25 May 2025

Tobacco Ban 禁煙

Scientific research has fully demonstrated that smoking is harmful to health, leading to serious diseases such as lung cancer, heart disease, and respiratory illnesses. Many countries have taken measures to regulate smoking through restrictions, taxation, and public health campaigns. However, global smoking bans have not yet been implemented for several reasons:
科學研究已充分證明,吸煙有害健康,會導致肺癌、心臟病和呼吸系統疾病等嚴重疾病。許多國家已採取措施,透過限制、徵稅和公共衛生運動來規範吸煙,但由於以下幾個原因,全球禁菸尚未能實施:

- Tobacco industry is a large global enterprise that generates billions of dollars in revenue and employs millions of people, and governments rely on tobacco taxes as a significant source of revenue.
- 煙草業是一個龐大的全球產業,創造了數十億美元的收入並僱用了數百萬人,並且政府依賴菸稅作為重要稅務收入來源。

- Global bans on smoking could promote illegal markets, leading to unregulated products that may be even more dangerous.
- 全球禁煙可能助長非法市場,導致產品不受監管,甚至更危險。

- Many people believe individuals should have the right to make their own choices, even if those choices are harmful.
- 許多人認為個人應該有權利做出自己的選擇,即使這些選擇是有害的。

- In some cultures, smoking is deeply rooted in traditions and social interactions, making comprehensive bans difficult to enforce.
- 在某些文化中,吸煙深植於傳統和社會互動中,因此全面禁止吸菸很難實施。


What I want to say is:
我想說的是:

First, although citizens' smoking habits can bring extra tax revenue to the government, we should not overlook the greater private and public health costs caused by smoking and secondhand smoke on smokers and those affected by it.
首先,市民的吸煙習慣雖然可以為政府帶來額外的稅收,但不要忽視吸煙對煙民及受二手煙影響的人在健康方面更大的私人與公共支出!

Second, the costs associated with tobacco control— including publicity, legislation, and enforcement—are not less than those of a ban. In essence, a smoking ban is simply to regulate tobacco products as drugs, which would only slightly increase the costs related to combating illegal substances. If there are concerns that banning smoking might not suppress illegal markets, I believe these countries are simply incapable of cracking down on any illegal activities.
第二,現在各國著眼於控煙的成本,包括宣傳、立法與執法上的人力與財力,絕不低於禁煙。禁煙簡單來說就是將煙草產品列為毒品來監管,只是稍為增加一點在打擊違禁品方面的成本吧!若然擔心禁煙後無法壓制相關的非法市場,我想,這些國家跟本無能力打擊任何違法行為!

Third, personal freedom should not infringe upon the welfare of others. Medical evidence has shown that smoking seriously affects the smoker's health and is a form of slow self-destructive behavior; the secondhand smoke exhaled by smokers can impact the health of those nearby, which is akin to chronic murder!
第三,個人自由不應該侵犯他人的福祉。已有醫學證明,吸煙會嚴重影響自己的健康,是一種慢性自殺的行為;吸煙時吐出的二手煙,會影響附近其他人的健康,這就等於慢性謀殺!

Fourth, although tobacco was once used as a medicinal substance by shamans, modern medicine and pharmaceuticals have advanced significantly. Therefore, we should not ignore its harms and preserve it solely because of its historical and cultural significance.
第四,雖然煙草曾經是巫醫所施用的藥物之一,但是現在有更先進的醫學與藥物,就不應該僅僅因為煙草與吸煙是歷史文化就無視其傷害地將其保留下來。

Since taxation and illegal markets are mentioned, here is a transition approach as reference from tobacco control to the tobacco ban: smokers can only buy and enjoy tobacco products and smoke in smoking areas with special licenses! These places need to be equipped with appropriate facilities to ensure that smokers do not bring tobacco products and secondhand smoke into the community through their skin, clothing or even lungs after smoking. This approach will allow the government to retain tax revenue, create jobs, reduce public health costs in the community caused by secondhand smoke, increase smokers' opportunity costs when smoking, and clearly convey the government's message and determination to eventually ban smoking.
既然提到了稅收與非法市場,這裡有一個從控煙到禁煙的過渡做法,可供參考:吸煙者只能在領有特別牌照的吸煙場所買到並享用煙草產品!這些場所需要設有適當的設施,以保證吸煙者在吸煙後不會透過其皮膚、衣物甚致肺部將煙草產品及二手煙帶入社區。這做法可讓政府保留這方面的稅收,創造就業機會,減少社區中因為二手煙做成的公共健康開支,增加煙民在吸煙時的機會成本,並明確帶出政府在最終禁煙方面的訊息與決心。

No comments:

Featured post

對我的文章發表評論或批評的方法 The ways to make comments for my articles

如有任何建議,讀者可以 在Facebook上發送私人訊息至“ArKai1975” ,或電郵至kaikaysk@gmail.com。 For any suggestions, readers may send privace message on Facebook at ...