoincampus
Musiccomesinmanyforms;mostcountrieshaveastyleoftheirown.【C1】______theturnofthecenturywhenjazz(爵士乐)wasborn,Am
______,theycontinuedtheirwork.
______thecausemaybe,thefactremainsthattemperaturesarerising,affectingAlaskafortheworse.
最新回复
(
0
)