Believe it or not the Electronic Cigarette has been around for a long time, like since the 1960s. However, in 2013 electronic cigarette became a hot item and had many new smokers and regular tobacco users switching to this new way of smoking. This new found technology even has a new term, individuals no longer smoke, they vape. It seems that the entire world is going “electronic”, electronic mail, electronic billing, Americans even prefer to talk through electronics…so why not smoke electronically?
Many members of society enjoy the fact that electronic cigarettes are cheaper and supposedly “healthier” by eliminating the second hand smoke effect. While other individuals find it annoying, worse than actual real cigarettes, and a danger to those who smoke through the electronic device. This controversy has been apparent since 2007 when the E-Cig was introduced to the North American region. With many years of tests and the “new and improved” e-cigarettes it only seems to get worse.
The new and improved electronics seem to have new problems or cause new issues for the smokers. While electronic cigarettes have been a small step into the future of society. I feel that Electronic Cigarettes should be regulated and restricted in the same manner as regular cigarettes. II. Reasons that Support My Argument Currently the FDA can only regulate the electronic cigarettes that the company making them markets as therapeutic.
A federal court case in 2010, Sottera v. FDA, riled that the FDA needed to establish a set of regulations electronic cigarettes that are not being marketed as therapeutic as well. The claims that electronic cigarettes are less harmful than tobacco cigarettes and can even be used as a viable way of quitting traditional smoking however have been largely unverified with any meaningful research. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) the safety of e-cigarettes and the effectiveness in they have in stop-smoking therapies have not been proven in any scientific way.
The studies that claim the benefits of e-cigarettes have been varied in terms of their scientific strength and rigor and none have been consistent in outside control factors. All of this led to, in October 2014, the WHO recommending that e-cigarettes be regulated and restricted with the same guidelines as conventional tobacco products (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 5). There is also the concern of secondhand exposure to e-cigarette vapors and the harmful effects of flavor liquids.
Several studies have compared traditional secondhand smoke to e-cigarette vapors and have documented the particle size and distributions to be similar to the smoke from conventional cigarettes. It has also been documented that e-cig vapors are not just water vapor, as has been regularly claimed by e-cig advertising. Additionally the American Association of Poison Control Centers has documented that cases of poisoning associated with e-cig flavor liquids tripled between 2011 and 2012 to a total of 1351. Also the number of poisoning cases referred to hospitals tripled from 2012 to 2013.
Finally, a recent report that reviewed 78 different publications that had studied e-cigs, found that young people are beginning to use e-cigs at a very rapid rate and that youth who use e-cigarettes are heavier, not lighter, smokers of traditional cigarettes (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 8 -9). Lastly is the claim that e-cigs are superior in helping people quit smoking. The results of a fully randomized and controlled that also took in to account gender, proved that after 6 months e-cigs were not any better at helping people stop smoking than nicotine patches or placebo e-cigarettes.
A far less comprehensive study of 5,000 adults showed that smokers who used both e-cigs and traditional cigarettes did not reduce their regular cigarette consumption over a 12 month period, as compared to those who were only using e-cigs or other nicotine replacement therapies (NRT). So it proved that at their best e-cigs are no more effective than any other NRT and additional tests would need to be done to prove that they could reduce and/or eliminate a user’s smoking habit and nicotine dependence (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 1). III. Reasons that Go Against My Position The tobacco industry and other researchers have an opposing point of view that e-cigarettes should be promoted as an effective tool in reducing tobacco product related deaths. They claim that a 2010-2012 survey of smokers in Hawaii came to the conclusion that smokers who tried e-cigs as a NRT, were more serious about quitting smoking than others who had not.
In May of 2014 53 nicotine specialists wrote the director of WHO with an argument that regulation of e-cigs should exploit their health benefits in educing smoking and the premature death it causes (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 18). Supporters of e-cigarettes also cling to research by the Cochrane Collaboration review in 2008 that shows people who smoke heavily may need a higher dose of nicotine in their NRT in order to quit smoking than the doses provided by nicotine gum, patches or tablets/lozenges. The data suggested they were more likely to quit if they had a more fast acting form of nicotine in conjunction with a patch, lozenge or gum NRT, (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 15).
Additionally supporters of e-cigarettes point to a study conducted for an e-cig advocacy group to measure the exposure to propylene glycol and glycerin and any possible health effects. The study claimed to determine the occupational threshold limit values (TLVs) to figure out what potential risks e-cigarette users may face. According to the study there was no evidence that e-cigarettes produce any contaminants that exceeded the TLVs (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 16). IV. Why is the Other Side Wrong The claims that are made my e-cigarette manufacturers and advocates are pretty fantastic.
They are marketed as a life-saving cure all for smokers trying to quit and as a harmless alternative for those who don’t want to smoke. It really is quite incredible. But all of their claims are based on many studies not held to rigorous standards, or based on what can be considered anecdotal evidence. In the 2008 Cochrane Collaboration study, that advocates say proves e-cigs are more effective as a standalone NRT, has been disproven by current research that shows e-cigarettes alone are no more effective at helping people stop smoking than any already existing conventional therapy (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 5). In the study that calculated TLVs for propylene glycol and glycerin, a comprehensive review of all peer reviewed research on the topic found that it was not correct to apply TLV limits to exposures of coworkers and people with other medical conditions. Also according to the review the claims by the e-cigarette industry that their product helps smokers quit are not supported by any recorded evidence (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 16).
Some of the main problems with e-cigarettes is that they have not been fully studied so people who use them and other aporizer devices don’t know what the risks are when using e-cigs as they are intended to be used, or how much nicotine and other potentially harmful chemicals are being breathed in. It is not even known whether there are any real benefits to using e-cigarettes as manufacturers of the devices claim (“What are electronic cigarettes? ” para. 1). The biggest problem with e-cigarettes has documented, scientifically gathered proof that completely nullifies the claims of virtually all e-cig manufacturers.
This is corroborated by the American Association of Poison Control Centers whose data shows that poisoning cases involving e-cigarette vapor liquids tripled from 2011-2012 and hospital patient data shows a tripling of the same incidents between 2012 and 2013. Finally as stated in my original argument, a report that gathered and reviewed the information from 78 reports on e-cigarettes showed that young people are very rapidly starting to use e-cigarettes and that those young people who use e-cigarettes are heavier smokers of tobacco cigarettes, not lighter smokers.
This information disproves virtually all e-cigarette manufacturer and advocacy group claims (“Supporting regulation of electronic cigarettes”, 2014, para. 9). V. Conclusion It seems as though the American public is no longer being fooled by the outrageous claims made by e-cigarette manufacturers. Sales of e-cigarettes have fallen so fast in recent months that the research firm Euromonitor International is cutting its compound growth percentage on the e-cigarette market from 114% to 57%.
Euromonitor research analyst Eric Penicka said he is preparing to “pull back that forecast” even further. Even big tobacco companies like Reynolds American Inc. and Altria Group Inc. are feeling the effects of the public’s growing dissatisfaction with e-cigarettes. Sales of their e-cig devices have fallen 21% and sales volume dropped 11% in the third quarter of this year alone and also told investors the Vuse e-cigarette would not be profitable in the second half of this year. Altria said it is going to have $100 million in asset write downs and exit charges in its e-cig manufacturing.
Customer dissatisfaction is among the biggest problems. Consumers say that the nicotine from the vapor liquids does not enter their blood stream as fast as a tobacco cigarette and that the vapor is so strong it makes many people choke. In some cases the consumers complained that they had to suck really hard on the device to get any vapor to come out at all. Vape shops all over the country are seeing the sales decline, it isn’t just a regional or localized slow down. Another issue is with the safety of the devices.
A study this January in the New England Journal of Medicine proved that cancer causing formaldehyde is released in e-cigarette vapors, new taxes and regulations in several states plus the impending FDA regulations that are coming down have all contributed to the downslide of this industry which is looking more and more like a fad, and a extremely unhealthy one at that. In conclusion, other than mere anecdotal evidence and biased marketing literature, there is little evidence to support the claims of e-cigarette manufactures claims about their products.
The real facts are that they have not been proven to be any more effective at helping people quit smoking that traditional methods and in many cases don’t help at all or worsen the problem. Frankly, any legitimate evidence gathered by the real scientific study of e-cigarettes proves that they are in fact toxic, and merely act as a gateway to heavier smoking of traditional tobacco cigarettes among the young people who are most rapidly getting hooked on e-cigarettes, and not as a magical cure-all tool to quit smoking. All of those claims are marketing material and false advertising. It is nothing more than a smoke screen.
