Smoking not only harms the smoker, but also those who are nearby. Therefore, smoking should be banned in public places. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Medical studies have shown that smoking not only leads to a health problem for a smoker but

also

people afflict passive smokers.

As a result

, many believe that smoking should be prohibited in populated areas.

Although

there are arguments on both side, I opine that forbidding people to smoke in the open area is the most appropriate course of action. Smoking, that has taken more lives than we have ever thought, that can cause severe diseases like cancer of lungs, mouth and throat. It works as a stress reliever for temporary but it has lead millions of people to distress and anxiety.

Moreover

, there has been evident medical proofs that clearly mentions that passive smoking is equally dangerous as active smoking.

Thus

,

one

smoker nearby may cause detrimental health effects to everyone. A typical example, statistics show that 67

percent

Change the spelling

per cent

show examples

of smoker perish from

one

or another smoking-related illness.

In addition

, If public smoking is banned, people will not be able to smoke in work areas or roads.

As a result

, they may reduce their nicotine intake as they do not have an option to smoke while working or walking.

In addition

, children’s mind is the most innocent

one

, they always imitate whatever their elders are doing.

Such

that, in case of banning public smoking they will not see much smokers unless there is

one

in their home, that will reduce

f

Add an article

the

show examples

uture smoking population.

However

, bars and pubs would suffer or may go out of business due to fewer customers.

Also

, few people consider smoking as a matter of freedom of choice, and enforcing

this

law might cause disruption in their mindset. In conclusion, No business is above the health of people.

Such

that making smoking illegal in public only brings benefits.