题目内容
根据《药品广告审查发布标准》 非处方药广告的忠告语是（）
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
In November the European Parliament’s culture and education committee is due to move forward on its proposed "audiovisual media services" directive, before sending it to the full parliament in December. The new rules update and relax the "Television Without Frontiers" directive of 1989, which opened Europe’s national markets. But critics complain that they also seek to extend fusty regulations from the era of broadcast television to today’s very different technologies. Rules on advertising, the protection of children and so on could potentially also apply to all kinds of video streams, including video blogs, online games and mobile-video services.This could have a chilling effect on innovation and risks stifling emerging technologies with rules designed for another age, says Chris Marsden of RAND Europe, a think-tank that has analysed the potential impact of the proposed rules for Ofcom, Britain’s media and telecoms regulator. "Regulators have to be thoughtful. They cannot predict the future of television "or the internet—no one can," says Niklas Zennstr. m, a co-founder of Skype, who is now setting up an internet television firm.The proposed rules may be unrealistic as well as onerous. The idea that websites can be regulated like broadcasters, which are required to keep strict records of what they show in order to help watchdogs investigate complaints, is untenable. Firms could simply relocate outside the European Union to escape the new rules. Last week Ruth Hieronymi, a member of parliament, said she would introduce wording that might help to overcome some of the objections.Behind the debate is the question of how best to balance competition and protection. Traditional broadcasters worry that they will be shackled by regulations while brisk start-ups can do as they please—so they like the idea of extending regulation to their new rivals. But even if the rules are approved as they stand, they will not come into force until 2010. Such a long, slow process seems incongruous given the pace of technological change. The word "onerous" (Line 1, Paragraph 4) most probably means（）
根据《互联网药品交易服务审批暂行规定》 向个人消费者提供互联网药品交易服务的药品连锁零售企业进行审批部门是（）
In November the European Parliament’s culture and education committee is due to move forward on its proposed "audiovisual media services" directive, before sending it to the full parliament in December. The new rules update and relax the "Television Without Frontiers" directive of 1989, which opened Europe’s national markets. But critics complain that they also seek to extend fusty regulations from the era of broadcast television to today’s very different technologies. Rules on advertising, the protection of children and so on could potentially also apply to all kinds of video streams, including video blogs, online games and mobile-video services.This could have a chilling effect on innovation and risks stifling emerging technologies with rules designed for another age, says Chris Marsden of RAND Europe, a think-tank that has analysed the potential impact of the proposed rules for Ofcom, Britain’s media and telecoms regulator. "Regulators have to be thoughtful. They cannot predict the future of television "or the internet—no one can," says Niklas Zennstr. m, a co-founder of Skype, who is now setting up an internet television firm.The proposed rules may be unrealistic as well as onerous. The idea that websites can be regulated like broadcasters, which are required to keep strict records of what they show in order to help watchdogs investigate complaints, is untenable. Firms could simply relocate outside the European Union to escape the new rules. Last week Ruth Hieronymi, a member of parliament, said she would introduce wording that might help to overcome some of the objections.Behind the debate is the question of how best to balance competition and protection. Traditional broadcasters worry that they will be shackled by regulations while brisk start-ups can do as they please—so they like the idea of extending regulation to their new rivals. But even if the rules are approved as they stand, they will not come into force until 2010. Such a long, slow process seems incongruous given the pace of technological change. According to the text, the new rules（）
The topic of cloning has been a politically and ethically controversial one since its very beginning. While the moral and philosophical aspects of the issues are entirely up to the interpretation of the individual, the application of cloning technology can be studied objectively. Many in the scientific community advocate the use of cloning for the preservation and support of endangered species of animals, which aside from cloning, have no other practical hope for avoiding extinction.The goal of the use of cloning to avoid extinction is the reintroduction of new genes into the gene pool of species with few survivors, ensuring the maintenance and expansion of genetic diversity. Likely candidates for this technique are species known to have very few surviving members, such as the African Bongo Antelope, the Sumatran Tiger, and the Chinese Giant Panda. In the case of Giant Panda, some artificial techniques for creating offspring have already been performed, perhaps paving the way for cloning as the next step in the process.With the estimated population of only about 1000 Giant Pandas left in the world, the urgency of the situation has led to desperate measures. One panda was born through the technique of artificial insemination in the San Diego Zoo in the United States. "Hua Mei" was born in 1999 after her parents, Hsing-Hsing and Ling-Ling, had trouble conceiving naturally.The plan to increase the Giant Panda population through the use of cloning involves the use of a species related to the Giant Panda, the American Black Bear. Egg cells will be removed from female black bears and then fertilized with Panda cells such as those from Ling-Ling or Hsing-Hsing. The fertilized embryo will then re-implanted into the black bear, where it will grow and mature, until a new panda is delivered from the black bear host.Critics of cloning technology argue that the emphasis on cloning as a method by which to preserve species will draw funding away from other methods, such as habitat preservation and conservation. Proponents of cloning counter that many countries in which many endangered species exist are too poor to protect and maintain the species’ habitats anyway, making cloning technology the only practical way to ensure that those species survive to future generations. The issue is still hotly debated, as both sides weigh the benefits that could be achieved against the risks and ethical concerns that constantly accompany any argument on the issue. (402 words)Notes: ethically 道德上。gene pool 基因库。insemination n.受精。fertilize 使受精。embryo 胚胎。proponent支持者，拥护者。weigh A against B权衡A和B的利弊。 The author directs attention to "Hua Mei", the baby panda born in the San Diego Zoo, in order to（）
微信支付 
支付宝支付