首页
登录
职称英语
The President’s Cancer Panel is the Mount Everest of the medical mainstream,
The President’s Cancer Panel is the Mount Everest of the medical mainstream,
游客
2023-12-12
19
管理
问题
The President’s Cancer Panel is the Mount Everest of the medical mainstream, so it is astonishing to learn that it is poised to join ranks with the organic food movement and declare:chemicals threaten our bodies. The cancer panel is releasing a landmark 200-page report, warning that our lackadaisical approach to regulation may have far-reaching consequences for our health.
I’ve read an advance copy of the report, and it’s an extraordinary document. It calls on America to rethink the way we confront cancer, including much more rigorous regulation of chemicals. Traditionally, we reduce cancer risks through regular doctor visits, self-examinations and screenings such as mammograms. The President’s Cancer Panel suggests other eye-opening steps as well, such as giving preference to organic food, checking radon levels in the home and microwaving food in glass containers rather than plastic. In particular, the report warns about exposures to chemicals during pregnancy, when risk of damage seems to be the greatest. Noting that 300 contaminants have been detected in umbilical cord blood of newborn babies, the study warns that:"to a disturbing extent, babies are born ’pre-polluted’."
It’s striking that this report emerges not from the fringe but from the mission control of mainstream scientific and medical thinking, the President’s Cancer Panel. Established in 1971, this is a group of three distinguished experts who review America’s cancer program and report directly to the President. One of the seats is now vacant, but the panel members who joined in this report are Dr. LaSalle Leffall Jr. , an oncologist and professor of surgery at Haward University, and Dr. Margaret Kripke, an immunologist at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. Both were originally appointed to the panel by former President George W. Bush. "We wanted to let people know that we’re concerned, and that they should be concerned, " Professor Leffall told me.
The report blames weak laws, lax enforcement and fragmented authority, as well as the existing regulatory presumption that chemicals are safe unless strong evidence emerges to the contrary. "Only a few hundred of the more than 80, 000 chemicals in use in the United States have been tested for safety, " the report says. It adds:"Many known or suspected carcinogens are completely unregulated. "
Industry may howl. The food industry has already been fighting legislation in the Senate backed by Dianne Feinstein of California that would ban bisphenol-A, commonly found in plastics and better known as BPA.from food and beverage containers. Studies of BPA have raised alarm bells for decades, and the evidence is still complex and open to debate. That’s life: In the real world, regulatory decisions usually must be made with ambiguous and conflicting data. The Panel’s point is that we should be prudent in such situations, rather than recklessly approving chemicals of uncertain effect.
The President’s Cancer Panel report will give a boost to Senator Feinstein’s efforts. It may also help the prospects of the Safe Chemicals Act, backed by Senator Frank Lautenberg and several colleagues, to improve the safety of chemicals on the market. Some 41 percent of Americans will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives, and they include Democrats and Republicans alike. Protecting ourselves and our children from toxins should be an effort that both parties can get behind—-if enough members of Congress are willing to put the public interest ahead of corporate interests.
One reason for concern is that some cancers are becoming more common, particularly in children. We don’t know why that is, but the proliferation of chemicals in water, foods, air and household products is widely suspected as a factor. I’m hoping the President’s Cancer Panel report will shine a stronger spotlight on environmental causes of health problems—not only cancer, but perhaps also diabetes, obesity and autism. [br] The author’s attitude towards the report of the Cancer Panel is
选项
A、ambivalent.
B、admiring.
C、apathetic.
D、awesome.
答案
B
解析
态度题。由report定位至首段末句。a landmark 200-page report中的landmark意为“划时代的”。之后第二段第一句又出现了extraordinary一词。此外,该段第四句“The President’s CancerPanel suggests other eye-opening steps as well…”中出现了eye—opening,可见作者对该报告持肯定态度,大加赞扬,故[B]符合文意。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3267511.html
相关试题推荐
Naturalhealersandevensegmentsoftheconventionalmedicalcommunityreco
Naturalhealersandevensegmentsoftheconventionalmedicalcommunityreco
Oldermenconsideringroboticsurgeryforprostatecancershouldn’ttrustth
President______wasthefirstAmericanpresidentorderingschooldesegregationin
TheheadofstateofAustraliais______.A、theGovernorB、thePresidentC、thePri
______waselectedpresidentforthemosttermsinAmericanhistory.A、TheodoreRo
______wasthefirstpresidentresignedfromoffice.A、RichardNixonB、BillClinto
U.S.presidentialelectionisheld______.A、inNovembereachleapyearB、inJanua
In1992,______ranforthePresidentasanindependentcandidate.A、BillClintonB
DuringtheCivilWar,President______issuedtheEmancipationProclamation,which
随机试题
Theprocessofacquiringtheself-disciplineforJapanesebeginsinchildho
Thesedays,peoplewhodo【C1】______workoftenreceivefarmoremoneythanpe
Disgustingasthefoodis,hetriestosinghighlyofthedishesinexchangeof
Itwasafineday,______wedecidedtostayathome.A、soB、butC、thereforeD、co
[originaltext]Germany’sRhineRiverishundredsofmileslong,butnotall
超声检查至少在妊娠几周后才能较好地显示胚胎初具人形A.3周 B.5周 C.6
个体建康危险因素评估结果为评估年龄高于实际年龄,表示()A.被评估者存在的
根据上图,下列说法正确的是:A.1996年至2004年,城市居民最低生活保
关于引起工程索赔的原因,下列说法不正确的是()。A、工程合同方面B、意外风险
银行承兑汇票的承兑银行,应当按照票面金额向出票人收取()的手续费。A:千分之一
最新回复
(
0
)