Friday, May 22, 2009 10:59 PM

Smoking should be banned totally for the good of all. Discuss.

sian...
haha
ok sorry was just entertaining myself.
man this is way harder than i thought it would be...
as in not the essay question but more on the fact that i am doing something out of my own accord.

When lighted, wisps of white fumes emerge from the glowing orange tip of the cigarette. These fumes, along with the smoke that a smoker exhales carry with them toxic chemical substances that are detrimental to the health of those who inhale them --- passive smoking. The cigarette itself contains tar and nicotine --- carcinogens which cripple the smoker's respiratory system over prolonged and excessive usage. Judging from the extent to which smoking harms people's health, banning smoking would definitely be beneficial to most people, that is, except the smokers themselves. Banning smoking entirely would result in the cigarette market being completely extinct, thereby perishing all the profits that have been reaped from this business. Banning smoking totally might not necessarily benefit everyone.

Cigarette smoke is a cocktail of more than four thousand chemicals. The hazardous effects of cigarette smoke on the body are widespread. While a smoker is harming his or her own body, secondhand smoke, smoke exhaled from the smoker and smoke emitted from the cigarette, when inhaled, increases a person's risk of contracting respiratory infections, cancer and heart disease. Smoking is no longer a personal affair, it is threatening the health of non-smokers as well. It is now an issue of morality, of whether the act of obtaining pleasure from smoking at the expense of someone else's physical well-being is indeed justifiable. Therefore, it is easily concluded that banning of smoking will indubitably be for the good of all non-smokers.

-smokers themselves will be severely affected
-withdrawal symptoms/ rehab

-global economy might be affected

-rather impossible to ban smoking entirely
-corruption and black markets

-we have tried;
-government is already advocating that smoking is bad for health
eg. health textbooks depict smoking as damn bad lol, anti-smoking campaigns and advertisements.
-government attempting to control effects of passive smoking
eg. banning smoking at certain crowded public places by law.
-availability of help rendered to smokers to aid them in the quitting process.
-devices which help reduce the percentage of toxic substances entering the smoker's body when smoking are available in pharmacies.
-prices of cigarettes have been raised but addicts refuse to budge.
-sad case: despite all these, there are still a lot of smokers.

-banning smoking might actually cause more problems.
-if so much has already been done to discourage smoking and yet the results are not satisfying, its a sign that banning smoking totally might not work out.
-the war against smoking is not ending anytime soon man.
-have to be resilient

bet there is a lot of mistakes here and there.i took examples of illnesses from the internet.
anyway i dont know if it is out of point
to my ghost readers: please give me advice on how to expand if you have any? or correct my format and structure thanks man
i dont really know how to write more in the first body paragraph





watched ten promises to my dog
You may have friends and school, but i only have you.

Labels: