With the appearance of the first law restricting smoking in public places in 1973, the smoking ban has become one of the most heated debates
'throughout the world'. Is it throughout the world, or in those Western countries where bans are mooted, or already in place. Is this really a hot topic of conversation among most Africans and Indians?? Be careful of sweeping statements like that.
Restricting the places where people can smoke is a constant reminder to the public that smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death worldwide, and that its effects spread far beyond the smoker. (Is it responsible for global warming?? It is a bit dramatic - better to say, "also affects those in the immediate envirnment".
According to the World Health Organization, passive smoking increases health risks such as cardiovascular disease and premature death in non-smokers. Children are especially vulnerable to the detrimental effects of tobacco smoke.
Being a non-smoker, I concur with smoking bans in certain settings, such as workplaces and enclosed public spaces, mainly on the grounds of hygiene (- do you mean 'hygiene' or 'health' - if hygiene, what do you see as 'unhygienic' about it, because it excapes this reader!) and safety. (omissions) It protects workers from the harmful effects of second- hand smoke and consequently reduces the-omit) absenteeism related to passive smoking diseases. In addition, a ban on smoking improves work productivity and reduces the risk of fires in areas where flammable materials are stored or handled.
It is scientifically proven that non-smoking in bars and restaurants improves the air quality and cleanliness of such establishments.
Non-smoking in bars does not do this. It is smoking which reduces air quality - so it is the banning of smoking which prevents the air quality being affect (except in planes, where the air quality has sharply declined because the air is now less frequently changed, with a resultant increase in incidence of deep vein thrombosis.)
Research and my experience as a nurse have shown that smoking bans reduce the incidence of smoking overall.
For many people it is a great inconvenience ('hassle' is far too colloquial a word for an essay) to walk or drive to the nearest designated smoking area. As a result, they consume less tobacco and may eventually discontinue/cease smoking. ('quit' is colloquial and may be used in ad compaigns etc but not in a formal essay).
The physical and medical consequences of active and passive smoking are immense.There is no doubt that smoking bans will always be criticised, but t is important for everyone to understand why it is necessary to prevent smoking in public places. (Reversed the order of these two sentences for greater impact and meaning.) In the meantime, in order for this law to be successfully implemented in our society, it has to be strongly enforced by local authorities. ('worldwide'- again, you won't find this nearly a burning insue on a couple of continents yet, and with no laws banning smoking in a country, why should their local authorites enforce American and English laws!!!?)