2. 医学
  3. This week marks the 10th anniversary of the Alar apple scare, in which many American consumers were driven into a panic followin

This week marks the 10th anniversary of the Alar apple scare, in which many American consumers were driven into a panic followin

admin2013-11-30  36
问题     This week marks the 10th anniversary of the Alar apple scare, in which many American consumers were driven into a panic following the release of a report by an environmental organization claiming that apples containing the chemical Alar posed a serious health threat to preschoolers. The report was disseminated through a PR(Problem Report)campaign and bypassed any legitimate form of scientific peer review. Introduced to the American public by CBS’ "60 Minutes," the unsubstantiated claims in the report led some school districts to remove apples from their school lunch programs and unduly frightened conscientious parents trying to develop good eating habits for their children.
    Last month, Consumers Union released a report warning consumers of the perils of consuming many fruits and vegetables that frequently contained "unsafe" levels of pesticide residues. This was especially true for children, they claimed. Like its predecessor 10 years earlier, the Consumers Union report received no legitimate scientific peer review and the public’ s first exposure to it was through news coverage.
    Not only does such reporting potentially drive children for consuming healthful fruits and vegetables, the conclusions were based on a misleading interpretation of what constitutes a "safe" level of exposure. Briefly, the authors used values known as the "chronic reference doses," set by the U.S. environmental Protection Agency, as their barometers of safely. Used appropriately, these levels represent the maximum amount of pesticide that could be consumed daily for life without concern. For a 70-year lifetime, for example, consumers would have to ingest this average amount of pesticide every day for more than 25,000 days. It is clear, as the report points out, that there are days on which kids may be exposed to more; it is also clear that there are many more days when exposure is zero. Had the authors more appropriately calculated the cumulative exposures for which the safety standards are meant to apply, there would have been no risks and no warnings.
    Parents should feel proud, rather than guilty, of providing fruits and vegetables for their children. It is well established that a diet rich in such foods decreases the risk of heart disease and cancer. Such benefits dramatically overwhelm the theoretical risks of tiny amounts of pesticides in food. So keep serving up the peaches, apples, spinach, squash, grapes and pears.
The primary purpose of this passage is to explain that______.
选项 A、not all reports on food are scientifically sound
B、it is important for the public to know the risks of pesticides
C、vegetables and fruits can be harmful to children’ s health
D、there should be no public concern over pesticides
答案A
解析 文章先用了一个报道说苹果中含有一些化学物质对学前儿童的身体有害，然后又引用Consumers Union发布的研究报告，接着作者分别批驳这两种观点，可见本文的主要目的是想表明并非所有的食物报告均有充分的科学依据。故答案为选项A。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/waNDFFFM
本试题收录于： 医学博士外语题库考研分类
0

医学博士外语

考研

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)