Please assess my writing task 2
Posted: Sat Dec 31, 2016 11:06 pm
Some businesses prohibit smoking in any of their offices. some government have banned smoking in all public places. Agree or disagree with this course of action? Give reasons for your opinion.
"Smoking is injurious to health" is one of the common phrase that is normally found printed on packets of cigarettes. This has certainly led to the belief that it is quite not healthy to smoke for long term. In fact, as a precaution it is been banned in many offices and public places. This decision is supported by some, whereas rejected by others. Personally, I believe that these place for public would be better without smoking, although the right to smoke or not should be individual one.
To begin with, everyone is aware that cigrattes contain hazardous chemicals and substances like nicotine, tar etc. These act as potential carcinogens for different organs of body particularly lungs. Moreover, many diseases are linked directly to smoke inhalation like lung cancer, Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease etc. As a matter of fact, not only the person who smoke is principally at risk of these mentioned diseases but others who are in vicinity can be affected aswell. This is defined as " passive smoking" and surely the measures prohibiting smoking in oranisations and public areas might reduce its risk to some extent.
Furthermore, it is human nature to get inspiration and strength when they visualise others openly performing certain actions. For instance, smoking in public can encourage others and it can be adopted as trending fashion symbol by some. However, if few secluded areas are provided to smokers then the growth seen in rate of smoking will be some how reduced. It will be then an individual opinion to adopt smoking as a habit , without being influential for others.
To conclude, I agree that smoking should not be allowed at public and business sectors. Alternatively, it is the responsibility of government to organise special corners for smokers where they can enjoy themselves in their own way. This might serve as a good step in limiting number of passive smokers as well.
"Smoking is injurious to health" is one of the common phrase that is normally found printed on packets of cigarettes. This has certainly led to the belief that it is quite not healthy to smoke for long term. In fact, as a precaution it is been banned in many offices and public places. This decision is supported by some, whereas rejected by others. Personally, I believe that these place for public would be better without smoking, although the right to smoke or not should be individual one.
To begin with, everyone is aware that cigrattes contain hazardous chemicals and substances like nicotine, tar etc. These act as potential carcinogens for different organs of body particularly lungs. Moreover, many diseases are linked directly to smoke inhalation like lung cancer, Asthma, Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease etc. As a matter of fact, not only the person who smoke is principally at risk of these mentioned diseases but others who are in vicinity can be affected aswell. This is defined as " passive smoking" and surely the measures prohibiting smoking in oranisations and public areas might reduce its risk to some extent.
Furthermore, it is human nature to get inspiration and strength when they visualise others openly performing certain actions. For instance, smoking in public can encourage others and it can be adopted as trending fashion symbol by some. However, if few secluded areas are provided to smokers then the growth seen in rate of smoking will be some how reduced. It will be then an individual opinion to adopt smoking as a habit , without being influential for others.
To conclude, I agree that smoking should not be allowed at public and business sectors. Alternatively, it is the responsibility of government to organise special corners for smokers where they can enjoy themselves in their own way. This might serve as a good step in limiting number of passive smokers as well.