外刊阅读及其翻译.doc

Ⅰ①Television ads for?erectile dysfunction, stroke or?toenail fungus?treatments have been called both a?boon?and a curse. ②Drugmakers assert that promoting their products makes patients aware of conditions they can then?flag?for their doctor. Ⅱ①Yet every developed country except the U.S. and New Zealand prohibits such direct-to-consumer?prescription?drug ads. ②It is hard to see educational value in commercials on American TV that show?radiant?models relaxing before a?tryst, accompanied by?voice-overs?that warn of possible side effects, including difficulty breathing and an unsafe drop in blood pressure. Ⅲ①An ad that?conflates?an?aura?of glowing health and the prospect of an?amorous liaison?with a list of?dire cardiovascular?symptoms is a?paradigm?of confused messaging because it does not provide the viewer with a clear guide to weighing both benefits and costs?entailed?in using a prescription medicine. ②Absent further interpretation, the underlying message reduces to: Sex or death—which will it be? ③Of course, the ads always end with an?admonition?to “ask your doctor....”? Ⅳ①Now, finally, the doctors are giving an answer. ②In November 2015 the American Medical Association asked for a ban on these ads, saying that they are partially responsible for theskyrocketing?costs of drugs. ③The World Health Organization and other groups have previouslyendorsed?such restrictions.? Ⅴ①In 2014 pharmaceutical companies spent $4.5 billion on consumer ads, mostly for television, a 30 percent rise from two years before. ②The?pitches?can?drum up?sales on higher-priced medications that can?drive up?drug costs when less expensive alternatives are sometimes available.? Ⅵ①Many of the newest ads are for?premium?drugs for life-threatening diseases or rare conditions that can cost tens of thousands of dollars and require large,?out-of-pocket?patient co-payments. ②After seeing an ad, patients may press physicians for a prescription without understanding the complex criteria needed to determine