Some countries today have passed laws against smoking tobacco in public buildings such as offices and restaurants. Other countries have no intention of doing this. Consider the possible arguments on both sides of this debate, and reach your own conclusion on which side you favour.

Around the world, there are some states implemented a law prohibiting smoking in

such

places as offices and restaurants, whereas other states prefer to do anything to tackle

this

issue. It appears that both supporters and opponents have their right persuasions.

To begin

with, countries that accepted no smoking regime in public buildings. It is common knowledge that people who

smoke

are injuring themselves,

moreover

, the poisoned tobacco exhausts harm those who at the same place nearby the formers. It can be seen in restaurants, people sit in one room, and if one individual

smoke

there is no choice except inhale cigarette gas,

furthermore

, people who often had their meals in places with

smoke

later acquired health diseases

such

asthma and frequent headache.

In addition

, people who take frequent

smoke

breaks are less

effictive

Correct your spelling

effective

. To illustrate, recent research shows that in the Netherlands, where companies prohibited smoking while employees work, their incomes have risen up to 20

percent

Change the spelling

per cent

show examples

. Another side to discuss is countries that accept and allow their nation to

smoke

tobacco in places with high people congestion. Perhaps those countries have no desire to restrict and make uncomfortable lives of those who have smoking habits. By doing

this

, people should not care if the restaurant they want to visit permits smoking.

Moreover

, in

such

a country like Spain, people would likely come to a restaurant with a lot of cigarette filters left on the floor due to presenting the fame of

this

restaurant.

Besides

, proponents of smoking at the workplace claim that it helps workers to reduce tension and stress. In conclusion, some countries support prohibiting

smoke

in offices and restaurants, while others have no intensity to stop it. In my firm conviction, I agree with formers because society has to look after each other’s health and

also

put sufficient effort into the workplace rather often cigarette breaks.