Smoking in Public
Instructions:
Write a 750-1000 word argumentation/persuasion essay using any approach as a method of development.
An effective argumentative essay must have evidence to make its case; most arguments that occur in daily life happen in the heat of the moment and are more likely directed toward saving one\’s own pride than toward giving clear and supportive proof to one\’s claims.
Knowing how to brainstorm is going to save you from writing a weak essay. Also, knowing how to support your claims with evidence from outside sources will further strengthen your essay. For that reason, this assignment requires the use of two references (no internet sources other than reputable online journals or magazines). Those sources must be incorporated into your paper using either quotations or paraphrasing. REMEMBER: Every sentence in which you have incorporated material from an outside source MUST end with an in-text citation.
Purpose: to persuadeMethod of Development: your choiceFor argumentative/persuasive topics, see the list at the end of \”Chapter 11: Argumentation-Persuasion\” in The Longman Reader. Don\’t forget my ilst of banned topics – please do not write on any of these overused topics:Abortion
Gun Control
Gay Marriage
Capital Punishment
Solution
Smoking in Public
According to the CDC (2016), cigarette smoking causes the highest preventable deaths. More than 6 million people die from the debilitating effects of cigarette smoking around the world annually (The Guardian, 2016). Smoking causes a range of conditions that impact on the health and wellbeing of the smokers significantly. Annesi-Maesano, Lundbäck, and Viegi (2015) state that smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer (it causes over 90% of lung cancer cases), and increases the risk coronary heart disease, stroke, and cardiovascular diseases by damaging blood vessels, clotting and blocking blood flow and supply. These effects affect active and passive (people who inhale second-hand smoke) smokers. Therefore, while smoking is a personal choice and a right, exposing non-smokers to the risks that come with passive smoking is wrong. Public smoking exposes non-smokers to passive smoking which increases their risk of developing the health concerns. Therefore, public cigarette smoking should be banned.
According to the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, has the right to enjoy a healthy living for the sake of his/her health and wellbeing. Smoking exposes the smoker and people around to harmful chemicals that influence their health and wellbeing by increasing the risk to diseases. Exposure to cigarette smoke causes multiple conditions that impact health significantly. According to Annesi-Maesano, et al. (2015), cigarette smoke contains more than 4000 toxic chemicals, of which hundreds are cancer-causing. The Government, which maintains the mandate to promote the health and livelihood of its citizens must enforce the public smoking ban effectively to protect unwilling passive smokers from the effects of smoking. Doing so will promote their health and wellbeing and ensure the enjoyment of the right. Smoking in public exposes people around to smoke without their consent. While smokers have a right to enjoy their life and rights, exposing non-smokers to harmful smoke oversteps the rights. The public smoking ban should be enforced efficiently, on this ground.
Additionally, the different health risks and diseases caused by smoking are expensive to treat and manage. In the long-term, a ban on public smoking will reduce the number of cases of people suffering from diseases such as lung cancer, stroke, cardiovascular conditions, and other conditions (CDC, 2016). A decrement in the cases will affect the health care system positively. The German Government funds more than 75 percent of the health care system (Porter & Guth, 2013). The high number of smokers and the high risk for conditions such as lung cancer, heart diseases, and stroke among others directs most of the funding to the treatment and management of the conditions (Marshall, 2016). Banning public smoking will reduce the number of passive smokers exposed to cigarette smoke, the risk for development of the mentioned diseases, and thus lower the cost of healthcare in the country. Additionally, the ban will reduce the number of cigarettes and smokers in the country and impact the health care system considerably. Money directed towards the management of smoking-related diseases can be directed to the improvement of the health care system.
The effective implementation of the public smoking ban will result in a decrease in smoking and help smoker towards rehabilitation. Like any other addiction, rehabilitation from smoking requires guidance and professional help. According to Roxby (2012), the implementation of public smoking ban in England has resulted in a drop from 29 percent in 2005 to less than 21 percent. The decrease in the number of smokers in Scotland and New York, moreover, show the possible impact of implementing the public smoking ban effectively. This impact minimizes the exposure of the smokers and passive smokers to less smoke thus reducing the effects of cigarette smoke on health. However, Levounis, Zerbo, and Aggarwal (2016) argue that the effective implementation of the ban should focus on addressing addiction rather than reacting to the problem. Developing and equipping educational, awareness-creation centres, and rehabilitation facilities will be essential in handling the problem effectively (Marshall, 2016). Implementation of the ban should consider reducing the number of new smoker, current smokers, and exposure to second-hand smoke.
Success in implementing a public smoking ban in Scotland, Ireland, Arizona, New York, and England among other places across the world shows the effectiveness of a ban in reducing the effects of cigarette smoking. According to the CDC (2016), the implementation of a comprehensive ban on smoking in indoor areas such as in the workplaces, bars, and restaurants in Scotland in 2006 continues to influence health and wellbeing significantly. There have been improvements in health outcomes, a reduction in hospital admissions of people suffering from acute coronary syndrome, and asthma. Additionally, the implementation of a similar law in England (2013), New York (2007), Arizona (2011), and Ireland (2011) has reduced admissions for asthma, heart-related diseases, and improvement in lung functions (CDC, 2016). These results show the importance of implementing a law that bans public smoking.
In
conclusion, smoking causes various health issues that influence the health and
wellbeing of the smoker and victims of passive smoking considerably. There is a
need for developing and enforcing a law that bans smoking in public. While
smoking is the smoker’s right, smoking in public infringes on the rights of the
non-smokers to a healthy living. Passive smoking exposes the smokers to hundreds
of cancer-causing toxic chemicals, triggers attacks in people with asthma, and promote
the development of heart diseases. There is a need for the effective
implementation of a public smoking ban. The success of such bans in other
countries and states in addressing the concerns shows the need to implement it
efficiently.
References
Annesi-Maesano, I., Lundbäck, B., & Viegi, G. (2015). Respiratory epidemiology. Sheffield: European Respiratory Society.
CDC. (2016). Health Effects of Cigarette Smoking. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/effects_cig_smoking/
CDC. (2016, December 1). Smokefree Policies Improve Health. Retrieved from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention : https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/secondhand_smoke/protection/improve_health/
Kuntz, B., & Lampert, T. (2016). Smoking and Passive Smoke Exposure Among Adolescents in Germany. Deutsches Aerzteblatt International, 113 (3) , 23-30.
Levounis, P., Zerbo, E., & Aggarwal, R. (2016). Pocket guide to addiction assessment and treatment. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association Publishing.
Marshall, T. R. (2016). Public opinion, public policy, and smoking : the transformation of American attitudes and cigarette use, 1890-2016. Lanham, Maryland: Lexington Books.
Porter, M. E., & Guth, C. (2013). Redefining the German Healthcare System. Berlin: Springer Berlin.
Roxby, P. (2012, July 1). Smoking ban’s impact five years on. Retrieved from BBC: http://www.bbc.com/news/health-18628811
The Guardian. (2016). Tobacco atlas: country by country. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/mar/23/tobacco-industry-atlas-smoking