In today’s America there seems to be an endless amount of rules and regulations that are for public health. Many make perfect sense and are a huge benefit for the public’s overall health. A great example of a rule that ensures a safer environment for the public are speed limits. With the amount of cars on the road and the already high casualty rates involved with cars, speed limits keep the roads much safer. While many people may agree and accept the rules of speed limits, there are many public health regulations that are controversial due to the infringement of some individual freedoms. One of these regulations that many people feel inhibit some of there individual freedoms are smoking regulations in public areas. I have a friend that regularly smokes cigarettes and often times when I go out with him he complains about the regulations on smoking in certain areas, especially when in bars. He thinks that these regulations are inhibiting his freedom to smoke cigarettes when and where he wants to. While this may be true, many studies show that second hand smoke can contribute to unwanted health issues. So in the case of smoking, if someone smokes next to you and you inhale that smoke your health can be affected. Which brings up a great argument of who’s freedom is actually being infringed on? Is it the smokers who cant smoke wherever they feel or is it the people who, if next to these smokers, have to breathe in now polluted air. Its a fine line and one that many people have researched and weighed there opinion on. Although smoking may infringe on other peoples freedoms within a certain proximity, recently there has been a new campaign on banning a certain product from people that only affects the user. In 2014, Bloomberg tried to ban certain foods that were linked to obesity and large cups of soda in New York. Bloomberg’s intent for this ban was to combat obesity in New York and create an overall healthier environment for the public. But this ban would have also taken away many individual freedoms in the process. Instead of making the decision not to drink large volumes of soda, the decision would now not even be there. Even if you lived a healthy life style and were not obese and you wanted to occasionally enjoy a large refreshing coke, you couldn’t. This ban was ultimately shot down in court but it brought up countless questions of when is public health taken to far and when are we not willing to give up individual freedoms for the overall public?