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
2023-03-07
57
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.
Which of the following statements is true of smoking restriction?
选项
A、Municipal bans on smoking in restaurants and bars are effective.
B、Scribbler50 himself did some research on the effectiveness of the bans on smoking.
C、Christian Jarrett found the morbid signs on cigarettes play an important role among all smokers.
D、The measure to restrict parents from smoking in cars with children is effective.
答案
A
解析
由最后一段第2句可知,公共场所禁烟取得了巨大成功,故选A“市禁烟令在餐厅和酒吧有效果”。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/dKQiFFFM
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
Skepticsofhighereducationoftencomplainthatuniversitiesoffertoomanyboringdegreeswithlittlevalueintheworkplace.【
AdecadeagobiologistsidentifiedaremoteprotectedareainnorthernLaos,calledNamEt-PhouLouey,asthecountry’sprobable
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlookingat—astrangerisvirtuallyunbearable.Everyone
Inourcontemporaryculture,theprospectofcommunicatingwith—orevenlookingat—astrangerisvirtuallyunbearable.Everyone
Theworldeconomyhasrunintoabrickwall.Despitecountlesswarningsinrecentyearsabouttheneedtoaddressaloominghung
HarlanCobenbelievesthatifyou’reawriter,you’llfindthetime;andthatifyoucan’tfindthetime,thenwritingisn’tap
HarlanCobenbelievesthatifyou’reawriter,you’llfindthetime;andthatifyoucan’tfindthetime,thenwritingisn’tap
HowdoyouexplaineconomicsinplainEnglish?TheFederalReserveBankofNewYorkhasbeenansweringthequestionwithaneven
InApril,BritishresearchersatUniversityCollegeLondonfoundthat,ratherthantherecommendedfive,sevendailyportionsof
A—RelevanceofmotivationtheoriesI—TradeUnionRepresentationB—SystematicTrainingJ—ContinuousDevelopmen
随机试题
数据与信息的关系为()。
男性,48岁,乙型肝炎病史10年,因乏力、低热、腹胀、少尿,来院就诊。检查发现巩膜黄染,腹部膨隆,有大量腹水存在。超声显像见肝略缩小,脾肿大,肝硬化结节形成,门静脉和脾静脉增宽。诊断为肝炎后肝硬化,门静脉高压症。下列不适当的治疗措施为
与调节水、钠代谢有关的激素有
A.3~4个月B.6个月C.1~3个月D.7~10天E.4~6个月甲亢加服复方碘溶液在术前
关于医德评价,下列说法错误的是
电算化系统中恢复功能是系统非常重要的基本功能,进行这一工作时应当()。
下列诗人中,以边塞诗著称于世的是()。
全面进攻
ThereisgrowinginterestinEastJapanRailwayCo.ltd.,oneofthesixcompanies,createdoutoftheprivatizednationalrail
Everymorningatfour-thirty,sixtyconcretetrucks—fromBrooklyn,fromQueens,fromNewJersey—raceinthedarkoverbridgesa
最新回复
(
0
)