-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
ELISE HU, HOST:
More than 30,000 people are killed by guns every year in the U.S. That's more than those that die of AIDS, and more - and about the same number as those who die in car crashes or from liver disease. But unlike diseases and car crashes, the federal government doesn't treat gun injuries or deaths as a public health threat.
Public health leaders say there are ways to reduce the toll1 of gun violence. NPR's Alison Kodjak reports that politics have gotten in the way.
ALISON KODJAK, BYLINE2: When U.S. officials feared an outbreak of the Zika virus last year, the Department of Health and Human Services, along with state officials, went into high gear. They allocated3 more than a billion dollars to deal with the potential threat. They tested mosquitoes neighborhood by neighborhood. They launched outreach campaigns to encourage people to use bug4 spray. And they pushed the development of a vaccine5.
VIVEK MURTHY: The response was swift.
KODJAK: That's former Surgeon General Vivek Murthy.
MURTHY: I was in the administration at that time, and we mobilized a tremendous number of resources to respond to Zika.
KODJAK: When an Ebola outbreak struck a year earlier in Africa, the story was the same. Congress almost immediately allocated billions for research and response. But last month, when 50 people died and more than 400 were injured in Las Vegas, and then within weeks another 26 died in Texas of the same cause, health officials have had almost no role.
MURTHY: If you look at the number of people who have died or been injured from gun violence, that dwarfs6 the number of people who have been affected7 by Zika or Ebola. There's absolutely no comparison.
KODJAK: Yet the government spends only about $22 million a year on research into gun violence. The reason - Congress. Back in 1997, lawmakers added a provision in the bill that funds the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention barring the agency from doing anything that would, quote, "advocate or promote gun control." At the same time, they cut the CDC's budget by the exact amount it had been spending on gun violence research.
The result was that government research into the causes of gun violence all but stopped. The issue comes up routinely after mass shootings. Two years ago, after a young man killed nine people in a church in South Carolina, our reporter asked former House Speaker John Boehner about the CDC restrictions8.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED BROADCAST)
JOHN BOEHNER: The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect the public health. I'm sorry, but a gun is not a disease.
KODJAK: After the most recent shootings, Democrats9 in Congress have called for more restrictions on guns, while Republicans, including President Trump10, say the problem is mental health. But neither approach is backed by research, says Dr. Georges Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association.
GEORGES BENJAMIN: When a new disease - particularly an infectious disease - enters the community, we have a mechanism11 to anticipate it, track it, get our arms around it. We do that when we have, you know, measles12, mumps13, chicken pox, Zika. But firearm-related death and disability, we don't.
KODJAK: He says that knowledge could lead to policies that reduce the toll of guns without cutting off access.
BENJAMIN: Firearms are a tool. And it's a consumer product. And unlike other consumer products, we're not working hard to make that consumer product safer.
KODJAK: The way we do with cars, he says. Benjamin points to the combination of safety features - like airbags and seat belts - and safety policies - like requiring licensing14 and banning drunk driving - that have made cars less lethal15 while ensuring they're still available.
BENJAMIN: So we've done everything we can to ensure that this epidemic16 of death and disability from firearms is only going to get worse.
KODJAK: Unless, he says, lawmakers decide they want to find out what causes gun violence and study ways to prevent it. Alison Kodjak, NPR News, Washington.
1 toll | |
n.过路(桥)费;损失,伤亡人数;v.敲(钟) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 byline | |
n.署名;v.署名 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 allocated | |
adj. 分配的 动词allocate的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 bug | |
n.虫子;故障;窃听器;vt.纠缠;装窃听器 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 vaccine | |
n.牛痘苗,疫苗;adj.牛痘的,疫苗的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 dwarfs | |
n.侏儒,矮子(dwarf的复数形式)vt.(使)显得矮小(dwarf的第三人称单数形式) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 affected | |
adj.不自然的,假装的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 restrictions | |
约束( restriction的名词复数 ); 管制; 制约因素; 带限制性的条件(或规则) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 democrats | |
n.民主主义者,民主人士( democrat的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 trump | |
n.王牌,法宝;v.打出王牌,吹喇叭 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 mechanism | |
n.机械装置;机构,结构 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 measles | |
n.麻疹,风疹,包虫病,痧子 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 mumps | |
n.腮腺炎 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 licensing | |
v.批准,许可,颁发执照( license的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 lethal | |
adj.致死的;毁灭性的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 epidemic | |
n.流行病;盛行;adj.流行性的,流传极广的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|