2. 考研
  3. [A] So far, mandatory on-the-menu calorie counts have been implemented in only three localities: Washington’s King County, New Y

[A] So far, mandatory on-the-menu calorie counts have been implemented in only three localities: Washington’s King County, New Y

admin2019-09-15  3
问题    [A] So far, mandatory on-the-menu calorie counts have been implemented in only three localities: Washington’s King County, New York City and Westchester County. And since none of these provisions have been in place for more than a year, nutritionists have yet to gather empirical proof that they work.
   [B] The U.S. Senate reached a bipartisan agreement to include a federal menu-labeling law as part of comprehensive health-care reform. The law, which requires chain restaurants to give consumers the information of calories on their menus, has initiated an intensive debate in the country. The implementation of the law means that when you look at a menu from a chain restaurant, those calorie counts will be staring you down. "Order me if you dare," the mighty Quesadilla Burger from Applebee’s (1,440 calories) may entreat.
   [C] Meanwhile, Yum! Brands, parent company of Kentucky Fried Chicken, Pizza Hut and Taco Bell, has promised to post calorie information on its menus by next January. If the creator of KFC’s Famous Bowls—fried chicken, mashed potatoes, corn, gravy and shredded cheese packed together for your gut-busting pleasure—volunteers to share these numbers, what excuse can other chains claim for not following suit, particularly if Washington lags in forcing them to do so? The writing is on the wall. And perhaps, as a result, fewer calories will be in your stomach.
   [D] Although there is no direct evidence of its effectiveness, prominently displayed calorie counts has been found to steer purchases. Last year, researchers in New York City examined consumer eating habits at Subway, which voluntarily posted calorie info in its stores. This study reported that Subway customers who pondered the calorie information purchased 52 fewer calories than those who didn’t.
   [E] Nevertheless, the restaurant industry, the biggest opponent of the law, had been pushing a federal bill that would require chains nationwide to post calorie information somewhere near the point of purchase but not on the menu itself. The industry claimed menu postings would be a costly logistical burden and would clutter valuable real estate on the menus. Not surprisingly, chains won’t voice the most obvious argument against high-profile calorie counts, because they’re concerned that consumers will be turned off by what they see.
   [F] As the menu-labeling momentum keeps surging, will such policy really improve eating habits? Well, it can do no worse than what’s out there. Researchers observed 4,311 consumers of McDonald’s, Burger King and Starbucks to see if they accessed in-store nutrition data. The info was not on the menu board but in a pamphlet, on a wall poster or an on-site computer. Only 0.1%, of the consumers looked at the numbers. If restaurants are sincere about health, they need to put calorie counts on the menu, straight in the customers’ sight lines.
   [G] Further, the forced disclosure of calories could lead more restaurants to change their offerings. A report by New York City health officials noted that since menu-labeling went into effect last summer, some chains have lowered the calorie counts on certain items. For example, in last March, a Chicken Club sandwich at Wendy’s was listed as being 650 calories. In June this year, the item was 540 calories—a 17% drop.
   
选项
答案A
解析 F先是顺着反对方的思路，对新法能否改善人们的饮食习惯提出质疑，经过对现实情况的对比分析，最后一句得出“餐厅应该把热量数直接写在菜单上”(put calorie counts on the menu)的结论，即新法规的要求。A首句说目前菜单热量数标识只在全国三个地方强制实行(mandatory on-the-menu calorie counts．．．three localities)，从语义上看，A与F是连贯的。从行文逻辑来看，前文先提出问题，然后解决问题(通过分析反对意见和现实情况，得出“有必要实施新法”的结论)，消除疑问之后，接下来便开始谈论新法的实施情况，这样的行文顺序十分合理。因此确定A应在F之后，本题答案选A。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/4j2Z777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)