Today, the harmful effects of smoking on direct smokers and passive ones who breathe cigarette smoke are well-discussed. Many
to forbid smoking in public places while others do not tend to follow. In
essay, both sides of the discussion will be debated and reach a conclusion.
On the one hand,
that oppose enacting
against smoking have got a dependent economy on importing or exporting
and cite that
could greatly influence their economic conditions. Critics of passing
against smoking point to evidence from
as Afghanistan in which the economy is massively supported by exporting opium annually. They claim that if the state warned people about the harmful effects of smoking on the health system and incremented the taxation of
would be sufficient prohibitive to their consumption and address the need to restrict smoking rules.
, those who support enacting
promote the idea that smoking would have harmful impacts on the health system. So far, many papers have been published in high-impact journals highlighting how smoking would impose irrecoverable damage to infants, pregnant women, and children leading to the development of cancers, neurodegenerative disorders, and autoimmune diseases.
, proponents of limiting rules for
It seems that there is an article usage problem here.
smoking claim that employees who are addicted to
should meet their needs every hour,
inevitably leaving their workplace or could not efficiently concentrate on completing their duty. They are able to cite evidence from
like China, where the government has set a penalty for smoking in industrial places and would sentence them if the offenders repeated.
Overall, I would tend to side with the supportive
in public places like restaurants and administrative centres. It would be a determining decision that directly influences people’s health and,
, the economy.
Leave a Reply