单选题
For decades, American society has been moving toward a
complete ban on smoking tobacco. Since about the mid-20th century, when
scientific studies revealing the drug's devastating effects on the human body
were made public, public policy and social attitudes have shifted more and more
against tobacco. This is something to my taste. But in
executing its well-intentioned ban on consuming tobacco products on University
of California campuses, the university administration's prohibition of
e-cigarettes is a step too far. These means of taking in tobacco can help get
smokers off conventional cigarettes, and there's no conclusive proof that there
are negative effects for bystanders. Simply put, e-cigarettes shouldn't affect
people who haven't made the decision to put themselves at risk.
It's also a point of contention as to how harmful e-cigarettes even are to
oneself. Boston University professor Michael Siegel, who advocates banning
cigarettes, doesn't believe we should restrict e-cigarettes the same way we do
"conventional" cigarettes, according to the East Bay Express. Furthermore,
according to a study published in the esteemed British medical journal the
Lancet, e-cigarettes were "modestly effective" at reducing smokers' dependency
on tobacco—much like the commercially available nicotine patches.
It doesn't seem there are obvious negative externalities to the use of
e-cigarettes. If that's the case, then what's the basis of the ban? Tobacco Free
Berkeley project manager Steve Maranzana illustrated one justification when he
told the East Bay Express that the university wants "to steer people towards
quitting resources that have been proven to be effective and
FDA-approved." In the context of a "better safe than sorry"
approach, the university's decision to include prohibiting e-cigarettes in its
tobacco ban makes sense, so does the idea that the university wants people to
use federally sanctioned "quitting resources." But just because the university
wants to play it safe or tell people to use one kind of quitting product, that
doesn't mean it has that authority. Banning e-cigarettes is an
excessive intrusion on the judgment and lifestyle of members of the UC
community. Individuals should have the ability to reason for themselves if
e-cigarettes are the right choice for them, and they should also be the ones to
determine whether they want to use UC-recommended or FDA-approved
methods. And if people decide to use e-cigarettes while not
creating a problem for anyone else, why should the university get to take away
that option?
单选题
It can be concluded from the first paragraph that the author ______.
A. has been smoking cigarettes for many years
B. objects to a complete ban on smoking tobacco
C. is in favor of banning cigarette smoking
D. often wonders if cigarette smoking is harmful
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】文章第一段介绍美国人为禁烟所做出的努力，说明禁烟是大势所趋。该段最后一句中的to my taste说明作者的态度，该词组的含义是“使某人高兴”，表明作者支持禁烟。
单选题
The author believes that prohibition of e-cigarettes by University of
California ______.
A. seems well-grounded and innovative
B. is illegal and consequently ineffective
C. can effectively help quit smoking
D. does not have a solid or sound basis
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】在文章第二段，作者评论加州大学禁止在校园内使用电子香烟的规定。该段中的关键词是a step too far(有点过分)。作者接着谈电子香烟的用途和优势，说明加州大学的这个规定不合理。
单选题
Paragraph 4 implies that ______.
A. FDA has approved the use of e-cigarettes in quitting smoking
B. e-cigarettes have proved to be effective for quitting smoking
C. Steve Maranzana does not welcome the use of e-cigarettes
D. University of Berkeley has done nothing to ban smoking