禁止在公共场所吸烟(No Smoking in All Public Places)
Some businesses now say that ao one call smoke cigarettes in any of their offices. Some governments have banned smoking in all public places. This is a good idea though it takes away some of our freedom.
As we know, smoking is harmful not only to our health but also to the environment. Smoking can lead to many diseases, such as lung cancer. Smoking affects non smokers
more than it does smokers. Ratio of passive smokers getting ill is higher than that of smokers. So, many nonsmokers are against smoking.
In public places, the harm of smoking is greater. This is connected with another effect of smoking. That is, smoking pollutes environment by giving much poisonous vapour off into the air.
Therefore, that the government ban smoking is very necessary and important to us. It is a measure to protect our health and environment. So many people, especially nonsmokers are for the policy.
Some people say that it takes away some of our freedom. I think it is a one-sided view. If one wants to smoke, he may smoke in private, not in the public places. In fact, smokers still have the freedom of smoking.
But, I think, smokers had better give up smoking, not only in private places, but also in the public places, everywhere. It will be beneficial to ail of us.
[参考译文]
禁止在公共场所吸烟
现在，有些单位宣称没有人可以在他们的办公室里吸烟。有些国家已禁止在公共场所吸烟，这种做法很好，尽管它剥夺了我们一些自由。正如我们所知道的，吸烟不仅对 环境 环境不利而且对 环境 环境也不利。吸烟会导致多种疾病，例如：
肺癌。烟气对不吸烟者的影响有甚于对吸烟者本人的影响。被动吸烟比吸烟人患病率要高。所以很多不吸烟的人反对吸烟。
在公共场合吸烟危害更大，这是吸烟产生的另外一种影响。那就是，吸烟所产生的大量有害气体会污染 环境 环境。因此，政府禁烟对我们来说是非常必要的和重要的。这是保护人类 环境 环境和 环境 环境的一个办法。所以有许多人，尤其是不吸烟的都赞同这一政策。
有些人说这会剥夺我们的一些自由。我认为这样的观点是片面的。如果某人想抽烟，可以在私人场合抽烟而不是在公共场合。实际上，烟民仍然有吸烟的自由。不过，我认为不仅仅是私下里，而且，在公共场合，在任何地方烟民最好放弃抽烟。这会有益于每个人。
Not allowing smoking in public places and office building is a very good rule. I believe this for several reasons .Not only will banning smoking improve people’s health, it will also increase worker productivity and reduce conflicts.
we all know smoking is not healthy. Unfortunately, when smokers are able to smoke in public buildings, they can make other people sick . They may work with people who are allergic to smoking, for examples. In that case , the non-smokers have no choice unless they want to quit their jobs. They can only get sicker , which is unfair .Of course , banning smoking in public buildings and offices will please non-smokers. It will also improve the smokers’ health. They will have fewer opportunities to smoke, so they will smoke fewer cigarettes.
Banning smoking in office buildings can also increase worker productivity. Smokers won’t interrupt their work all the time to smoke. There will also be fewer worker absences. When smokers cut down the number of cigarettes, they will get fewer smoking related illnesses.
Finally, it is a good idea to ban smoking in public places and office buildings because a ban can reduce conflicts. Non-smokers tend to get annoyed and jealous because smokers have an excuse to take frequent breaks .The most significant conflict, however, is over whether smokers have a right to smoke in public . As we have already seen, non-smokers feel they are not always given a choice. If smoking in public is allowed , they will be forced to breathe harmful air. This may violate their rights, and non-smokers are angry with smokers because of it.
It seems clear that banning smoking n public places and office buildings is a good idea. It will reduce conflict and increase productivity. It will also benefit health of smokers and non-smokers alike. I believe that just about anything that improve our health is a good idea
Tobacco smoke is killing thousands of people every year and injuring hundreds of thousands more every day like children. Federal officials released a massive report that is sparking renewed efforts to ban smoking in public places. Secondhand smoke has been classified as known carcinogen, this classification is only shared by ten other pollutants.(These pollutants include benzene, asbestos and smoke inhaled directly from cigarettes. Govenor Mario Cuomo has asked the Legislature to outlaw smoking on school grounds and antismoking advocates said they would target airlines and fast food chains for similar bans.
The risk of developing lung cancer due to tobacco smoke is 1 in 1,000 for nonsmokers and 2 in 1,000 for nonsmoking spouses of smokers. However, the risk for smokers is 70 in every 1,000.
Passive smoking causes between 150,000 and 300,000 cases of bronchitis, pneumoia and similar infections in children less than 18 months old and worsens the condition of between 200,000 and 1 million asthmatic children. It is pointless to allow people to smoke in one part of a restaurant and not to allow it in another when eventuallly the nonsmoking section breathes in the smoke.
In conclusion, second hand smoke is a human carcinogen that kills about 3,000
U.S. nonsmokers because of lung cancer annually. Cigarette smoke is responsible ffor 150,000 to 300,000 cases of bronchitis and pneumonia and other lower respiratory infections in children up to 18 months of age. Tobacco smoke is also known to cause the build-up of fluid in the middle ear causing various infections. As one can see it is not recommended for people to smoke in public due to the effects it has on smokersa s
as well as nonsmokers.