<International Circulation>:   To me the argument is seems right.  Perhaps we need a third person who could say why it didn’t appeal to them.

  《国际循环》：对我来说这种论点看起来是正确的。可能我们需要另一个旁观者来说明循证医学为什么没有对他们产生吸引力。
 
    Prof.Sniderman:  My bet is that everyone in the room， if their blood pressure was up would just treat it.  In my model everyone will act.  They will vote because there are expectations of the people who believe.  Evidence-based medicine is their framework of action and the message they have heard repeated for 20 years.  How could you hear something for 20 years and that not be the way things should be carried out.

    Sniderman教授:我确信在这个房间的每一个人都会这样做，如果他们的血压升高他们就会开始降压治疗。这就是我认为的模式。他们会投票决定因为对此深信不疑的人还抱有期望。循证医学是他们行动的框架并且这种模式他们已经反复听说长达20年了。你怎么能听说一件事情长达20年而事实上事情并不是那样做呢？

 
    <International Circulation>:  Do you think we should not treat our blood pressure?

  《国际循环》：那么您认为我们不应该对我们的高血压进行治疗吗？
 
    Prof.Sniderman:  No， I think we should.  Their voting is no.  I don’t think that in real life they would behave that way.  Their voting is whatever others do in a social context.  It is very difficult for people to suddenly confront their convictions.  My presentation was 15 minutes of me saying something different from what that audience has heard for years.  I am not an authority figure.  I am a Canadian， a nobody who carries no weapon of authority or title.  

    Sniderman教授:不，我认为我们应该对高血压进行治疗。但是他们投票的结果是不治疗。我并不认为在现实生活中他们也是这样做的。他们的投票正是其他人在真实的社会环境下所做的事情。对于人来说突然对抗自己的信念是一件很艰难的事情。我的演讲时间只有15分钟，我讲了一些和听众们已经听说了很多年的观念所不同的内容。我并不是个权威人物。我是加拿大人，是个没有执掌任何职权或头衔的普通人。