The Weird World of Tobacco
By Anna Quidlen
[1] Imagine that millions of Americans are addicted to a lethal (poisonous/ deadly) drug, yet the Food and Drug Administration had repeatedly refud to 心灰意冷的句子regulate (control) it. Imagine that when (while) the FDA does its duty, an appeals court decides it cannot do so, that the drug is so dangerous that if the FDA regulated it, it would have to be banned.
[2] Welcome to the topsy-turvy (是非颠倒的) world of tobacco, where nothing much makes n (be meaningful) except the vast profits, where tobacco-company executives slip-slide along the continuum (连续统一体) from aggrieved (sad) innocence to heartfelt (sincere真诚的) regret without breaking (shed blood) a sweat, and where the only people who em to be able to shoot straight鸡蛋蒸肉 (hit the target命中目标的) are the jurors (judges) who decide the ubiquitous (common) lawsuits.
[3] The most recent panel (court) handed down a judgment of $ 145 billion—the largest jury
award in history—on behalf of sick smokers in Florida. Lawyers for the tobacco companies thundered that the judgment would bankrupt them, yet the stock market scarcely (hardly) shuddered. Experts said the amount would likely (possible) be reduced when cooler judicial heads prevailed.
[4] The jurors—who gave up two years of their lives, listened to endless witness and yet deliberated (gave) only a few hours—could be forgiven if they felt they'd fallen down Alice's rabbit hole into Wonderland, where the Queen of Hearts cries "Off with their heads万圣节恐怖图片 (Kill them)" but no one is ever executed (killed).
[5] Al Gore, for instance, inspired (=encouraged) by the death of his sister from lung cancer, has insisted that he will do everything he can to keep cigarettes out of the hands of children. But he says he would never outlaw cigarettes becau millions of people smoke. How many urs mandate legality? What about the estimated 3.6 million chronic cocaine urs, or the 2. 4 million people who admit to having shot (injected) or snorted唐氏筛查看男女 heroin?
黄瓜拌拉皮
[6] I can almost feel all the smokers, tired of standing outside their office buildings puffing in the rain, jumping up and down and yelling, "Tobacco is different from 闹钟英语illicit drugs!" Becau it is legal? Now there's a circular argument.
[7] A hundred years ago the sale of cigarettes was against the law in 14 states. The Supreme Court had concluded of (about) cigarettes, "They posss no virtue (good quality), but are inherently bad, and bad only." At the time (Then), Coca-Cola contained traces of cocaine, and heroin was in cough syrups.
[8] Since then tobacco companies have spread political contributions around like weedkiller on the lawn in summer, supporting largely complicit Republicans, who like free enterpri (and soft money) more than they hate emphyma. (George W. Bush responded to a question about the recent mega-ttlement (judge/ decision) by bemoaning a litigious nation.)
[9] Responsibility-minded Americans accept (considered) the argument that individuals have the right to poison themlves, although studies showing that the vast majority of s
mokers began as minors (as young children) rai questions about informed connt.
[10] Official tobacco apologists (apology. n./ apologize. vt.) spent years insisting their product did not cau cancer, and then that it was not addictive (n.). Now they've done a 180, arguing that since there is no such thing as a safe cigarette, the FDA, created to regulate the safety of products, cannot touch them. If this sounds (=is) like having it both ways, that's becau it is.
[11] Meanwhile (=at the same time), Philip Morris makes large contributions to 超市的拼音soup kitchens, ballet companies, muums and shelters—being a good citizen with the profits of a product that kills 400, 000 people a year. And magazines run articles about the dangers of cigarettes in the same issues that adverti them.
[12] Even tobacco foes have fudged (hesitated). When Dr. David Kessler ran (administrate) the FDA, he publicly concluded (said) what everyone already knew: that cigarettes are nothing more than a delivery device (media) for nicotine, a dangerous and addictive drug. But the agency did not take the obvious next step. The Food, Drug, and C
法制节目观后感
osmetic Act forbids the sale (ll) of any drug that is not safe and effective, and part of the FDA's mandate (responsibility) is to regulate devices. Cigarettes are a device (media/ equipment). The drug and chemicals they deliver are patently (obviously) unsafe. Ergo (Therefore), cigarettes should be banned.
[13] That's not going to happen in our lifetime. Too many tobacco farmers, too many tobacco addicts; a right to a livelihood (happiness), a right to a lifestyle. [The arguments (reasons) hold for (support) legalizing illicit drugs as well, but never mind.]
