发布时间 : 星期三 文章Unit 6 Risks新编大学英语第二版第四册课文翻译培训资料更新完毕开始阅读5d0062b40640be1e650e52ea551810a6f524c8e6
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》
Unit 6 Risks
Risks and You
At some time or other, all of us have played the part of a hypochondriac, imagining that we have some terrible disease on the strength of very minor symptoms. Some people just have to hear about a new disease and they begin checking themselves to see if they may be suffering from it. But fear of disease is not our only fear, and neither is risk of disease the only risk we run. Modern life is full of all manner of threats-to our lives, our peace of mind, our families, and our future. And from these threats come questions that we must pose to ourselves: Is the food I buy safe? Are toys for my children likely to hurt them? Should my family avoid smoked meats? Am I likely to be robbed on vacations? Our uncertainties multiply indefinitely.
Anxiety about the risks of life is a bit like hypochondria; in both, the fear or anxiety feeds on partial information. But one sharp difference exists between the two. The hypochondriac can usually turn to a physician to get a definitive clarification of the situation-either you have the suspected disease or you don't. It is much more difficult when anxiety about other forms of risk is concerned, because with many risks, the situation is not as simple.
Risks are almost always a matter of probability rather than certainty. You may ask, \what if you get hit from the side and end up trapped inside the vehicle, unable to escape because of a damaged seat belt mechanism? So does this mean that you should spend the extra money for an air bag? Again, in head-on collisions, it may well save your life. But what if the bag accidentally inflates while you are driving down the highway, thus causing an accident that would never have occurred otherwise?
All of this is another way of saying that nothing we do is completely safe. There are risks, often potentially serious ones, associated with every hobby we have, every job we take, every food we eat-in other words, with every action. But the fact that there are risks associated with everything we are going to do does not, or should not, reduce us to trembling neurotics. Some actions are riskier than others. The point is to inform ourselves about the relevant risks and then act accordingly.
For example, larger cars are generally safer than small ones in collisions. But how much safer? The answer is that you are roughly twice as likely to die in a serious crash in a
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》
small car than in a large one. Yet larger cars generally cost more than small ones (and also use more gas, thus increasing the environmental risks!), so how do we decide when the reduced risks are worth the added costs? The ultimate risk avoider might, for instance, buy a tank or an armored car, thus minimizing the risk of death or injury in a collision. But is the added cost and inconvenience worth the difference in price, even supposing you could afford it?
We cannot begin to answer such questions until we have a feel for the level of risks in question. So how do we measure the level of a risk? Some people seem to think that the answer is a simple number. We know, for instance, that about 25,000 people per year die in automobile accidents. By contrast, only about 300 die per year in mine accidents and disasters. Does that mean that riding in a car is much riskier than mining? Not necessarily. The fact is that some 200 million Americans regularly ride in automobiles in the United States every year; perhaps 700,000 are involved in mining. The relevant figure that we need to assess a risk is a ratio or fraction. The numerator of the fraction tells us how many people were killed or harmed as the result of a particular activity over a certain period of time; the denominator tells us how many people were involved in that activity during that time. All risk levels are thus ratios or fractions, with values between 0 (no risk) and 1 (totally risky).
By reducing all risks to ratios or fractions of this sort, we can begin to compare different sorts of risks-like mining versus riding in a car. The larger this ratio, that is, the closer it is to 1, the riskier the activity in question. In the case just discussed, we would find the relative safety of car travel and coal mining by dividing the numbers of lives lost in each by the number of people participating in each. Here, it is clear that the riskiness of traveling by car is about 1 death per 10,000 passengers; with mining, the risk level is about 4 deaths per 10,000 miners. So although far more people are killed in car accidents than in mining, the latter turns out to be four times riskier than the former. Those ratios enable us to compare the risks of activities or situations as different as apples and oranges. If you are opposed to risks, you will want to choose your activities by focusing on the small-ratio exposures. If you are reckless, then you are not likely to be afraid of higher ratios unless they get uncomfortably large.
Once we understand that risk can never be totally eliminated from any situation and that, therefore, nothing is completely safe, we will then see that the issue is not one of avoiding risks altogether but rather one of managing risks in a sensible way. Risk management requires two things: common sense and information about the character and degree of the risks we may be running.
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》
风险与你
1 在说不定的某个时候，我们大家都曾充当过疑病症患者的角色,只凭一些轻微的症状便怀疑自己得了某种可怕的病。有的人只要一听说一种新的疾病，就会去检查，看自己是否可能患了这种病。然而，对疾病的恐惧并非我们唯一的恐惧。同样，患病的危险也并非我们唯一会遇上的危险。现代生活中充满了各种各样的威胁，诸如对我们生命的威胁，对我们平和心境的威胁，对我们家人的威胁，对我们未来的威胁。从而产生了好些问题，我们不得不问自己：我买的食品安全吗？给孩子们的玩具会伤害他们吗？我们家的人是不是不该吃熏肉？我度假时会不会遭抢劫？我们的疑虑就无休止地增加。
2 对生活中风险的担忧与疑病症有相似之处；二者的恐惧或忧虑皆起因于信息不全面。但二者之间也存在一个明显的差别。疑病症患者通常可以求助于医生，以便澄清疑虑——要么你得了你所怀疑的疾病，要么你没得。但当涉及到其它形式的风险时，事情就要困难得多，因为对许多风险来说，情况并不那么简单。
3 风险几乎总是一个可能性的问题而无确定性可言。你也许会问：“我该不该系安全带？”如果你坐的车要与其它车正面相撞，那当然该系安全带。倘若你的车侧面被撞，结果你被困在车里，又因安全带装置遭破坏而无法挣脱，那怎么办呢？这是否意味着你该再花些钱在车内安一个保险气袋呢？同样，在正面相撞的情况下，保险气袋完全可以救你一命。但是，万一正当你在高速公路上开车时，保险气袋突然意外充气膨胀，从而导致了本来绝不会发生的事故，那又该如何是好？
4 上面说的这一切，只是从另一角度说明我们所做的事没有一件是百分之百安全的。有些风险——常常是潜在的重大风险——与我们的每个业余爱好、所做的每项工作、所吃的每种食物有关，换句话说，与所进行的任何活动有关。但我们又不能，也不该因危险存在于我们将要做的每件事，而变成战战兢兢的神经症患者。有些活动是比其它活动更危险。关键在于要让自己了解相应的风险，然后相机行事。
5 例如，两车相撞时，大车总的说来要比小车安全些。可究竟能安全多少呢？答案是这样：在一起严重的车祸中坐小车丧生的可能性是坐大车的两倍左右。然而，大车通常比小车贵（并且消耗更多的汽油，由此给环境带来了更大的风险！）。那么我们该怎样确定什么时候值得为降低风险增加花费呢？例如，避免风险最保险的做法也许是去买一辆坦克或装甲车，从而把撞车时死亡或受伤的风险降到最小。然而，即便你买得起，这笔额外的费用以及忍受坦克或装甲车所带来的不便是否值得呢？
6 在我们尚不知所涉及的风险程度之前，我们还无法回答这些问题。那么，我们该如何去衡量风险程度呢？有些人似乎认为答案只不过是一个简单的数字。例如，我们知道每年大约有25,000 人死于车祸。相比之下，每年只有大约300人死于矿山事故和灾难。这难道就意味着乘坐汽车要比采矿危险得多吗？未必。事实是，在美国每年大约有两亿人经常性地以车代步；而大概只有70万人从事采矿作业。我们评估一种风险时，所需要的有关数字是一
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》
个比率或分数。该分数的分子告诉我们在某个特定时期由于从事某种特定活动而丧生或受伤的人数；其分母告诉我们在这一时期从事这种活动的总人数。这样，所有的风险程度都是由比率或分数表示，其大小介于0（无风险）到1（完全风险）之间。
7 通过把所有风险都简化为这种比率或分数，我们便可以开始比较不同种类的风险，如比较采矿与乘坐汽车。这个比率越大，也就是说它越接近1，那么有关活动的风险就越大。在刚才讨论的例子中，我们可以用每一活动中死亡的人数除以参与该活动的总人数，从而找出汽车旅行与采煤的相对安全性。此处，我们可以很清楚地看到，乘坐汽车旅行的风险是每一万人中大约有一人丧生；而就采矿而言，其危险程度是每一万矿工中大约有四人死亡。所以，尽管在车祸中丧生的人远比采矿要多，其实后者的风险是前者的四倍。这些比率使我们能够对毫不相干的活动或情形的危险性加以比较，即便差别如苹果与橘子那样大也能比较。如果你反对冒险，你就会选择风险比率较小的活动。如果你无所畏惧，那么你往往会对高比率不太在乎，除非它们大得令人难以承受。
8 我们一旦明白了风险是永远无法从任何情况中完全去除的，因而就没有绝对安全的事，我们也就会明白问题的关键不是要彻底避免风险，而是要理智地管理风险。风险管理需要两大要素：常识以及与我们可能要承担的风险的性质和程度相关的信息。
Health Risks
Opinion polls repeatedly tell us that the only thing Americans worry about more than the environment is their health. This is entirely understandable, for health is obviously preferable to illness. What makes today's preoccupation with health slightly surprising is that Americans are far healthier now than they have ever been. Many diseases that once struck terror into hearts have either been completely eliminated or brought under control. Although AIDS is a notable exception, few new mass killers have come along to replace the ones that have been eliminated.
Nonetheless, health—and the various threats to it—remains everyone's permanent concern. After all, more than half of us (57 percent) will die from either heart disease or cancer, if current trends continue.
One major problem with any comparison of health risks—especially life-threatening ones—is that they differ enormously in their immediacy. For instance, AIDS—if you get it—will probably be fatal after a number of years. Cancer induced by smoking or exposure to radiation, on the other hand, may take 20 to 30 years before its catastrophic effects show up. In making choices about health risks, therefore, it is important to bear in mind the likely time lag between taking a risk and suffering its consequences.
<<<<<<精品资料》》》》》