sábado, 15 de noviembre de 2008

Arguments for and against essays

Banning smoking in all public places

Over the last few years many people in the World have had the habit of smoking in all places. For that reason some governments have implemented the banning of smoking in public places. The purpose of this essay is to discuss the arguments for and against of this banning.

One point in favor is that researches have generated evidence that secondhand smoke causes the same problems as direct smoking, including lung cancer, cardiovascular disease and lung ailments such as emphysema, bronchitis and asthma. Therefore non-smokers are exposed to the same carcinogens as active smokers and banning smoking in public places can be a solution for this big problem.

On the other hand, one argument against banning smoking in public places is that not for all is convenient. For example: first, laws to prevent smoking in bars will not be effective because of the culture in our society; second, the general public will not accept smoke-free bars and restaurants; and third, smoke-free laws will cause bars and restaurants to lose money.

Summing up, I think that this banning can control some issues in the human health and more if we are talking about the passive smokers but; in this process, the governments are going to find some problems which will need to be solved by implementing new laws in order to deal with this issue.

Pros and cons of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Stem Cells are cells that can be developed into many different types of cells such as muscle cells, brains cells or blood cells. A lot of scientist researches and medical professionals have made the embryonic stem cell therapy process to understand and help human development but, however, there are some arguments for and against about this research that will be exposed in this essay.

Some of the pros of stem cell researchers are that scientists can learn about how we are made up and try to reverse problems in this stage such as cancer and birth defects.

Another argument in favor is that we are learning how to grow tissue to use for medical reasons. If they keep progressing in their studies, scientists will be able to cure illness such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s diseases, among others.
But, on thee other hand, some of the cons of stem cell researchers are that to develop a cell line scientists have to use embryonic stem cells witch are taken from embryos that are about one week old (this means that the baby will not live). So a life is lost in order to save others.

Some staunch pro-lifers regard the destruction of the blast cyst (which is a laboratory – fertilized human egg). These pro-lifers believe that is immoral to destroy a few-day-old human embryo, even to save or reduce suffering in existing human life.

Summing up, we can conclude that many of these researches are important to expand adult life but, I don’t agree with that if this means ignore the many moral issues involving the use of human embryos. So scientists will have t find a way to do this well in order to the human’s salvation.

No hay comentarios: