单项选择题

While disease is present prior to social organization, communal life creates special hazards. While the organization of society can reduce the dangers of disease, trade and urbanization, with their consequent problems of sanitation and pollution, can also aggravate such dangers. Even in the mid-twentieth century, during the brief calm between the polio and AIDS epidemics, epidemic health risks associated with carcinogens (cancer-producing substances ) from polluted air threatened the industrialized world.   To the economist, efforts to combat these risks are at least partially public goods. The benefits from public goods are indivisible among beneficiaries. A sole private purchaser of health care would give others in society a "free ride" with respect to the benefits obtained. To market theorists, such goods are lawful objects of governmental intervention in the market. While the theory of public goods helps explain aspects of public health law and assists in fitting it into modern economic theory, it omits a critical point. Ill health is not a mere byproduct of economic activity, but an inevitable occurrence of human existence. As a result, wherever there is human society, there will be public health. Every society has to face the risks of disease. And because it must, every society searches to make disease comprehensible within the context of the society’’s own particular culture, religion, or science. In this sense, health care is public not only because its benefits are indivisible and threats to it arise from factors outside of the individual but also because communal life gives individuals the cultural context in which to understand it.   Governments typically have assumed an active role with respect to health care, acting as if their role were obligatory. How governments have fulfilled that duty has varied throughout time and across societies, according not only to the wealth and scientific sophistication of the culture but also to its fundamental values--because health is defined in part by a community’’s belief system, public health measures will necessarily reflect cultural norms and values.   Those who criticize the United States government today for not providing health care to all citizens equate the provision of health care with insurance coverage for the costs of medical expenses. By this standard, seventeenth and eighteenth-century America lacked any significant conception of public health law. However, despite the general paucity (scarcity) of bureaucratic organization in pre-industrial America, the vast extent of health regulation and provision stands out as remarkable. Of course, the public role in the protection and regulation of eighteenth-century health was carried out in ways quite different from those today. Organizations responsible for health regulation were less stable than modern bureaucracies ,tending to appear in crises and fade away in periods of calm. The focus was on epidemics which were seen as unnatural and warranting a response ,not to the many prevalent and chronic conditions which were accepted as part and parcel of daily life. Additionally ,and not surprisingly ,religious influence was significant ,especially in the seventeenth century. Finally, in an era which lacked sharp divisions between private and governmental bodies, many public responsibilities were carried out by what we would now consider private associations. Nevertheless, the extent of public health regulation long before the dawn of the welfare state is remarkable and suggests that the founding generation’’s assumptions about the relationship between government and health were more complex than commonly assumed. The author mentions all of the following as causes of epidemic diseases EXCEPT

A. expanding international trade.
B. rapid general urbanization.
C.inadequate sanitation facilities.
D.poor preventive measures.
热门 试题

填空题
A large proportion of the studies of behavior used animals as subjects, especially pigeons, rats, and rabbits. There are a number of reasons why researchers in this field frequently choose to conduct their experiments with nonhuman subjects. First of all, the possibility of a placebo effect is minimized with animal subjects. 46)Whereas a human subject’’s behavior may be drastically altered by the knowledge that he or she is being observed, this is unlikely with animal subjects because most studies with animal subjects are conducted in such a way that the animal does not know its behavior is being monitored and recorded. Furthermore, it is unlikely that an animal subject will be motivated either to please or displease the experimenter, a motive that can ruin a study with human subjects. A second reason for using animal subjects is convenience. The species most commonly used as subjects are easy and inexpensive to care for, and animals of a specific age and sex can be obtained in any quantities the experimenter needs. 47)Once animal subjects are obtained, their participation is as regular as the experimenter’’s--animal subjects never fail to show up for their appointments, which is unfortunately not the case with human subjects.48) Probably the biggest advantage of domesticated animal subjects is that their environment can be controlled to a much greater extent than is possible with either wild animals or human subjects. This is especially important in experiments on learning, where previous experience can have a large effect on a subject’’s performance in a new learning situation. Likewise, if a human subject tries to solve some mystery as part of a learning experiment, the experimenter cannot be sure how many similar problems the subject has encountered in his lifetime. 49) When animals are bred and raised in the laboratory, however, their environments can be constructed to make sure that they have no contact with objects or events similar to those they will encounter in the experiment.A final reason for using animal subjects is that of comparative simplicity. 50)Just as a child trying to learn electricity is better off starting with a flashlight than a radio, researchers may have a better chance of discovering the basic principles of learning by examining creatures that are less intelligent and less complex than human beings The assumption here is that although human beings differ from other animals in some respects, they are also similar in some respects, and it is these commonalities that can be investigated with animal subjects.