Banning Of The Law Of India

Smoking has been a controversial issue in public culture as well in media. When someone smokes, the person lights the tobacco and all the chemicals so they burn. The person breathes in the smoke so it goes through the airways and into the lungs. The nicotine in the smoke get passed into the blood. Throughout the 20 century smoking has garnered too much attention on tv and in people life. Moreover 100 million people died from tobacco related diseases in the 20th century without action taken. Tobacco kills up 50% of its users, even though 1 billion people could die this century from tobacco related diseases. One research conducted by CNN in 1994 showed that 40% of people are in favor for smoking. Yet another research by Anna Heart showed that 70% population are for knowing public smoking. All thing consider smoking has a lot of disadvantages more than advantages and represent death. Personally I’m against smoking for many reasons health, addiction.

The Government of India has created an anti-tobacco plan to tackle the growing issues of tobacco, health concerns, and rising death toll. Their first goal was to eliminate advertising as this was perceived to encourage the youth to take up the dangerous habit. This ban posed ethical and commercial challenges for both sides of the argument. The government has the power to pass laws to help prevent people from smoking and protect its people. They found the ethical decision was to use this power by creating and

One of my favorite pastimes is smoking. Smoking, for me is a great stress reliever; it helps take the edge off. It can’t be denied however, smoking is still bad for you. The damage it does to the body is well documented and researched. There have been two warring sides of the media, the pro- tobacco side and the anti- tobacco side. ‘Big Tobacco’ as well as anti-smoking activist bombard the public with images to promote their agenda. This essay I will be comparing and contrasting ads from both pro and anti-smoking industries. Although, the ads have different goals the way they go about achieving them are similar. The pro smoking ad makes smoking seem more glamorous than it really is. The anti-smoking commercial makes smoking seem sinister and ominous.

The prohibition of tobacco has been trending in foreign nations such as Finland, Norway and France. To conduct similar constraints is the intention of the government of India. Endangerment and possible victims of hazards are the concerns of those who are in favor of banning tobacco as well as other precarious commodities such as handguns and narcotics in India. Millions of deaths around the world have been the aftereffect of tobacco and cigarette smoking since the 90’s. Predictions of an increase of death toll would occur in the latter years to come. Utilization of tobacco among the youth is the product of propagandas’ enticements. Consequently, an increase in medical expenses such as hospital bills and health care expenditures would become the repercussion of such consumption. Additionally, even supposing that the occupation of 26 million people is the liability of tobacco industries, a boycott of tobacco and job turnovers would not create an adverse impact on the economy of India. Investments in other stocks would enhance the Indian economy. Finally, a decline of tobacco consumption would become fruitful if there is a proper implementation of banning tobacco endorsements.

“Tobacco is an agricultural crop, most commonly used to make cigarettes. It is grown all over the world and supports a billion-dollar industry.” Tobacco is one of the huge issues that include people in our society. Many people are using sources that will bring up tobacco. Even though TVs, radios or cigarettes packs have warnings on them, people still continue to do it. The government should take more actions to this problem; actions that will make people want to realize the cause that is given to them. Tobacco may not seem to be dangerous but it has causes to humans. People may feel good when they smoke, do shisha or other tobacco related sources that include the same chemicals, but they do not realize the risks that tobacco brings. Therefore, tobacco use should be decreased.

In conclusion, the tobacco industry is very harmful to society’s health. Cigarettes are the only legal consumer products in the world that cause half of their long-term users to die prematurely. Putting a ban on advertisement was just a start to not advertise so the tobacco industry would not solicit children, but the tobacco industry has come up with different strategies to solicit adolescents even more. If a law was passed to ban tobacco completely, citizens of the United States would not have to worry about second hand smoke, reduces the chance of cancer, and health

There are several ways through which government can control the usage of Tobacco. One of them is that government can impose huge tax on tobacco products by which people will move out of tobacco. It can also be argued that government should ensure smoking should not be high-hand in advertisements

These studies compare tobacco consumption before and after a complete ban on advertising, controlling for other factors. Although such studies may be complicated by inadequate of data collection or poor implementation of the ban, they have yielded convincing data that a complete ban on advertising makes an important contribution towards reducing smoking prevalence.

On Feb 6, 2001 Government of India (GOI) dropped a bombshell on the tobacco Industry when it announced that it would shortly table a bill banning Tobacco Companies from advertising their products and sponsoring sports and cultural events. The objective of such a ban was to discourage adolescents from consuming tobacco products and also arm the Government with powers to launch an anti-Tobacco Program.

personal aspect, as for the ban on tobacco ads being shown in the country by the Indian Government 02/06/2001. Not only for health purposes such as lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart disease, stroke, asthma, reproductive affects in women, diabetes, premature, low birth weight in babies, blindness, cataracts, or age related macular degeneration. With India being a nation with war, as well as lots of heat as they are in the middle of the Sahara desert, many people are subject to having breathing issues without smoking. The reasoning was to block adolescents from purchasing tobacco products, where here in the United States there actually is a sting operation in many cities that police officers pay someone to attempt to purchase tobacco products in order to ensure that businesses are not selling to minors. Minors are not the only reason any country should ban the ads, as I remember as a little girl, the commercial was “ like father, like son” and it showed everything the father did the son would do, and at the end of the day and they would go sit under a tree, the father would then light up a cigarette and then the son would look at the pack and then look up to the father and the words “ like father, like son would be said and the brand was Marlboro, this was 1968 if my memory serves me correctly.

The government of India serves the people. When a product is produced that affects the health of the people the government is justified to take action. With Tobacco products India banned the advertising and sponsorship of sport and cultural events (IBS Center for Management Research (ICMR), 2001). Those in favor of the ban cite the French who stated that Tobacco advertising ban was to protect public health. They also, state the World Health Organization’s (WHO) death toll numbers. These numbers show that tobacco products are one of the leading causes of death in the world are continuing to grow. People who are in favor of the banning of advertising for tobacco products use a World Bank report that shows a substantial decline in smoking when ban of advertising in enacted for all forms of media. Finally, the fear of children becoming addicted to smoking has helped to support the justification to ban advertising on tobacco products. With these reasons we can understand and support a governments action to ban advertising on tobacco products.

Apart from the financial benefits that come from the tobacco, it also has its positive consequences. For instance, ruling out the tobacco industry may be unethical especially if the product emerges to be the cure for the obesity because nicotine can clear fat residues from an individual's system (Mujtaba, 2013). Not only that but also the act of closing down tobacco production may shut down the farmer's industry hence affecting their lives. Moreover, allowing the tobacco industry will emphasize on the freedom, liberty and also enhance the right to choose by consumers. Meaning, a government that is paternalistic should never interfere with its consumers who are also adult's choices-whether bad or good. Ideally, a consumer does not

On February 6, 2001 Government of India released shock news on the tobacco Industry when it announced that it would soon table a bill banning Tobacco Companies from advertising their products and sponsoring sports and cultural events. The reason for doing this is to discourage the company’s adolescents from overwhelming tobacco products and also arm the Government with powers to launch an anti-Tobacco Program.

Tobacco advertising refers to promotion display of tobacco products in media such as; radio, television, print, billboards and at retail stores. The ban on tobacco advertising by the Indian Government has many effects on the people as well as their ethics and freedom of choice. This paper will provide a summary argument in favour of the ban as well as opposing the ban. And to conclude with my opinions on what the government should do with tobacco advertising.

· It was said that French Constitutional council declared that ban on advertising tobacco products was not constitutional, it based on the need to protect public health