Based on studies presented in the reference, anti-smoking and anti-drinking advertisements are effective. For that matter, more concerted worldwide efforts are needed to be undertaken to intensify this strategy specifically due to the fact that there is a percentage of the nations that ban such advertisements in favor of tobacco and alcohol producing companies. In addition, there are already government and non-government efforts specifically programs and campaigns to prevent substance addiction and abuse. One of the most important evidence of the effectiveness of preventive action is the study that was quoted in the book conducted by the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University if a child reached the age of 21 without taking the habit of drinking, smoking or drug abuse, he or she would most probably not take the habit of at all. This is a strong proof that prevention really is better than cure.
Preventive measures are potentially very effective. The main hindrance to such strategies though is the limit brought about by implementation. If a nation is willing or not to implement such actions to the point of making laws to be able to legalize efforts to prevent substance abuse.
The second strategy of action with great potential is the establishment and implementation of government regulations. This is related to the first one since it answers the question of how effective would the government plan and act upon programs and even laws related to the prevention and resolution of substance abuse. Basically, the ultimate responsibility of ending a nation’s problematic issue depends on the stand of the government. Based on the discussion presented by the reference, there are numerous programs already undertaken by the government. The different levels of government such as the federal, state and local leaders had their own contributions in anti-substance abuse warnings through