今天出國(guó)留學(xué)網(wǎng)GRE欄目的小編給大家?guī)?lái)“GRE雙語(yǔ)閱讀：碳酸飲料遭批判”，以下是詳細(xì)內(nèi)容，希望對(duì)同學(xué)們有所幫助!
Food politics in America——Popped
美國(guó)的食品政策：砰的出現(xiàn)
Soda Politics: Taking on Big Soda (and Winning). By Marion Nestle.
軟飲料策略：對(duì)付軟飲料(然后取得勝利)。作者馬里昂·奈斯特。
MARION NESTLE'S heavyweight polemic against Coca—Cola and PepsiCo comes at an odd moment for the industry. Americans are drinking fewer sugary sodas—in 2012 production was23% below what it had been a decade earlier. Even sales of diet drinks are losing their fizz, as consumers question the merits of artificial sweeteners. From one angle, it would seem that health advocates such as Ms Nestle have won. Yet in America companies still produce 30gallons of regular (not diet) fizzy drinks per person per year. In many countries, particularly developing ones, consumption is on the rise.
軟飲料工業(yè)正處不尷不尬之際，馬里昂?奈斯特對(duì)口可口可樂(lè)以及百事可樂(lè)的抨擊頗具影響力。越來(lái)越少的美國(guó)人選擇飲用含糖碳酸飲料—與十年前相比，2012年含糖碳酸飲料的生產(chǎn)減少了23%。人們甚至也失去了對(duì)膳食飲料的青睞，因?yàn)橄M(fèi)者們對(duì)飲料中是否添加人工甜味劑提出了質(zhì)疑。從某個(gè)角度來(lái)看，像奈斯特女士這樣的健康倡導(dǎo)者似乎贏得了勝利。然而，美國(guó)軟飲料公司每年生產(chǎn)的常規(guī)碳酸飲料(而非膳食飲料)人均多達(dá)30加侖。在許多國(guó)家，尤其是發(fā)展中國(guó)家，常規(guī)碳酸飲料的消費(fèi)仍呈上漲趨勢(shì)。
Ms Nestle, a professor at New York University, is both heartened by recent progress and dissatisfied with it. That is no surprise. Her first book, “Food Politics” (2002), remains a bible for those who bewail the power of food companies. In her new book she attacks the industry's most widely consumed, least healthy product. “Soda Politics”, she says, is a book “to inspire readers to action”. As a rallying cry, it is verbose. When readers learn on page 238 that she will pick up a particular subject in chapter 25, it is with no little dismay that they realize they are only on chapter 17. But what the author wants most is to craft a meticulous guide to the producers' alleged transgressions, and how to stop them.
對(duì)于最近取得的進(jìn)展，奈斯特女士，這位紐約大學(xué)的教授頗受鼓舞，但并不滿足于此。這也不足為奇。她的第一本書(shū)“糧食政策”依舊被那些哀嘆食品企業(yè)權(quán)勢(shì)的人們奉為經(jīng)典。在新書(shū)中，奈斯特女士對(duì)軟飲料行業(yè)消費(fèi)最廣，最有害健康的產(chǎn)品進(jìn)行了抨擊?！盾涳嬃喜呗浴愤@本書(shū)旨在激勵(lì)人們采取行動(dòng)，奈斯特說(shuō)到。然而作為戰(zhàn)斗口號(hào)，卻顯得頗為繁冗。讀者們?cè)诘?38頁(yè)了解到奈斯特將在第25章講述一個(gè)特別的主題，卻意識(shí)到自己才看到第17章，但他們并沒(méi)有因此而沮喪。作者最想做的是擬定一份詳細(xì)的指南，指出生產(chǎn)商曾經(jīng)的過(guò)失，并想方設(shè)法阻止他們的這種行為。
Ms Nestle says she would have no quibbles with sweet fizzy drinks if they were sipped occasionally, as a treat. However, for millions of people in many countries, they are not. In Mexico companies sold 372 cans of fizzy drinks per person in 2012. About half of Americans do not drink them regularly, but those who do are disproportionately poor, less educated, male, Hispanic or black. Ten per cent of Americans down more than four cans a day.
奈斯特說(shuō)如果人們只是在吃飯招待的時(shí)候偶爾飲用加了甜味劑的碳酸飲料，她不會(huì)提出異議。但實(shí)際上許多國(guó)家，成千上萬(wàn)的人們都在喝這種飲料。2012年，僅墨西哥人均消費(fèi)的碳酸飲料就高達(dá)372罐。大約一半的美國(guó)人不會(huì)經(jīng)常性地飲用碳酸飲料，但是那些選擇碳酸飲料的人多半是些窮困潦倒，未接受良好教育的西班牙或者黑人男性。百分之十的美國(guó)人平均每天要喝掉至少4罐碳酸飲料。
Drinking a lot of sweet fizzy drinks is plainly unhealthy. Unlike a Big Mac, they have no nutritional value; nor do their calories satisfy hunger. One large study found that for each can added to a person's daily diet, the risk of diabetes jumped by 22%. There are also links between sugar and heart disease, stroke and cancer. Drinking lots of sodas imposes clear costs on individuals, Ms Nestle argues, but it has a broader cost, too. American taxpayers subsidize corn production (and thereby corn syrup) and let the poor use government food vouchers to buy fizzy drinks. More important, taxpayers foot the health bill for those who develop chronic disease.
很顯然，過(guò)度飲用碳酸飲料對(duì)身體健康是有害的。與巨無(wú)霸不同的是，這些碳酸飲料毫無(wú)營(yíng)養(yǎng)價(jià)值，它們產(chǎn)生的熱量也無(wú)法抵抗饑餓。一項(xiàng)大型研究表明，如果在日常飲食中加入碳酸飲料，那么人們罹患糖尿病的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)就會(huì)增加22%。心臟病，中風(fēng)以及癌癥與過(guò)多的糖分?jǐn)z入不無(wú)關(guān)系。奈斯特說(shuō)，大量飲用碳酸飲料會(huì)增加個(gè)人開(kāi)支，但實(shí)際上個(gè)人花費(fèi)要遠(yuǎn)大于此。美國(guó)的納稅人為玉米生產(chǎn)做出了貢獻(xiàn)(也就是為玉米糖漿的生產(chǎn)做出了貢獻(xiàn))，同時(shí)，他們讓窮人用政府提供的食品券來(lái)購(gòu)買(mǎi)碳酸飲料。更重要的是，納稅人為那些罹患慢性疾病的人支付醫(yī)療帳單。
Encouraging people to drink fewer fizzy drinks, however, is fiendishly difficult. Soda companies spend billions on marketing; it is a tribute to the admen that Coca—Cola is one of the world's best—loved brands, despite selling what is essentially fattening sugar—water. (Think of Coca—Cola's encouragements to “open happiness” and PepsiCo's exuberant spokeswoman, Beyoncé Knowles.) Once people get used to consuming sugary drinks, they are loth to give them up. There is evidence suggesting that sugar is addictive—some laboratory animals prefer sugar to cocaine.
然而，鼓勵(lì)人們盡量少喝碳酸飲料卻出奇的難。碳酸飲料企業(yè)在營(yíng)銷(xiāo)上花費(fèi)巨資。盡管可口可樂(lè)售賣(mài)的實(shí)際上是令人增肥的糖水飲料，但可口可樂(lè)無(wú)疑是世界上最受消費(fèi)者青睞的品牌之一。而這對(duì)于廣告人而言，是件可喜可賀的事情。(想想可口可樂(lè)頗具鼓動(dòng)性的廣告語(yǔ)“開(kāi)啟幸福”，百事可樂(lè)活力四射的代言人碧昂絲·諾利斯。)人們一旦習(xí)慣了消費(fèi)含糖飲料，便很難戒掉。有證據(jù)表明食糖是會(huì)上癮的—與可卡因相比，實(shí)驗(yàn)室的動(dòng)物們更喜歡食糖。
Most interesting, fizzy—drink companies are skilled at swatting away attempts at regulation. Ms. Nestle describes an extraordinarily broad team of allies. That includes obvious friends, such as employees, bottlers and distributors, as well as the restaurants, cinemas, shops and sports stadiums that sell their products. But the companies are also astute philanthropists. When Michael Bloomberg, then mayor of New York, tried to block the use of government vouchers to buy sodas in 2010, the congressional black caucus was among those to lobby against it. The caucus's foundation has received money from both Coke and Pepsi. In 2011 Philadelphia was considering a soda tax. After the soda lobby offered a big donation to the city's children's hospital, the idea fizzled out.
更有趣的是，碳酸飲料企業(yè)對(duì)規(guī)避規(guī)范化的嘗試頗有一套。奈斯特將其描述為一個(gè)非比尋常的龐大聯(lián)盟。很顯然，這個(gè)聯(lián)盟包括了這些企業(yè)的盟友們，比如雇員，瓶裝工，經(jīng)銷(xiāo)商，那些出售他們商品的飯店，電影院，商店以及體育場(chǎng)。但這些碳酸飲料企業(yè)同時(shí)也是非常精明的慈善家。2010年，當(dāng)時(shí)的紐約市市長(zhǎng)邁克爾?布隆伯格試圖阻止人們用政府代金券購(gòu)買(mǎi)碳酸飲料，但卻遭到了包括美國(guó)國(guó)會(huì)黑人同盟在內(nèi)的多數(shù)人的反對(duì)。2011年，費(fèi)城考慮是否要征收碳酸飲料稅，但在碳酸飲料游說(shuō)集團(tuán)出資捐助了一家當(dāng)?shù)氐膬和t(yī)院之后，這項(xiàng)提議未能實(shí)施。
Coca—Cola and PepsiCo do have a few notable adversaries. Mr. Bloomberg, a billionaire, remains their single biggest foe. It is telling that in two rare instances when a soda tax has been passed—in Berkeley, California and in Mexico—it was with the help of cash from Mr. Bloomberg. Drinks companies must also reckon with a small army of health advocates, among which Ms. Nestle is a major—general.
可口可樂(lè)和百事可樂(lè)確實(shí)有一些頗為出名的對(duì)手。布隆伯格，這位億萬(wàn)富翁是他們最大的對(duì)手。據(jù)說(shuō)在兩個(gè)頗為罕見(jiàn)的通過(guò)征收碳酸飲料稅的例子中—一個(gè)是加利福尼亞的伯克利市，另一個(gè)是墨西哥—都是在布隆伯格的資金幫助下通過(guò)了碳酸飲料稅法案。飲料公司還得去對(duì)付那些以奈斯特為首的健康軍團(tuán)。
With the slow decline of soda in America, she and her allies are advancing. Coca—Cola and PepsiCo are peddling healthier drinks, such as bottled water. However, as they try to face down a long—term threat while maintaining near—term profits, they are still pushing their syrupy fare.
隨著美國(guó)人慢慢地拒絕碳酸飲料，奈斯特和她的盟友們正向成功一步步邁進(jìn)?？煽诳蓸?lè)和百事可樂(lè)正忙于推銷(xiāo)更健康的飲料，如瓶裝水。然而，他們?nèi)耘f努力推動(dòng)碳酸飲料事業(yè)的發(fā)展，試圖在維持短期利潤(rùn)的同時(shí)，努力克服長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)的威脅。
Ms Nestle is impatient. To the casual reader, her suggestions can seem extreme. She writes enthusiastically about adorning soda cans with warning labels, such as pictures of a diabetic's foot ulcer. She suggests that parents should teach their children about fizzy drinks by gently boiling down a Coke or a Pepsi into sludge, which sounds rather fun, and asking them to calculate the precise length of grocery shelves bearing sodas, which sounds less so. This zeal threatens to overshadow her stronger points: fizzy drinks offer no nutritional benefit and impose clear costs—on individuals' health and on society.
奈斯特女士可沒(méi)那么好的耐心。對(duì)于一般的讀者，她給的建議似乎很極端。在書(shū)中她強(qiáng)烈建議碳酸飲料瓶上面必須貼有糖尿病患者腳部潰爛諸如此類(lèi)的警示標(biāo)志。她建議父母?jìng)冊(cè)谙蚝⒆觽兘榻B碳酸飲料時(shí)，將可口可樂(lè)和百事可樂(lè)說(shuō)成是垃圾，這看上去頗為有趣，并要求孩子們?nèi)ニ闼汶s貨店擺滿碳酸飲料的貨架究竟有多長(zhǎng)，這聽(tīng)上去似乎沒(méi)那么好笑了。這份熱情讓斯耐特關(guān)于碳酸飲料的觀點(diǎn)顯得不那么重要了：碳酸飲料沒(méi)有任何營(yíng)養(yǎng)價(jià)值，對(duì)個(gè)人的健康沒(méi)有好處，而且還增加了社會(huì)的負(fù)擔(dān)。
GRE閱讀欄目推薦：
GRE經(jīng)濟(jì)類(lèi)雙語(yǔ)閱讀精選
GRE雙語(yǔ)閱讀之德國(guó)實(shí)施割禮須征求孩子意見(jiàn)
新GRE閱讀長(zhǎng)難句中英互譯精選
解析GRE閱讀的主題層面和細(xì)節(jié)層面