In this day and age, smoking is undeniably one of the major causes of serious illness, death, and even worse social problems. Nevertheless, completely forbidding smoking should be carefully considered in relation to other social aspects. Therefore, I partially agree with governments promulgating cigarettes and other tobacco products prohibition.
Firstly, in addition to the toxic compounds that could seriously cause several visceral diseases, the key factor that makes smoking warningly hazardous is the accompanied addiction. Regarding long-term welfare, this function pushes users to use cigarettes ceaselessly, thus gradually contributing to the development of serious ailments. Moreover, this long-lasting reality has been proven both directly and indirectly to bring about many social issues, such as juvenile crimes, domestic violence, and public health downgoing. Therefore, these harmful impacts on public health must be controlled by the smoking restriction enactment.
On the other hand, the cigarette industry has grown tremendously for several years that a complete reduction could make a comparatively huge impact on the world economy. This ironic truth sadly infers that banning cigarettes and other tobacco products is a totally risky move when it comes to economic regard. Hence, reconsidering the introduction of a resolution prohibiting cigarettes to ameliorate health problems at the expense of a fruitful economy is quintessential.
Looking at both sides of view, it is widely agreed that cigarettes and other tobacco products are unhealthy but they are relatively considerable factors impacting the world economy. Therefore, to simultaneously improve public health and maintain the balance of the economy, completely banning smoking should not be the first choice for nations, but imposing certain restrictions on it could be a better solution. By striking a balance between these two aspects, governing bodies could improve citizens’ well-being as a whole on a global scale.