170 ielts essay samples

 
77 
A further point is that governments throughout the world make huge profits from levying 
taxes on cigarettes. This provides funds which are used for building schools, hospitals 
and other public amenities. 
The tobacco industry also employs tens of thousands of people throughout the world, 
particularly in poorer countries like Zimbabwe or India. Without cigarettes, these people 
would have no jobs. 
I would also argue that people should have the right to choose whether they smoke or 
not. People should not smoke in a room where there are non-smokers but surely they 
should be free to smoke elsewhere. 
The arguments against smoking are well known. Smoking has been shown to be 
dangerous to health. Heart disease, bronchitis and lung cancer have all been linked. 
A further issue is that smoking costs governments millions of pounds because of the large 
number of people who need treatment in hospitals for smoking related problems. 
There is also concern today about passive smoking. Recent research has shown that 
non-smokers can suffer health problems if they spend long periods of time among people 
who do smoke. 
In general, I think the world would be a better place without cigarettes. However, the 
decision as to whether to smoke or not should be for each individual to make. 

---

 
78 
HEALTH
 
95. Smokers can cause themselves serious health problems. The choice to smoke 
is made freely and with knowledge of dangers. 
Smokers should therefore expect to pay more for medical treatment than non-
smokers. 
Everyone has the choice of being a smoker or not. The people who choose to smoke do 
so knowing there is a risk of causing harmful damage to themselves. However, I do not 
entirely agree that these people should have to pay more to receive all the medical 
treatment they need. 
I think there are many situations in which a medical problem has nothing to do with 
whether a person smokes or not. In these cases, where an illness has no relation to 
smoking, then I believe that smokers should not be required to pay more than other 
people for their medical treatment. Most car accidents, for example, have no connection 
with smoking, and the people who are injured ought to have the same medical help, 
regardless of the cost. And what about the common flu - it does not seem justifiable to me 
that a smoker should have to pay more to see a doctor for an illness we can all contract. 
On the other hand, I agree that a smoker should pay more than a non-smoker for the 
necessary treatment of any condition which has been caused by smoking. The principle 
that people should take responsibility for their own actions is a good one. Consequently, if 
a person chooses to smoke knowing that this habit can cause serious health problems, 
then there is no reason why the community or an insurance company should have to pay 
for medical treatment for an illness which could have been avoided. 
In many countries, cigarette packets have a clear warning that smoking can cause health 
problems and so no smoker can claim not to know the danger. Lung cancer is sometimes 
a fatal disease and the treatment is both lengthy and expensive, and it is unfair for the 
smoker to expect the hospital or the community to carry the cost. In fact, it could also be 
argued that those who smoke in public should be asked to pay extra because of the 
illness caused to passive smokers. 
In conclusion, I feel that smokers should pay more in cases related to smoking, but for 
any other illness they should pay the same as anyone else.