article writing Ban smoking at public place
Answers
Explanation:
A total ban on smoking in enclosed public places would lead to less smoking in the home and reduce the deadly effects of passive smoking, argued a comprehensive study of passive smoking published last week by the Royal College of Physicians. The study said that the estimated 12 200 deaths each year in the United Kingdom from passive smoking were entirely preventable. It recommended that preventing passive smoking at home was a “public health priority” and that helping smokers to stop by having a ban in enclosed public places would lead to less smoking in the home. A smoking ban in all workplaces could save the economy £4bn ($7.1bn; €5.8bn) a year, the report estimated.
Members of the Royal College of Physicians’ Tobacco Advisory Group said that the previous health secretary, John Reid, was wrong to have claimed that a total ban on smoking on public would increase smoking in the home. They noted that the number of smoking households that became smoke-free increased from 22% to 37% between 1996 and 2003. And they attributed this to increased restrictions on smoking in public places in that period.
Carol Black, president of the college, said at the launch of the report, “There is very clear evidence of the harm caused by passive smoking, yet, despite this, we feel that among politicians and the public there is confusion over the issue. Our previous health secretary, John Reid, claimed restrictions on smoking outside of the home would lead to more exposure in the home, but we know the evidence would be quite contrary to that. Our report aims to dispel those myths.”
John Britton, professor of epidemiology at the University of Nottingham, said that there was an “unanswerable moral case” to protect all people from passive smoking at work and added, “Smoke free legislation will save lives, reduce health inequalities, save money, and improve pubic health.”
Efforts to minimise the effects of passive smoking in bars, such as installing ventilation and having smoke-free zones were almost pointless, argued Richard Edwards, senior lecturer in public health at the University of Manchester. He said, “The evidence is that these approaches do not work and do not protect against passive smoking.”
The £4bn saving would comprise £832m from prevention of death and disease, £181m from prevention of fires and reduced cleaning costs, and £2.8bn from improved productivity of staff no longer taking smoking breaks.
The college called on the government to introduce comprehensive legislation to make all workplaces and other enclosed public places smoke-free as soon as possible.
Going Smoke-Free: the Medical Case for Clean Air in the Home, at Work and in Public Places is available, priced £16, from RCP Publications Department, tel 020 7935 1174 ext 358.
Thanks
Answer:
The numbers of people who smoke have increase over the years. Although they are equipped with the knowledge of how unhealthy smoking can be, people still choose to smoke. It is a personal choice and a highly addictive habit. Smokers choose to subject themselves to the health risks of smoking. It is not for the government or any third party to dictate whether or not a person should be allowed to smoke. However, smoking does not only affect the smoker negatively. It also affects all the people around those who smoke because when people smoke in pubic the smoke travels everywhere through the air, and the negative effects of this smoke affects all living, breathing creatures. Therefore smoking should be banned in all public places.
People who smoke in public portray a bad example. Children are easily influenced in their growing stages. They imitate the people around them because they cannot differentiate between right and wrong. Therefore they perceive the actions they see around them as the way things should be. Besides that, teenagers who see people smoke in public take it as precedent to start smoking as well. There is a saying that goes "monkey see monkey do," which tells us that people imitate the actions of others as they see it in their daily lives. Teenagers happen to think that smoking makes a person "cool." When they see adults doing it on the streets it strengthens their belief in the "coolness" of smoking. Some teenagers think that smoking marks their transition into adulthood and maturity. Hence, more teenagers start smoking due to the influence of seeing other people smoke in public places.
If smoking is banned in public areas, it will promote a healthier lifestyle for everyone. People will see it as a government endorsement for a healthier lifestyle of everybody. This is because by banning smoking in public areas the government sends the message that the government cares about the health of the citizens and that the government discourages people from smoking. Thus, when smoking is not allowed in public areas it reminds people that health care is very important. It reminds each and every person that the government is seriously concerned for the well being of its citizens. Therefore, people would be reminded to live a healthy lifestyle.
If smoking is banned in public places it safeguards the life of the smoker as well as that of the public. Studies have shown that second hand smoke kills. Second hand smoke causes sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), respiratory infections and asthma attacks in children. Besides that, second hand smoke causes heart diseases and lung cancer in smoking and non-smoking adults. According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC), secondhand smoke contains at least 250 chemicals known to be toxic, including more than 50 that can cause cancer" (CDC, 2009). These studies have proven that second hand smoke can cause cancer and is extremely bad for both the smokers and non-smokers' health. In addition, the CDC also states that, "The California Environmental Protection Agency estimates that secondhand smoke exposure causes approximately 3,400 lung cancer deaths and 22,700-69,600 heart disease deaths annually among adult nonsmokers in theUnited States" (CDC, 2009). This means that just by being near people who are smoking, innocent people are dying of diseases that are caused by second hand smoke. This violates a non-smokers' right to live a healthy lifestyle because just by being in public places where other people smoke they are subjected to breathing in toxic fumes. Consequently, the health of innocent non-smokers who are in public places are being jeopardized against their will.