Which is more harmful smoking or pollution?

Answer 1

Pollution is more harmful than smoking.... why? Read on!


Let's examine it on different contexts.
Let there be the two levels: 1) Personal 2) Environmental.

1) Personal. If you happen to live in China and work in a sweatshop where the intensity of air pollution is a crucial factor and you also also smoke then the amount of air pollution you inhale determines the rationale for the physiological effect of smoking. Workers who smoke and work in an atmosphere of dirty air will cover their noses when working there however by the time they get home they smoke. The effect is Lung Cancer. duh!

conclusion: smoking is physiologicaly more harmful than air pollution when examined under the individual's sphere of control.

2) Environmental. Pollution's filthy claws reach halfway around the planet in the form of irregular weather patterns due to Global Warming affecting millions of people elsewhere. Both smoking and traditional sources of air pollution add Co2 to the environs but smoking's contribution to Co2 increase is insubstantial when compared to that of Smog etc and unlike stopping smoking which requires only an individual's will stoping traditional sources of air pollution requires a revolution.

conclusion: Pollution harms the environs and its effects reach farther than smoking who only affects the persons he comes in contact with/

Although many many people die of smoking and some due to global warming we can conclude that the one difference between them is that smoking is self inflicted pain (and therefore requires only personal effort to allaviate) while pollution is pain inflicted upon the whole planet.

Pollution is more harmful than smoking.

Answer 2

Well since smoking is one of the reasons for pollution among several other things, then I would say pollution.

Answer 3

since smoking is one of the causes of pollution, i'll say pollution is more harmful.

Answer 4

smoking...