E cigarettes

Nour Kabalan

Prof. Dania Adra

English 203

20 October 2015

                                          http://www.bbc.com/news/health-24914473,

    Electronic cigarettes (or e- Cigarette), available in fancy designs, are devices that deliver to the smoker the vapor of a liquid containing nicotine after heating it. “Electronic cigarettes ‘could save millions of lives’, Future hope, a revolution, and Healthy rats” (Hogenboom 1) are the appealing titles throughout this text which allude to the heroic role of the e-cigarettes in smoking cessation. However, several points are debatable and some arguments presented as facts are questionable. The difference between a regular cigarette and its electronic counterpart is the absence, in the latter, of the inhaled smoke resulting from the combustion of tobacco and cigarette paper. Nicotine is still being delivered so the addictive substance is not eliminated. It’s scientifically proven that nicotine can let you be addicted to other things; therefore it is a damage to the brain. In addition, chemical analysis of the vapor of some e-cigarettes revealed that they aren't free of carcinogens and toxic substances. So stating that “rather than inhaling the toxic substances found in tobacco, e-cigarette users inhale vaporized liquid nicotine” (Hogenboom 1) is not accurate because this vapor also contains toxic substances. “But in rats at least, a study showed that after inhaling nicotine for two years there were no harmful effects” (Hogenboom 2). Is it scientifically sound to accept a period of two years to declare a product safe? If this study was conducted in 1996 before the invention of the e-cigarette, what would the delivery mechanism of nicotine have been to the rats? Another medically proven fact is that lip cancer is associated with heat exposure that is obviously found in e-cigarettes. Last but not least, I disagree with Dr. Le Houezec that “every adolescent tries something new, many try smoking. I would prefer they try e-cigarette to regular cigarette” (Hogenboom 2). When they try an e-cigarette they are exposed to nicotine, to the tobacco taste and to the social habit of smoking. This could turn them into regular cigarette smokers; that is why adolescents shouldn’t be encouraged to use e-cigarettes.

 

            On the other side, when reading a text from a reliable source such as BBC written by a science reporter, it would be wise to reconsider one’s position and try to look for some convincing evidence. The warnings from the WHO and the British Medical Association concerning e-cigarettes mentioned by the writer give the text an objective aspect. For now at least, the e-cigarette seems safer especially when pertaining to a crucial phenomenon rarely mentioned: passive smoking. When sitting next to a regular cigarette smoker a non-smoker can inhale up to fifty percent of the smoke with all of its toxic constituents. With e-cigarettes the vapor dissipates very rapidly and passive smoking is not a concern. Also, if the nicotine containing liquid is purified from toxic chemicals, the e-cigarette can replace the nicotine patch in a process to cut down on smoking. Furthermore, the removal of tobacco taste and smell and the availability of devices that don’t look like real cigarettes can help adolescents bypass the addictive part related to habituation and senses. Here I agree with the comment of Lynne Dawkins from the University of East London: “we don’t want to spoil this great opportunity we have for overseeing this unprecedented growth and evolving technology that has not been seen before. We have to be careful not to stump that” (Hogenboom 3).

 

 

 

 

 

Works cited:

Hogenboom, Melissa. “Electronic cigarettes ‘could save millions of lives.” BBC news. BBC. 12 Nov. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 15