The EPA and Anti-tobacco Zealots Essay

Big tobacco is losing in a war for the public to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and The Truth Initiative. Big tobacco being the large tobacco companies in the world like Philip Morris International, British American Tobacco, Imperial Brands, Japan Tobacco International, and China Tobacco. The CDC is a government operated agency that contributes to the overall health of the public. The Truth Initiative is the largest non-profit public health organization in the U.S. whose goal is to inspire tobacco free lives. Not only is Big tobacco losing, they may have already lost.

Psychology is defined as the study of the human mind and mental status in order to predict and also explain aspects of human behaviour. In regards to the behaviour concerning addiction, tobacco use is considered the most highly used (and abused) legal substance nationwide. It also has the highest leading risk factors causing considerable rates in morbidity and mortality and several types of cancer, respiratory disease and heart disease; relating to why promoting behavioural change (through aspects of psychology) is considered so imperative in today 's healthcare environment. In addition, the health promotion source that this essay will be examining is the National Tobacco Campaign, aimed at altering smoking behaviours, plus the associated advertisement strategies used, and lastly the psychological theories associated.

This author creates an invalid analogy when he compares smokers’ right to the civil right sought by Black in the 1950s and 60’s. In an attempt to convince that smokers are being discriminated that smokers are a potential “target of violent antismoker and overzealous public enforces.” There are several problems that gave this argument invalid. First, smoking in public area put other people other on risk and that is why they are being discriminated. The discrimination against black people is just plain cruelty because the white taught of them as less because of their skin color. While smoking it puts other in danger, therefore, they don’t approve of people smoking especially in public area. Second, the civil right movement was to give freedom

It's clear that all human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights, so smokers think they have the same right as non-smokers and shouldn't be targeted because of how they choose to live their lives and not being limited by where they decide to smoke. While all humans have the right to do whatever they want, they are not allowed to affect other's people health under the name of freedom. When it comes to nicotine the concept of choice is totally false. According to CDC more than 7000 chemicals are found in tobacco, about 70 chemical of them are known to be cancer causing substances. So non-smokers should have the right to breathe clean air and not being forced by other's unhealthy choices. It has been proven that second-hand

The nation endorses freedom of choice, which includes smoking. In America, freedom is everything; freedom is notorious a symbol for the nation. Therefore, this right can only be seen as something that cannot be taken away. “Quite simply, a just government does not have the authority to ban smoking on private property or to tell smokers to quit or to punish them if they do not” (In Defense of Smokers). The government does not poses the authority to impose their will upon a citizen; “Another reason to oppose the current campaign against smokers is because it violates the legitimate rights of smokers” (In Defense of Smokers). In addition to endorsing freedom, the nation should work to preserve it, because without upholding the rights that our

The connection between cigarettes and lung cancer was unconvincing because scientist found that cigarettes give a person a higher risk of getting lung cancer not that cigarettes give you lung cancer. People thought this was unconvincing because the lack of research proving that it does cause lung cancer, rather than increasing your chances. Also, the industry backfired scientist by saying their products were not harmful because the lack of proof. Prior to releasing the statement that cigarettes put you at a higher risk of lung cancer, all uncertainty questions should have been answered and publicly stated. So, the cigarette industry could not come back at scientist with a countering argument or statement.

Tobacco companies hire scientists to conduct research with goals that would benefit their product to not look bad. In the 1950s the connection of lung cancer was being associated with tobacco in the US. (Lecture 17) Tobacco companies were great at advertising their product

In the year of 2010, 15.1% of Australian aged over 14 years were regular smokers, decreasing from 16.6% in 2007 and from 24.3% in 1991. One-quarter of the whole population were people who used to smoke and more than half had never smoked. Smoking currency is largest amongst 18-40-year-olds, and this group set a primary target audience for the National Tobacco Campaign (2010 National Drug Strategy Household Survey).

This has been one of the major philosophical arguments brought up in this course. In fact, the first day of class we started with the basic moral claim that, “Human beings have the moral right to harm themselves” (Vaughn Beginning Moral Claims). This is a claim that I agree with. However, people must be adequately informed of the risks of their behaviors. This is something that the tobacco industry does not do. Through their Tobacco Industry Research Council and claiming that the link between cigarettes and lung cancer has not been proven they successfully confused the public. Then, during the Cipollone case of the early 1990s, it came out that the tobacco industry did know more about the harms, but had not released that information to the public. The tobacco industry did not accurately inform people of the risk of smoking cigarettes. Due to this, its claims that it should not be shut down because people have the right to harm themselves is invalid because people did not have accurate information to decide if they viewed the rewards better than the risks. The United States of America has the responsibility to inform its citizens of the risks and then react appropriately to assure the wellbeing of its

The tobacco industry is a very unethical industry, due to the long term effects of tobacco on humans. The industry also does not assess the ethical and social responsibility the best way that it should. There are many factors that make the industry unethical; some of the reasons are the way the cigarette companies around the world Advertise, the way governments and cigarette companies make a huge profit from the sales of cigarettes, and the labeling health risks. I do believe however that there is something that the tobacco companies can do to better their strategy as far as their ethics go. I think that they should, always be looking for the best interest on their consumers, as well as advertise strictly

Do you smell that? That foul scent mixed into the air. It’s killing you slowly inside, each time you take a breath of this putrid, polluted, dirty scent. You smell it too, the trillions of chemicals racing into your lungs. Now look around yourself, and you’ll see someone smoking on the bench beside you. Smoking is the number one avoidable causes of death. Therefore, smoking should be banned from all public areas. The ban from smoking in public will help to reduce the smokers intake of cigarettes/chemicals, cigarettes themselves are a danger to the earth, some may argue that this ban may damage the cigarette economy, and that smoking does not only effect the smoker himself/herself, it effects everyone around them, in many various ways.

The numbers of people who smoke have increased over the years. Although they are equipped with the knowledge of how unhealthy smoking can be, people still choose to smoke. It is a personal choice and a highly addictive habit. Smokers choose to subject themselves to the health risks of smoking. It is not for the government or any third party to dictate whether or not a person should be allowed to smoke. However, smoking does not only affect the smoker negatively. It also affects all the people around those who smoke because when people smoke in public the smoke travels everywhere through the air, and the negative effects of the smoke affects all living, breathing creatures. Therefore smoking should be banned in all public places.

Smoking comes with many problems. Not only for the smoker, but for the nonsmokers who are exposed to the smoke. In 1993, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) classified second-hand smoke as a Group A carcinogen- the most dangerous category of carcinogens. About 600,000 people

Traditionally, many advertisements released by cigarette brands under the Philip Morris label have depicted happy people joined together in friendship (supposedly due to their common habit). Other advertisements attempted to associate cigarettes with sleek mystical figures, sometimes even sexually desirable ones. All this has changed, however, due to recent legal developments in which the cigarette giant was pressured to offer anti-smoking ads, in addition to the usual fictional ones depicting happy mannequins. In no way were they to advertise cigarettes, and they were mandated to help stop youth smoking. These requirements placed Philip Morris in a difficult situation. They needed to satisfy the

Smoking tobacco has been practiced for years. People worldwide view smoking as a lifestyle and smoked for pleasure and relaxation. During the 19th century it was considered fashionable to be seen taking a puff from a cigarette. At that time, the world was blind to the negative effects of smoking tobacco. However, during the 20th century, scientific research began and The American Cancer Society began to emphasize the health risks of smoking cigarettes. By 1964 a Surgeon’s General warning was seen on every pack of cigarettes across the U.S. linking smoking to lung cancer. Even with the astounding evidence of the health effects, cigarette smoking continues to claim the lives of thousands of Americans each year. Cigarette smoking causes permanent damage for not only the smoker, but the non smoker and environment as well. If the U.S. government were to ban cigarette smoking all together, there will be a positive change in the well-being of Americans everywhere.