Whenever there is mention of a ban for health or anti-cruelty reasons, the livelihood discussion is sure to follow. Be it countrywide curbs on advertising and sale of tobacco products, the ban on horse-pulled Victoria carriages in Mumbai, or the recent ban on the sale of firecrackers in Delhi, the legitimate rationale behind the restrictions are almost always countered (to put it mildly) by raising concerns about the loss of livelihood.

On the face of it, loss of livelihood is as good a reason as any for the Government to take a pause on its action. However, scratch deeper and the argument falls apart. Doctors familiar with tobacco and firecracker-related ailments will tell you that the livelihood of farmers and workers in both segments is threatened anyway because of the health hazards they are exposed in the course of their work.

The skin’s exposure to liquid nicotine from tobacco causes illnesses ranging from headaches and dizziness to nausea to altered lung-related functions and musculoskeletal problems, Dr Pankaj Chaturvedi, a head and neck surgeon with Tata Memorial Hospital, had written in BusinessLine (Pulse).

The thick post-diwali haze is, in fact, an insight into the chemicals being handled by workers in the firecracker industry. As for animal-pulled or even human-pulled carts or carriages, it’s high time they were replaced by humane alternatives.

Whether a ban is the best way forward is debatable. But an evolved society needs to weed out unhealthy practices or cruel fads by basing its reasoning on scientific debate, irrespective of culture, religion or popularity. The discussion has to address the question of alternative employment as well. Else, the debate will fail to move forward. The real cause for the call to weed out an unacceptable practice will be lost in the din.

PT Jyothi Datta Deputy Editor

Related Topics
comment COMMENT NOW