Smoking Ban Essay Papers Services

Sample 1. Smoking Ban in Public Places

Tobacco as a stimulant can be used in several different ways but the most common way it is used is smoking it in the form of cigarettes. Smoking is legal in most countries in the world but in the last couple of years there have been debates about whether or not smokers should be allowed to smoke anywhere they want. It is common knowledge that the ban of smoking in public places is majorly for the protection of non smokers from the side effects of smoking, but there are other factors which inform the decision to impose a ban on smoking in public places (Robbins 38). This paper seeks to investigate both the benefits and side effects of smoking in public and finally argue a case for or against the ban on smoking in public places.

Proponents of the ban of smoking in public places argue that because not everyone is a smoker, the smell of cigarette smoke is offensive to non-smokers. They also cite the health effects that second hand cigarette smoke has on the non-smokers who are fond of being around smokers. Some radical proposers to the ban, who also support a total ban on the use of tobacco, further cite the effects that smoking has on the health of the smokers themselves. On the other hand, opponents of the ban argue that if smoking in public places should be illegal then cigarettes would be illegal or contraband products. They also argue that smoking ban in public places is an infringement into their particular rights as people who engage in a legitimate act. Another reason why smokers feel offended by ban in public smoking is the fact that smoking as a practice is protected by the law and as it stands, they are engaging in a legal activity which should not be interfered with. Some of them go as far as arguing that there are more harmful environmental hazards like industrial smoke, motor vehicles exhaust fumes and smoke resulting from the burning of trash or garbage (Sloan 85). These, they argue, have greater environmental effects than just smoking. Some opponents also say that the general public has no reason to think that everybody’s natural goal is or must be to maximise their lifespan.

There are several economic benefits directly attached to the production and sale of tobacco in many parts of the world. Tobacco has been known to support agricultural output, earn several countries foreign revenue for being a major export commodity, provide income for households, and generate both direct and indirect employment in many countries. For instance, in Greece, the northern parts of the country are mostly mountainous and do not support much agriculture other than tobacco cultivation. In fact, it is deemed as one of the most profitable and stable segments of the agriculture sector in Greece earning the farmers an average of 7,000 – 10,000 euro per hectare and during the recent economic downturn, only 25% of the total jobs lost were lost in the tobacco industry (Hahn et al, 2009). Tobacco employs most of the residents of northern Greece both directly, through cultivation of the crop, and indirectly, mainly in the processing, sales and distribution of the finished product. Other countries which benefit socio-economically from the culture of tobacco include Brazil; Malawi, in Africa; Canada; and the United States, especially the state of Kentucky.

Tobacco as a stimulant also has some health benefits. Research shows that the nicotine in tobacco as a mild stimulant acts within the nervous system to help in relaxation and reduce anxiety (Sloan, 2004). Tobacco also increases the rate of metabolism in the human body and suppresses appetite. These effects can help one to reduce body weight and keep obesity in check. Smoking has also been linked to lowering the risk of Parkinson’s disease and some forms of heart attacks.

On the flipside, research has also revealed a lot of negatives about smoking especially in public places. It has been proven that second hand smoke can cause breathing problems to non smokers (Hahn et al, 2009). This happens when a non smoker, especially one who is allergic to smoke, inhales the smoke exhaled by the smoker and the smoke reaches his or her respiratory system causing itchiness in their systems thereby causing inflammations in the lungs resulting in difficulty in breathing problems and sometimes respiratory diseases. Second hand smoke also causes eyesores especially to non smokers who are allergic to smoke (Shetty, 2009). This is as a result of smoke coming into contact with the non smoker’s eyes resulting to itching of the eyes.

Medical research has also shown that second hand smoke, just like the first smoke inhaled by the smoker, can lead to heart diseases (Shetty, 2009). The cause of heart diseases is attributed to the stimulation effect of nicotine which increases pulse rate. With time the heart develops some kind of dependency on nicotine and in the event that nicotine is lacking or in short supply, the heart’s functioning is interfered with. Smoking and exposure second hand smoke are also likely causes of several forms of cancer, but most commonly lung cancer and cervical cancer. This is as a result of the tar present in tobacco, which is capable of changing the structures of the body’s cells. This contributes to the causes of the various forms of cancer…

Sample 2. Do e-cigarettes really not so harmful for health as traditional cigarettes or this opinion has appeared due to well-thought marketing strategy?

It is known the fact that habit is quite a strong phenomenon in human life. There are many habits that are quite easy to get, it can be done even accidentally. However, it can be difficult to break a habit. As far as breaking the habit can be quite difficult, it is common practice to try not to destroy the habit at all but change it in some more positive way. Nowadays people see such positive way in e-cigarettes as alternatives to the traditional tobacco cigarettes. A popularity of e-cigarettes and their widespread image as a harmless alternative to the traditional tobacco cigarettes could be the reason why there is quite a high number of studies which consider the harmfulness of the e-cigarettes. However, even though the studies showed that in general e-cigarettes are less harmful than tobacco cigarettes, they are a quite new phenomenon from the historical view, thus their harmfulness is not conclusive.

The main and one of the most obvious argument to support harmless of the e-cigarettes is the fact that in their system it is lack of combustion. An operating principle of e-cigarettes is more like aerosol than the traditional tobacco cigarettes. This can be a reason why, compared to traditional cigarettes, e-cigarettes have less toxicant exposure for their users (Callahan-Lyon, Priscilla ii36). However, comparing e-cigarettes with the traditional cigarettes, one can notice that e-cigarettes have a more complex system and elements that are more saturated with harmful substances. This is a reason why “users and others may experience secondhand or thirdhand exposures through direct physical contact with product components, or inhaling secondhand aerosol” (Callahan-Lyon, Priscilla ii36). In this way, product components, and secondhand aerosol of e-cigarettes are more harmful to the users and others that the traditional tobacco cigarettes.

However, considering an effect of the e-cigarettes, one can say that it is more positive than the effect of the traditional tobacco cigarettes. Thus, e-cigarettes, especially those with nicotine, reduce lung function less than the traditional tobacco cigarettes (Harrell, Paul Truman et al. 4). Besides, e-cigarettes do not appear to significantly affect complete blood count, in contradistinction to tobacco cigarettes (Harrell, Paul Truman et al. 4). Moreover, “studies reported that although both e-cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes increased pulse, increased inflammatory markers, and impacted measures of myocardial function, these changes were only significant for tobacco cigarettes” (Harrell, Paul Truman et al. 4). Callahan-Lyon, Priscilla also noticed that PM emissions from e-cigarettes were fifteen times lower than emissions after use of traditional cigarettes (37). In this way, the evidence from above clearly showed that effect of the e-cigarettes could be much less harmful to health than the effect of the traditional tobacco cigarettes.

There is one more fact that must be taken into account in this context. As far as e-cigarettes are considered as less harmful than the traditional tobacco cigarettes, there is a quite high number of people who regard e-cigarettes as a safe alternative or even as aids for treatment from nicotine addiction. One must notice that such approach is not quite correct. The first and the most important fact is that e-cigarettes, even though they are less harmful than the traditional tobacco cigarettes still can harm health. Even though e-cigarettes are less harmful than the traditional cigarettes, they are not an absolutely safe alternative. Harrell, Paul Truman et al. noticed that e-cigarettes could be a less harmful source of nicotine than traditional tobacco cigarettes, “but evidence of decreased harm with long-term use is not available” (38). Considering e-cigarettes as aids for treatment from nicotine addiction one can notice that e-cigarettes are not regulated by The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as drug delivery devices, they are rather regulated as tobacco products (Ebbert, Jon O. et al. 129). Moreover, Ebbert, Jon, et al. refer to the American Heart Association, noticing that clinicians should not recommend e-cigarettes as primary cessation aids, and should advise patients to consider a quit date for using e-cigarettes and not plan to use them indefinitely (132). Thus, even if e-cigarettes are less harmful than the traditional tobacco cigarettes they can not be as aids for treatment of nicotine addiction or as a permanent safe alternative to the traditional cigarettes.

The facts from the above allow one to make a conclusion about the harmfulness of e-cigarettes. The evidence from the studies showed that complex system of e-cigarettes could have more intensive harmful substances than a system of the traditional tobacco cigarettes. In this way, e-cigarettes can be more harmful than the traditional cigarettes. However, harm from such elements are rather the accidents than a natural result of using e-cigarettes. On the contrary, the studied that compared using the traditional cigarettes and e-cigarettes showed that e-cigarettes in all respects are less harmful than the traditional tobacco cigarettes. Thus, in general, e-cigarettes are less harmful than the traditional cigarettes. However, even being less harmful than the traditional cigarettes they still are harmful and cannot be considered as aids for treatment from nicotine addiction or as the permanent safe alternative to the traditional cigarettes.

Works Cited

Callahan-Lyon, Priscilla. “Electronic Cigarettes: Human Health Effects.” Tobacco Control, vol 23, no. suppl 2, 2014, pp. ii36-ii40.

Ebbert, Jon O. et al. “Counseling Patients On The Use Of Electronic Cigarettes.” Mayo Clinic Proceedings, vol 90, no. 1, 2015, pp. 128-134.

Harrell, Paul Truman et al. “Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (‘‘E-Cigarettes’’): Review Of Safety And Smoking Cessation Efficacy.” Otolaryngology – Head And Neck Surgery, vol 151, no. 3, 2014, pp. 1-13.

It’s a proven fact that a good sample of research paper serves better than dozens of explanatory articles, so you are welcome. We just remind you that you are not allowed to use any of the information posted at our blog without proper references. If you already think that we are cruel and hate students, we are happy to prove you’re wrong. Place your order to get your own sample of research paper and put an end to all your academic troubles. Studying can be hard, but it doesn’t have to be a torture.

Ban the Smoking: It’s Bad for Everyone

Second-Hand Smoking

Now that America is no longer dependent on tobacco production as a means to sustain its economy, the industry and culture surrounding it should be heavily controlled. Now that fewer people are smoking cigarettes, because of the well-documented health concerns related to its use, more cities and districts are cracking down on smoking in public places – and rightfully so. Smoking in public places should not only be banned, it should come with heavy penalties, such as outlandish fines, criminal charges and, if possible, public beatings. Due to the health problems associated with smoking cigarettes, due to smoking being a fire hazard and offensive to non-smokers, smoking in public places should never go under the radar. It should be banned on a national scale.

Smoking cigarettes, cigars or pipes in public places should be banned because it’s offensive to the non-smokers who have to endure the smoke, the butts, the mess and the smell. Consider the typical public place – a market door entrance, a park bench, an elevator. People come to these places for peace and quiet, for necessity, to get to work, so they should not be required to breathe another person’s poisonous tobacco fumes. Everyone knows that second-hand smoke is just as, if not more, dangerous than directly inhaling the smoke. Why should a health-conscious, everyday person have to be penalized for another’s bad decision? It just isn’t right – so smoking in public places should be banned altogether. It’s also disgusting to smell cigarette smoke – even worse when it’s on your clothes. The American government has yet to criminalize the use of all tobacco products, mostly because of billion-dollar companies like Phillip Morris, out of Richmond, Virginia, pays millions of dollars in taxes annually. But cigarettes are killing everyday Americans, costing them too much in the long run. They should certainly be banned everywhere, not just in public places.

More articles to read: Junk Food in School | Why Are You Not in Class and out There Bleeding?

Smoking Is Not Fashionable Anymore!

Let’s ban smoking in public places because it gives young, impressionable adolescents the wrong idea. They see it and think it’s a normal, healthy, cool adult thing to do – something they perhaps feel they’re supposed to do it as adults, maybe even as teens. This is bad because they do not possess the foresight and self-preservation experience to avoid doing things that could one day kill them. By banning smoking in public places, fewer people will be seen smoking and, subsequently, outcast from society. It will be the thing that those people do; they will have to hide it. This is good because this mentality will condition smokers to perhaps give up smoking, a good deterrent for sure because the same social and peer pressure that may have encouraged them to begin smoking has gone the other way. Banning smoking in public places is a wonderful idea and should be taken up by every single jurisdiction, municipality, city, hole-in-the-wall town and county in the country.

In addition to smoking raising health concerns, banning public smoking altogether, including indoors, would surely cut down on fires – both in buildings and possibly in nature, as well. Just picture a waiter with five minutes for a smoke standing just outside a restaurant’s kitchen in a rush to fill their nicotine cravings. The headwaiter calls their name and they flick the cancer stick away – it’s not their problem, right? But it’s windy that night and the cigarette rolls into the nearby trash. And, bam – a fire has begun. People could die. How about banning smoking anywhere a fire could start, any place that could endanger others? This would cut down immensely on building fires. Innocent people wouldn’t have to die in fires, and their beloved possessions would not be destroyed. Banning public smoking benefits everyone, including the smoker.

Let’s conclude this argument by going a step further. If we can already see how banning public smoking would benefit our citizens – protecting their health, peace of mind, homes and possessions – why stop there? Let’s ban smoking tobacco products altogether! Let’s rid our wonderful society of this evil poison, this killer of people, this addictive substance with no health value whatsoever. Let’s make cigarettes so expensive to buy that few can afford them, and so hard to find that they may as well be sold on the black market. This should apply to those vaporized smoking apparatuses, too. They are said to be a healthier alternative to smoking filter tobacco products, but they are just offensive to be around.

0 Replies to “Smoking Ban Essay Papers Services”

Lascia un Commento

L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *