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
86
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://www.kaotiyun.com/show/kXcD777K
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
[A]Askingforparentalinvolvement[B]Settingupsmallgroups[C]Makingclassroomeventspredictable[D]Extendin
[A]Askingforparentalinvolvement[B]Settingupsmallgroups[C]Makingclassroomeventspredictable[D]Extendin
Peoplehavespeculatedforcenturiesaboutafuturewithoutwork.Todayisnodifferent,withacademics,writers,andactivists
ThequestionofhowAmericansspentand,crucially,savedmoneyoverthepasttwoyearsloomslargeovertheeconomytoday.Ins
Peoplewhousuallychowdownonchillipeppersmayliveforlongerandhaveasignificantlyreducedriskofdyingfromcardiovas
HarlanCobenbelievesthatifyou’reawriter,you’llfindthetime;andthatifyoucan’tfindthetime,thenwritingisn’tap
Duringthelast15years,theEarth’ssurfacetemperatureroseatarateof0.04℃adecade,farslowerthanthe0.18℃)increase
Despitehelpingtorecordevents,photoscoulddamageourmemories.Researchersfoundpeoplewhotakepictureshave【C1】________r
WhenNeilArmstrongandBuzzAldrinreturnedfromthemoon,theircargoincludednearlyfiftypoundsofrockandsoil,whichwer
InApril,BritishresearchersatUniversityCollegeLondonfoundthat,ratherthantherecommendedfive,sevendailyportionsof
随机试题
混合痔是指
营养性巨幼细胞性贫血主要临床表现不包括
宋某持三角刮刀抢劫王某财物,王某夺下宋某的三角刮刀,并将宋某推倒在水泥地上,宋某头部着地,当即昏迷。王某随后持三角刮刀将宋某杀死。关于王某行为的性质,正确的是:()
根据税收征收管理法律制度的规定,下列情形中,纳税人应当办理注销税务登记的是()。
《蒙古秘史》和戏剧《虎头牌》反映了明清时期吉林的英雄史诗和史传文学以及戏剧创作的兴盛。()
西方教育心理学的创始人是()。
论述侵权民事责任的免责事由。
A:Whydon’tyouhavedinnerwithmetonight?B:______.
在窗体上画一个名称为Command1的命令按钮,然后编写如下程序:OptionBase1PrivateSubCommandl_Click()DimaAsVarianta=Array(1,2,3,4,5)Sum=0Fori
Moreover,theColemanreportfoundthatthegapbetweenblackandwhitechildren’sachievementscoresappearedasearlyasthef
最新回复
(
0
)