题目内容
After millennia of growth which was so slow that each generation hardly noticed it, the cities are suddenly racing off in every direction. The world population goes up by two percent a year, city population goes up by four percent a year, but in big cities the rate may be as much as five and six percent a year. (61) To give only one example of almost visible acceleration. Athens today grows by three dwellings and 100 square meters of road every hour. There is no reason to believe that this pace will slacken. (62) As technology gradually swallows up all forms of work, industrial and agricultural, the rural areas are going to shrink, just as they have shrunk in Britain, and the vast majority of their people will move into the city. In fact, in Britain now only about four or five percent of people live in rural areas and depend upon them; all through the developing world the vanguard of the rural exodus has reached the urban fringes already, and there they huddle in shanty towns. We are heading towards an urban world.(63) This enormous increase will go ahead whatever we do, and we have to remember that the new cities devour space. People now acquire far more goods and things. (64) There is a greater density of household goods, they demand more services such as sewage and drainage. Above all, the car changes everything: rising incomes and rising populations can make urban car density increase by something like four and five percent in a decade; traffic flows rise to fill whatever scale of highways are provided for them. The car also has a curious ambivalence: it creates and then it destroys mobility. The car tempts people further out and then gives them the appalling problem of getting back. It makes them believe they can spend Sunday in Brighton, but makes it impossible for them to return before, say, two in the morning. (65) People go further and further away to reach open air and countryside which continuously recedes from them, and just as their working weeks decline and they begin to have more time for leisure, they find they cannot get to the open spaces or the recreation or the beaches which they now have the time to enjoy. This enormous increase will go ahead whatever we do, and we have to remember that the new cities devour space.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Only three strategies are available for controlling cancer: prevention, screening and treatment. Lung cancer causes more deaths than any other types of cancer. A major cause of the disease is not (21) known; there is no good evidence that screening is much helpful, and treatment (22) in about 90 percent of all cases. At present, therefore, the main strategy must be (23) . This may not always be true, of course, as for some other types of cancer, research (24) the past few decades has produced (or suggested) some importance in prevention, screening or treatment.(25) , however, we consider not what research may one day offer but what today’s knowledge could already deliver that is not being delivered, then the most practicable and cost-effective opportunities for (26) . premature death from cancer, especially lung cancer, probably involve neither screening nor improved (27) , but prevention.This conclusion does not depend on the unrealistic assumption that we can (28) tobacco. It merely assumes that we can reduce cigarette sales appreciably by raising prices or by (29) on the type of education that already appears to have a (30) effect on cigarette assumption by whitecollar workers and that we can substantially reduce the amount of tar (31) per cigarette. The practicability of preventing cancer by such measures applies not only in those countries, (32) , the United States of America, because cigarette smoking has been common for decades, 25 to 30 percent of all cancer deaths now involves lung cancer, but also in those where it has become (33) only recently. In China, lung cancer (34) accounts for only 5 to 10 percent of all cancer deaths. This is because it may take as much as half a century (35) the rise in smoking to increase the incidence to lung cancer. Countries where cigarette smoking is only now becoming widespread can expect enormous increase in lung cancer during the 1990’s or early in the next century, (36) prompt effective action is taken against the habit-indeed, such increase is already plainly evident in parts of the (37) .There are four reasons why the prevention of lung cancer is of such overwhelming importance: First, the disease is extremely common, causing more deaths than any other type of cancer now (38) ; Secondly, it is generally incurable; Thirdly, effective, practicable measures to reduce its incidence are already reliably known; and finally, (39) tobacco consumption will also have a substantial (40) on many other diseases. 39().
Only three strategies are available for controlling cancer: prevention, screening and treatment. Lung cancer causes more deaths than any other types of cancer. A major cause of the disease is not (21) known; there is no good evidence that screening is much helpful, and treatment (22) in about 90 percent of all cases. At present, therefore, the main strategy must be (23) . This may not always be true, of course, as for some other types of cancer, research (24) the past few decades has produced (or suggested) some importance in prevention, screening or treatment.(25) , however, we consider not what research may one day offer but what today’s knowledge could already deliver that is not being delivered, then the most practicable and cost-effective opportunities for (26) . premature death from cancer, especially lung cancer, probably involve neither screening nor improved (27) , but prevention.This conclusion does not depend on the unrealistic assumption that we can (28) tobacco. It merely assumes that we can reduce cigarette sales appreciably by raising prices or by (29) on the type of education that already appears to have a (30) effect on cigarette assumption by whitecollar workers and that we can substantially reduce the amount of tar (31) per cigarette. The practicability of preventing cancer by such measures applies not only in those countries, (32) , the United States of America, because cigarette smoking has been common for decades, 25 to 30 percent of all cancer deaths now involves lung cancer, but also in those where it has become (33) only recently. In China, lung cancer (34) accounts for only 5 to 10 percent of all cancer deaths. This is because it may take as much as half a century (35) the rise in smoking to increase the incidence to lung cancer. Countries where cigarette smoking is only now becoming widespread can expect enormous increase in lung cancer during the 1990’s or early in the next century, (36) prompt effective action is taken against the habit-indeed, such increase is already plainly evident in parts of the (37) .There are four reasons why the prevention of lung cancer is of such overwhelming importance: First, the disease is extremely common, causing more deaths than any other type of cancer now (38) ; Secondly, it is generally incurable; Thirdly, effective, practicable measures to reduce its incidence are already reliably known; and finally, (39) tobacco consumption will also have a substantial (40) on many other diseases. 40().
Only three strategies are available for controlling cancer: prevention, screening and treatment. Lung cancer causes more deaths than any other types of cancer. A major cause of the disease is not (21) known; there is no good evidence that screening is much helpful, and treatment (22) in about 90 percent of all cases. At present, therefore, the main strategy must be (23) . This may not always be true, of course, as for some other types of cancer, research (24) the past few decades has produced (or suggested) some importance in prevention, screening or treatment.(25) , however, we consider not what research may one day offer but what today’s knowledge could already deliver that is not being delivered, then the most practicable and cost-effective opportunities for (26) . premature death from cancer, especially lung cancer, probably involve neither screening nor improved (27) , but prevention.This conclusion does not depend on the unrealistic assumption that we can (28) tobacco. It merely assumes that we can reduce cigarette sales appreciably by raising prices or by (29) on the type of education that already appears to have a (30) effect on cigarette assumption by whitecollar workers and that we can substantially reduce the amount of tar (31) per cigarette. The practicability of preventing cancer by such measures applies not only in those countries, (32) , the United States of America, because cigarette smoking has been common for decades, 25 to 30 percent of all cancer deaths now involves lung cancer, but also in those where it has become (33) only recently. In China, lung cancer (34) accounts for only 5 to 10 percent of all cancer deaths. This is because it may take as much as half a century (35) the rise in smoking to increase the incidence to lung cancer. Countries where cigarette smoking is only now becoming widespread can expect enormous increase in lung cancer during the 1990’s or early in the next century, (36) prompt effective action is taken against the habit-indeed, such increase is already plainly evident in parts of the (37) .There are four reasons why the prevention of lung cancer is of such overwhelming importance: First, the disease is extremely common, causing more deaths than any other type of cancer now (38) ; Secondly, it is generally incurable; Thirdly, effective, practicable measures to reduce its incidence are already reliably known; and finally, (39) tobacco consumption will also have a substantial (40) on many other diseases. 37().
The destruction of our natural resources and contamination of our food supply continue to occur, largely because of the extreme difficulty in affixing (把……固定) legal responsibility on those who continue to treat our environment with reckless abandon (放任). Attempts to prevent pollution by legislation, economic incentives and friendly persuasion have been met by lawsuits, personal and industrial denial and long delays-not only in accepting responsibility, but more importantly, in doing something about it.It seems that only when government decides it can afford tax incentives or production sacrifices is there any initiative for change. Where is industry’s and our recognition that protecting mankind’s great treasure is the single most important responsibility If ever there will be time for environmental health professionals to come to the frontlines and provide leadership to solve environmental problems, that time is now.We are being asked, and, in fact, the public is demanding that we take positive action. It is our responsibility as professionals in environmental health to make the difference. Yes, the ecologists, the environmental activists and the conservationists serve to communicate, stimulate thinking and promote behavioral change. However, it is those of us who are paid to make the decisions to develop, improve and enforce environmental standards, I submit, who must lead the charge.We must recognize that environmental health issues do not stop at city limits, county lines, state or even federal boundaries. We can no longer afford to be tunnel-visioned in our approach. We must visualize issues from every perspective to make the objective decisions. We must express our views clearly to prevent media distortion and public confusion.I believe we have a three-part mission for the present. First, we must continue to press for improvements in the quality of life that people can make for themselves. Second, we must investigate and understand the link between environment and health. Third, we must be able to communicate technical information in a form that citizens can understand. If we can accomplish these three goals in this decade, maybe we can finally stop environmental degradation, and not merely hold it back. We will then be able to spend pollution dollars truly on prevention rather than on bandages. The word "tunnel-visioned" (Line 2, ParA．4) most probably means "()."
微信支付 
支付宝支付