final paper

NEED DONE ASAP

Assignment 1: Persuasive Research Paper—Final Version

Assignment 1 Grading Criteria	Maximum Points
Thesis Statement: You have a single, main point (a thesis statement), and all sentences in your paper directly relate to and support your thesis statement. Your main point is a clearly defined claim and is consistent with current research on the subject selected.
Quality of Support: You support your initial claim with the evidence you have gathered during your research, and moderate use of your personal experience. You give full credit for any ideas that are not your own. You have explained within the text of the paper the reason for the use of any biased or non-academic source.
Presentation of Support: Your reader can easily determine which words are quotes, which words are summaries or paraphrases, and which words are your own ideas. You correctly cite every claim that is not your own or common knowledge and include all necessary information. If the item cited contains quotes, you provide a page or paragraph number. You correctly quote and paraphrase, using the criteria in your text. You use p. for a single page and pp. for multiple pages.
Identifying Opposing Arguments: You present the strongest arguments against your claim; you avoid the “straw man” fallacy and argue as hard for the other side as you argue for your own.
Responding to Opposing Arguments: You evaluate each possible objection and reply appropriately; not all objections can be refuted but all must be addressed.
References Used: Personal communications are only cited within the paper, not on the references page. All other sources must match with a references citation for every source used in the paper and an in-text citation for every source listed on the references page. You have few or no sources that end in “.com” or “.org”.
Proprietary Database and Governmental Web site Usage: For governmental pages, you offer the exact address of the cited Web page, not the home page of the sponsoring organization. If your reader cannot access the page, you have included a complete citation to the page’s location, including DOI where possible. You have removed artifacts (underlining, colored text, etc.) from the URL and any period at the end of the citation.
Length and Substance: The paper meets the length requirements of 8–10 pages of actual text (excluding the title, abstract and reference pages). The work is not padded to meet the length designation, and the discussion in all areas is detailed but succinct.
Reference Page Format: Title (References) and text are in standard form, not bold, italics, or all caps, and in hanging-indent format. You have not used authors’ first names, only their initials. You have correctly capitalized the titles of your reference works. You have included all required information for each type of citation, according to APA style, and your text. You have used the appropriate abbreviations as presented in your text.
Abstract: Your abstract is titled “Abstract” and is not in bold-faced type; it contains 120 words or fewer and is numbered page two (with numerals in place of word numbers). The paragraph is not first-line indented and is double spaced.
Research Paper Format: Your title page is double-spaced, as is the rest of the paper. On the title page you have a header with the words “Running Head:” followed by your running head and a left-aligned page number. For the rest of the paper, you have a running head with five spaces and then the numeral 1; headers are one-half inch from the top of each page, and all margins are one inch. The title is in standard text, is not bolded or in italics, and should be centered on the page. Dates are not part of the cover for APA papers.
Organization: You present your argument in a way that is easy to understand.
Style, Word Choice, and Audience: How do you say what you have to say? For this assignment, assume that your audience includes the members of this class. Your tone should be college-level, without referring to yourself, or addressing the reader directly. Delivery should be objective, in the third-person voice.
Grammar and Mechanics: Use correct spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, apostrophe usage, and homophone. You present your argument academically.
TurnItIn
Total:	300

Prospectus

Abstract and thesis statement

Public smoking of cigarettes has been a major topic of controversy at both local and high-ended legislative boardrooms. Its plight has brought much anguish to the perpetrators and other secondary parties such as second-hand smokers, the environment and the government. Nonetheless, there are compelling arguments that indicate the need to have the current laws amended and prohibit public smoking. This is a move brought about by findings which show the detrimental effects of public smoking. The act impacts persons from the early ages to grown-ups situated at their places of work. All in all, it is important that the issue be addressed appropriately as briefly highlighted in the paper.

There exists a significant distinction between the ethics and cultural norms of various societies. Nonetheless, vices such as smoking in public are universally discouraged and considered not harmful, but also inappropriate. This paper analyses the need to ban public smoking with two fold approach; both as a social responsibility and also for health concerns.

Explanation

The effects of public smoking are categorized into two, these being; the ethics in smoking and the effects of secondary smoking. This therefore denotes the reasons as to why public smoking should be condemned and illegalized by all forms of legislation in order to deal with the two aspects (Health Committee, 2005). The objectives and purpose of banning public smoking includes.

Ensuring there will be no involuntary smoking (David, 2008)
Ensuring that the passage of the vicious culture to lower generations is reduced
Progressive mitigation of smoking habits and
Provision aid in the fight against lung cancer (Health Committee, 2005)

Over fifty percent of lung cancer cases are brought about by smoking, to mean that any effort to reduce smoking would change the prevalence rate for lung cancer (David, 2008). It is paramount to note that once public smoking is condemned and illegalized, there shall be both reduced smoking and many smokers would also quit smoking as they would find it hard to continue with acts secretly. Also, banning of public smoking will ensure that there shall not be involuntary smoking, which is referred to as secondary smoking (Health Committee, 2005).

Cultures are mostly cross-changed from one generation to another through sight. Thus, once public smoking is banned, it shall be easy to control rate of smoking among the younger and oncoming generations.

Sub points

Some of the supporting points to the banning of public smoking include:

Creation of a virtuous society
Denying of religious rights to citizens
Creation of a means to cut government expenditure
ease of congestion in hospitals (David, 2008)
Control of environmental degradation

While the government does not have a right in choosing what the citizens should do privately, it is mandated to ensure that the citizenship is portrayed in the best light in the international community (Health Committee, 2005). Also, there are many religious circles that hold smoking as a sin and an abomination. To ensure that this right to withhold from smoking is protected, public smoking should be abolished.

There are both direct ways and indirect ways of cutting government spending and congestion in hospitals. One of the indirect ways that the government would use to cut the spending shall be banning of public smoking (David, 2008). As a result of this ban, the government will reduce the amount-if not completely stop, of funds used in rehabilitating victims of smoking. This would ensure that there will be fewer patients in hospitals. The space in hospitals could easily be used for more complicated cases and also for any emergencies that may arise. One main factor in regards to environmental degradation is air pollution. A ban on smoking would come in handy in controlling environmental pollution (Health Committee, 2005).

Possible Objections

It is expected that the smokers would never go down without a fight. Some of the grounds that they would try to raise are:

That smoking is a right just like other human right.
That it is not possible to control lung cancer through a ban on public smoking since smoking will still continue secretly (David, 2008)
That the government supports vegetation of tobacco and it would therefore be imprudent to discourage its consumption, and,
That smoking in itself contributes very little to air pollution.

The opponents of a ban on public smoking would mostly be the persons that are indeed smokers. Essentially, the human rights do not expressly add some rights to it. This makes it hard to make legislation that ban public smoking. Secondly, smoking cannot be claimed to be the main contributor of air pollution, hence to come up with a legislation act to ban smoking so as to control air pollution would be misplaced (Health Committee, 2005).

A ban on public smoking is not a ban on smoking. Thus, this would do little towards control of lung cancer. Also, as noted smoking is not the only contributor towards lung cancer. Thus, it is not prudent to assume that by making legislations that ban public smoking would reduce cases of lung cancer (David, 2008).

Reply to Objections

The above objections are weak and the following reply is most suitable as a counter:

The fact that public smoking contributes very little to lung cancer is a reason in itself to make the ban in public smoking a mode of control towards the deadly disease. Thus, while it would not stop all the population from smoking at least the prevalence rate for lung cancer would be reduced (Health Committee, 2005).
Secondly, while most governments’ support the cultivation of tobacco, legislation can also be made to control the cultivation if at all that would reduce the prevalence rate for lung cancer and other objectives of the ban (David, 2008).
Every effort to control air pollution should not be undermined. Thus, control through a ban on public smoking is a valuable percentage in control of air pollution.

Annotated Bibliography

Menzies, D.& Nair. A. et al. (2006). Respiratory Symptoms, Pulmonary Function, and Markers of Inflammation Among Bar Workers Before and After a Legislative Ban on Smoking in Public Places. JAMA. 2006;296(14):1742-1748. doi:10.1001/jama.296.14.1742.

Summary

The article discusses findings on a research that was done in Tayside, Scotland and it included the enrolment of 105 asthmatic and non-asthmatic nonsmoking bar workers. The main outcomes involved the evaluation of sensory and respiratory symptoms. The results revealed that the proportion of bar workers with sensory and respiratory symptoms dropped from 79.2% before the ban to 53.2% one to two months afterward. Therefore, smoke-free legislation was linked with remarkable early improvements in the sensory and respiratory symptoms.

Credibility

Relevance

The article is of much relevance to this particular discussion as it brings into light the actual results of having a society in which public smoking has been prohibited. Through the findings denoted in the article, it is possible for one to apprehend the rate at which respiratory infections are prevalent in an area, before and after the ban on public smoking.

Hinds, M.H. (1992). Impact of a local ordinance banning tobacco sales to minors. Public Health Rep. 1992 May-Jun; 107(3): 355–358.

Despite the fact that most jurisdictions do not legalize the sale of tobacco to younger people, the enforcement of these laws is always taken less seriously encouraging the minors to still purchase tobacco easily (Hinds, 1992). The reference material is survey that shows tobacco smoking dropped from 25.3% to 19.7% overall, following a local ban on public smoking. Among the girls, the tobacco smoking declined from 26.4% to 11.5%. The students who reported that they were asked to proof their age before purchasing tobacco increased from 29.3% to 61.5%. Therefore the study shows that local ordinances can be an effective tool that can help in the reduction of tobacco smoking among adolescents.

Credibility

The author of this paper assessed the impact or effect of local ordinance created to prevent the sales of tobacco to minors by conducting surveys of tenth grade students after and before the implementation of the local ordinance.

Relevance

This paper shows that most addictions to tobacco smoking start when an individual is younger than eighteen years. It brings the topic of discussion into a more localized and simple level of boy-girl relationship in the society. Through this approach, one is able to gain insight on the plight of public smoking from a narrower but similarly significant picture.

In the surveys, there were questions regarding the behaviors of tobacco use, demographic/personal characteristics, smoking cessation resources and smoking policy at the workplace. The regression analysis showed that workers working in smoke-free workplace were more than 25%ready and likely to quit the smoking. At the same time, these workers were more than 25%ready and likely to realize smoke cessation as compared to those working in workplaces that permitted or allowed smoking. This study concluded that smoke-free workplace policies help workers discontinue or reduce the use of tobacco.

Credibility

Relevance

In a highly developing world today, it is imperative to have a closer analysis of the working environment in which we amerce ourselves. The conducted survey in this report does just that and brings into our attention, the relation between the workplace and practices such as smoking.

References:

David, H., (2008).

Smoking

Bans
. New York: SAGE

Great

Britain HYPERLINK “http:///h”: Parliament HYPERLINK “http:///h”: House of Commons HYPERLINK “http:///h”:
Health Committee
, (2005).
Smoking HYPERLINK ” HYPERLINK “http:///h”http HYPERLINK “http:///h”:// HYPERLINK “http:///h”books HYPERLINK “http:///h”. HYPERLINK “http:///h”google HYPERLINK “http:///h”. HYPERLINK “http:///h”com HYPERLINK “http:///h”/ HYPERLINK “http:///h”books HYPERLINK “http:///h”? HYPERLINK “http:///h”id HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”m HYPERLINK “http:///h”94 HYPERLINK “http:///h”ij HYPERLINK “http:///h”_ HYPERLINK “http:///h”m HYPERLINK “http:///h”4 HYPERLINK “http:///h”kiUC HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”printsec HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”frontcover HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”dq HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”why HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”ban HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”public HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”smoking HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”hl HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”en HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”sa HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”X HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”ei HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”mcrZUYXyBueT HYPERLINK “http:///h”0 HYPERLINK “http:///h”QWQ HYPERLINK “http:///h”14 HYPERLINK “http:///h”CQCg HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”ved HYPERLINK “http:///h”=0 HYPERLINK “http:///h”CCwQ HYPERLINK “http:///h”6 HYPERLINK “http:///h”AEwAA HYPERLINK “http:///h”” in HYPERLINK ” HYPERLINK “http:///h”http HYPERLINK “http:///h”:// HYPERLINK “http:///h”books HYPERLINK “http:///h”. HYPERLINK “http:///h”google HYPERLINK “http:///h”. HYPERLINK “http:///h”com HYPERLINK “http:///h”/ HYPERLINK “http:///h”books HYPERLINK “http:///h”? HYPERLINK “http:///h”id HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”m HYPERLINK “http:///h”94 HYPERLINK “http:///h”ij HYPERLINK “http:///h”_ HYPERLINK “http:///h”m HYPERLINK “http:///h”4 HYPERLINK “http:///h”kiUC HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”printsec HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”frontcover HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”dq HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”why HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”ban HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”public HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”smoking HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”hl HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”en HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”sa HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”X HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”ei HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”mcrZUYXyBueT HYPERLINK “http:///h”0 HYPERLINK “http:///h”QWQ HYPERLINK “http:///h”14 HYPERLINK “http:///h”CQCg HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”ved HYPERLINK “http:///h”=0 HYPERLINK “http:///h”CCwQ HYPERLINK “http:///h”6 HYPERLINK “http:///h”AEwAA HYPERLINK “http:///h”” HYPERLINK “http:///h”Public HYPERLINK ” HYPERLINK “http:///h”http HYPERLINK “http:///h”:// HYPERLINK “http:///h”books HYPERLINK “http:///h”. HYPERLINK “http:///h”google HYPERLINK “http:///h”. HYPERLINK “http:///h”com HYPERLINK “http:///h”/ HYPERLINK “http:///h”books HYPERLINK “http:///h”? HYPERLINK “http:///h”id HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”m HYPERLINK “http:///h”94 HYPERLINK “http:///h”ij HYPERLINK “http:///h”_ HYPERLINK “http:///h”m HYPERLINK “http:///h”4 HYPERLINK “http:///h”kiUC HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”printsec HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”frontcover HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”dq HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”why HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”ban HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”public HYPERLINK “http:///h”+ HYPERLINK “http:///h”smoking HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”hl HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”en HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”sa HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”X HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”ei HYPERLINK “http:///h”= HYPERLINK “http:///h”mcrZUYXyBueT HYPERLINK “http:///h”0 HYPERLINK “http:///h”QWQ HYPERLINK “http:///h”14 HYPERLINK “http:///h”CQCg HYPERLINK “http:///h”& HYPERLINK “http:///h”ved HYPERLINK “http:///h”=0 HYPERLINK “http:///h”CCwQ HYPERLINK “http:///h”6 HYPERLINK “http:///h”AEwAA HYPERLINK “http:///h”” Places HYPERLINK “http:///h”: Report HYPERLINK “http:///h”, Together with Formal Minutes
. London: Author

Hinds, M.H. (1992). Impact of a local ordinance banning tobacco sales to minors. Public Health Rep. 1992 May-Jun; 107(3): 355–358.
Menzies, D & Nair, A. et al. (2006). Respiratory Symptoms, Pulmonary Function, and Markers of Inflammation Among Bar Workers Before and After a Legislative Ban on Smoking in Public Places. JAMA. 2006;296(14):1742-1748.doi:10.1001/jama.296.14.174

AnnotatedBibliography

This paper was done with the aim of investigating the link between smoke-free legislation or smoking ban with markers of inflammation, pulmonary function and symptoms of bar workers. It was done in Tayside, Scotland and it included the enrolment of 105 asthmatic and non-asthmatic nonsmoking bar workers. The main outcomes involved the evaluation of sensory and respiratory symptoms. The results revealed that the proportion of bar workers with sensory and respiratory symptoms dropped from 79.2% before the ban to 53.2% one to two months afterward. Therefore, smoke-free legislation was linked with remarkable early improvements in the sensory and respiratory symptoms.

Hinds, M.H. (1992). Impact of a local ordinance banning tobacco sales to minors. Public Health Rep. 1992 May-Jun; 107(3): 355–358.

This paper shows that most addictions to tobacco smoking start when an individual is younger than eighteen years. Despite the fact that most jurisdictions do not legalize the sale of tobacco to younger people, the enforcement of these laws is always taken less seriously encouraging the minors to still purchase tobacco easily. The author of this paper assessed the impact or effect of local ordinance created to prevent the sales of tobacco to minors by conducting surveys of tenth grade students after and before the implementation of the local ordinance. From this survey, tobacco smoking dropped from 25.3% to 19.7% overall. Among the girls, the tobacco smoking declined from 26.4% to 11.5%. The students who reported that they were asked to proof their age before purchasing tobacco increased from 29.3% to 61.5%. Therefore, local ordinances can be an effective tool that can help in the reduction of tobacco smoking among adolescents.

These authors conducted this study to report information on the effect or impact of workplace smoking policies on worker smoking habit from a heterogeneous and large sample of workplaces and smokers in 22 diverse communities who participated in this trial. The population base which completed surveys and supplied data, consisted of a total of 8271 adult smokers who were employed. In the surveys, there were questions regarding the behaviors of tobacco use, demographic/personal characteristics, smoking cessation resources and smoking policy at the workplace. The regression analysis showed that workers working in smoke-free workplace were more than 25%ready and likely to quit the smoking. At the same time, these workers were more than 25%ready and likely to realize smoke cessation as compared to those working in workplaces that permitted or allowed smoking. This study concluded that smoke-free workplace policies help workers discontinue or reduce the use of tobacco.

References:

Glasgow, R. E., Cummings, K. M. & Hyland A. (1997). Relationship of worksite smoking policy to changes in employee tobacco use: findings from COMMIT. Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation. Tob Control 1997;6:S44- doi:10.1136/tc.6.suppl_2.S4
Hinds, M.H. (1992). Impact of a local ordinance banning tobacco sales to minors. Public Health Rep. 1992 May-Jun; 107(3): 355–358.

Menzies, D., Nair, A., Williamson, P.A., Schembri, S., Al-Khairalla, M., Barnes, M., Fardon, T.C., McFarlane, L., Magee, G.J. & Lipworth, B.J. (2006). Respiratory Symptoms, Pulmonary Function, and Markers of Inflammation Among Bar Workers Before and After a Legislative Ban on Smoking in Public Places. JAMA. 2006;296(14):1742-1748. doi:10.1001/jama.296.14.1742

Research Paper Proposal

Thesis

With the social ethics in the different societies being different, the effects of some vices are common like smoking in public; this paper analyses the need to ban public smoking both as a social responsibility and also for health concerns.

Explanation

The effects of public smoking are categorized into two; the ethics in smoking and the effects of secondary smoking. Thus, the reasons as to why public smoking should be condemned and illegalized by all forms of legislation and laws must deal with the two aspects (Health Committee, 2005). The objectives and purpose of banning public smoking includes

· This will ensure that there will be no involuntary smoking (David, 2008)

· Banning of public smoking ensures that the passage of the vicious culture to lower generations is reduced

· That secondary smoking is slowly diminished, and,

· As a way of fighting lung cancer (Health Committee, 2005)

Over fifty percent of lung cancer cases are brought about by smoking. Thus any effort to reduce smoking would change the prevalence rate for lung cancer (David, 2008). It is paramount to note that once public smoking is condemned and illegalized, there shall be both reduced smoking and also, some smokers would quit smoking as they would not do in private either. Also, banning of public smoking will ensure that there shall not be involuntary smoking, also called secondary smoking (Health Committee, 2005).

Cultures are mostly cross-changed from one generation to another through sight. Thus, once public smoking is banned, it shall be easy to control rate of smoking to the younger generations. This will also happed to the effects of secondary smoking which are closely related to smoking itself.

Sub points

Some of the supporting points to the banning of public smoking include

· Creation of a virtuous society

· Denying of religious rights to citizens

· A way of cutting government expenditure and

· To ease congestion in hospitals (David, 2008)

· Control of environmental degradation

While the government does not have a right on choosing what the citizens should do privately, it is also mandated to ensure that the citizenship is portrayed in the best light in the international community (Health Committee, 2005). Also, there are many religious circles that hold smoking as a sin and an abomination. To ensure that this right to withhold from smoking is protected, public smoking should be abolished.

There are both direct ways and indirect ways of cutting government spending and congestion in hospitals. One of the indirect ways that the government would use to cut the spending shall be banning of public smoking (David, 2008). By ensuring that the amounts that are government would use in curing victims of smoking and also this would ensure that there will be fewer patients in hospitals. The space n hospitals could easily be used for more complicated cases and also for any emergencies that may arise. One of environmental degradation factors includes air pollution. Thus, a ban on smoking which leads to air pollution would come in handy in controlling environmental pollution (Health Committee, 2005).

Possible Objections

It is expected that the smokers would never go down without fighting. Some of the grounds that they would try to raise include;

· That smoking is a right just like other human rights

· That it is not possible to control lung cancer through ban on public smoking since smoking will still continue (David, 2008)

· That the government supports vegetation of tobacco and thus it would be imprudent to discourage its consumption, and,

· That smoking in itself contributes very little to air pollution.

The opponents of a ban on public smoking would mostly be the persons that are indeed smokers. One, the human rights do not expressly add some rights to it. This makes it hard to make legislation that ban public smoking. Secondly, smoking cannot be claimed to be the worst contributor to air pollution. Thus to come up with legislation banning smoking to control air pollution would be misplaced (Health Committee, 2005).

A ban on public smoking is not a ban on smoking. Thus, this would do little towards control of lung cancer. Also, as noted smoking is not the only contributor towards lung cancer. Thus, it is not prudent to assume that by making legislation banning public smoking would reduce cases of lung cancer (David, 2008).

Reply to Objections

The above objections are weak and thus the following reply is made.

· The fact that some of the public smoking contributes very little to lung cancer is a reason in itself to make its ban in public smoking a mode of control towards the deadly disease. Thus, while it would not stop all the population from smoking at least the prevalence rate for lung cancer would be reduced (Health Committee, 2005).

· Secondly, while most governments’ support the cultivation of tobacco, legislation can also be made to control the cultivation if at all that would reduce the prevalence rate for lung cancer and other objectives of the ban (David, 2008).

· Every effort to control air pollution should not be undermined. Thus, control through a ban on public smoking is a valuable percentage in control of air pollution.

References

David, H., (2008).

Smoking Bans

. New York: SAGE

Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Health Committee

, (2005).

Smoking HYPERLINK “http://books.google.com/books?id=m94ij_m4kiUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=why+ban+public+smoking&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mcrZUYXyBueT0QWQ14CQCg&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA” in HYPERLINK “http://books.google.com/books?id=m94ij_m4kiUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=why+ban+public+smoking&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mcrZUYXyBueT0QWQ14CQCg&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA”Public HYPERLINK “http://books.google.com/books?id=m94ij_m4kiUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=why+ban+public+smoking&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mcrZUYXyBueT0QWQ14CQCg&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA”

Places: Report, Together with Formal Minutes

. London: Author

Turn in your highest-quality paper
Get a qualified writer to help you with

“ final paper ”

Get high-quality paper

NEW! AI matching with writer

Still stressed with your coursework?

Get quality coursework help from an expert!

Order now