首页
登录
职称英语
Municipal bans on smoking in restaurants and bars are highly controversial, but
Municipal bans on smoking in restaurants and bars are highly controversial, but
游客
2023-12-30
32
管理
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. [br] 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”。文中只说到Scribbler50写博客,而做调查的是PalMD和Christian Jarrett,故排除B“Scrib-bler50做了些有关禁烟令效果的调查”。由第5段倒数两句可以看出,Christian Jarrett的研究发现,吸烟警告对不同人群的效果不同,故C的all smokers错误。D“禁止父母在与孩子同车时吸烟的措施是有效的”,最后一段第4句说该项禁令效果尚未有研究,故排除D。
转载请注明原文地址:http://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3318504.html
相关试题推荐
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,b
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,b
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,b
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,b
Sallyappearsbeingahardtimeconvincingherhusbandtogiveupsmoking.A、tob
Parapsychology,whichaverycontroversialfieldis,hasattractedarelatively
Begivenenoughresources,evenahighlyradioactivesitecanbedecontaminated
Sallyappearsbeingahardtimeconvincingherhusbandtogiveupsmoking.A、tob
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,but
Municipalbansonsmokinginrestaurantsandbarsarehighlycontroversial,but
随机试题
Thispassageismainlyabout______.[originaltext]Over2,000yearsago,Rome
TheCounsellingServicemaycontacttutorsif[originaltext]Sothecounsellings
EversinceitwasclaimedthatamedicinemadefromtheChinesethree-stripe
保险学是一门范围非常广泛的交叉学科,涉及经济、法律、医学、数学、社会学等学科,体
共用题干 第二篇TheIcemanOnaSeptemberdayin
实质性脏器破裂时,腹腔内积血不凝的主要原因是A.血液被腹膜渗液稀释 B.凝血因
文书倾向测试属于()测试。A.职业兴趣 B.职业能力 C.职业人格 D.
贵州成煤地质条件好,煤田分布广,储量大,煤种齐全,煤质较优,资源基础储备量居全国
适合设计单端固定桥的是( )。A.某一侧基牙倾斜度大,难以取得共同就位道 B
《特种设备安全监察条例》确定的起重机械类特种设备,是指用于()重物的机电设
最新回复
(
0
)