E cigarettes - Research Paper Example

?E Cigarettes There is a new craze among the people who are trying to quit smoking. Instead of using a nicotine patch in order to help curb their nicotine craving, they are turning towards something that looks like a cigarette, tastes, like a cigarette, but isn't a cigarette. Known as the e cigarette, the contraption is meant to aid the smoker in getting off his nasty smoking habit bu giving him the nicotine fix that he so craves, without the negative effects that smoking a cigarette gives. Or does it? This paper will look into the similarities in the physical description of the e cigarette and the cigarette. I shall discuss the chemical components that make up the e cigarette and whether smokers prefer one product over the other and why. Then I shall conclude as to whether the cigarette or e cigarette is the better, healthier alternative to a quick nicotine fix. The similarities between the cigarette and e cigarette mainly lies in the fact that they both look like regular cigarettes. But while one has to be lit and puffed on in order to draw out the nicotine, thus burning away the paper and tobacco base of the product, the e cigarette is electronic based and relies on an electronic delivery system to deliver liquid tar into the system of the user. The use of the e cigarette is described as (Sohn, Emily “How Safe are E Cigarettes?”) : Electronic cigarettes typically use a rechargeable battery-operated heating element to vaporize the nicotine in a replaceable cartridge. Nicotine is usually dissolved in propylene glycol, a clear and colorless liquid that is commonly found in inhalers, cough medicines and other products. The only commonality between the regular cigarette and the e cigarette is the fact that they are both meant to produce a particular type of smoke flavor that smokers can easily recognize. However, the flavor is produced in regular cigarettes by burning tobacco rolled in paper while the electronic cigarette creates the flavor using an atomized liquid (“Comparing Regular Cigarettes with Regular Cigarettes”). In fact, both types of cigarettes are known to produce certain types of illnesses in their users that shall be discussed in later parts of this paper. Cigarettes evolved from the pipe that our forebears used to stuff with tobacco leaves and then burn while being sucked from one end of the pipe. To make it more convenient to use and carry, the paper burn based version was created. The smoker creates an unhealthy vapor and tar by-product each time that he smokes a cigarette. The e cigarette on the other hand creates a harmless vapor that looks like a harmless mist when exhaled. This particular type of cigarette does not produce 2nd hand smoke problems or get its smell into clothing, hair, or upholstery (“Are e-Cigarettes Safer than Real Cigarettes?”). Having said that, those who have made the switch from regular cigarettes to e cigarettes claim the aforementioned reason as the main basis for their switch from the real thing to the electronic version. The e cigarette is actually allowed in non-smoking places and other places where cigarettes would normally be banned. Although Hon Lik, the Chinese pharmacist who invented the e cigarette in 2003 had high hopes for the health benefits of his product when it was first introduced, the reality of the situation is that the product was released with very little product study and scientific observation. Very little is currently known about the e cigarette in terms of effects on the human body and whether it mimics the after effects of long term cigarette smoking as well. Although there is existing information regarding the effects of tobacco and nicotine absorption and inhalation by people, there is very little to no information available pertaining to the effects of nicotine in liquid form. What would happen if the nicotine vial in the e cigarette were to come into direct contact with the skin? Are there any health hazards related to the prolong use of propylene glycol? These are some of the reasons that the American Food and Drug Administration considered banning the sale of the product after the anti-smoking groups pointed out specific health concerns about the product. The foremost concern being that the product is being marketed towards children and teenagers (“Are E-Cigarettes Safer Than Real Cigarettes?”). The concern pertaining to easy access to the cigarette substitute by the younger portion of society is based upon the fact that there are no clear rules pertaining to the sale of the e cigarette to minors. Due to the fact that the nicotine is masked behind popular flavors like almond, chocolate, cherry, and fruit, it would seem that the product is meant to encourage non-smokers to give smoking a try. Easy access to the product via internet based sales make it easy for the kids to come into possession of the product that is deemed as “cool” in certain youth circles because of the red-orange led lights at the tip of the cigarette wanna be (Sohn, Emily “How Safe are E Cigarettes?”). Due to the many unknown factors involved in e cigarette use, there is a move to ban the product in the US. Having already been banned in 14 other countries such as Hong Kong, Canada, Brazil, Thailand, and Saudi Arabia, the health risk factors involved in the use of the product is fast becoming an international concern. The USFDA has very little information to work with regarding the components that make up the e cigarette, a problem that leaves it struggling with ways and means to regulate the sale and use of the item in the U.S. As of 2009, the USFDA has been trying to bring smokers back to the regular cigarette fold by claiming that tobacco specific nitrosamines, more popularly known as carcinogens, were found in the cartridges of the e cigarette products (Siegel, Michael “Comparison of Carcinogen Levels Shows that Electronic Cigarettes are Much Safer Than Conventional Ones”). There is a real reason to be concerned with this discovery as the combination of nitrosamines and diethylene glycol, the main ingredient in the anti-freeze that car radiators use, could prove to be a highly lethal combination (Maugh II, Thomas H. “FDA: Electronic Cigarettes are a No-No”). This discovery makes the e cigarette a far more lethal than regular cigarettes in terms of health hazards to its users. Opponents of the e cigarette that include the anti-smoking groups are concerned about the way the product is being marketed as the healthy alternative to cigarettes. A debatable claim that is based upon the premise that (Maugh II, Thomas H. “FDA: Electronic Cigarettes are a No-No”) : ... the delivery of nicotine directly to the lungs speeds its passage to the brain, enhancing the drug's addictive properties. Critics also said the devices are appealing to the young and could serve as a learning aid to promote smoking of actual cigarettes. Stop-smoking experts say the devices are not useful for ending cigarette addiction because they do nothing to interrupt the hand-to-mouth behavior that is an integral part of the habit. E cigarettes could prove to be more addictive and cancerous than their regular counterpart due to the fact that the product was, unlike the regular cigarettes, not meant to be smoked in one sitting and therefore carries more nicotine in its cartridge system than it actually should. The e cigarette actually leaves the nicotine consumption from the product up to the user in this case. These health concerns have forced the USFDA to classify the e cigarettes as a combination of drug and medical device that is meant to help ease the smoking cessation problem of individuals trying to kick the smoking habit (“Electronic Cigarettes Not a Safe Alternative to Conventional Cigs”). More recent evidence of the potential lethal effects of the e cigarette on humans include a small study conducted by Constantine I. Vardavas and his team for the Center for Global Tobacco Control at the Harvard School of Public Health. The study was conducted in Greece and included 30 healthy regular smokers who were asked to smoke an e cigarette for 5 minutes. According to Vardavas the people in the study showed changes “... in the lung function of healthy smokers who puffed on an e-cigarette for just five minutes -- although it's not clear what the long-term result of those responses might be in regular e-cigarette users.” (Norton, Amy “Study Finds E Cigarettes Affect Airways, and Quickly”). E cigarettes are currently ticking time bombs. Very little is known about the product and its components for people to risk their health using the product even as an aid in giving up nicotine. More studies have been conducted and established pertaining to the effects of regular cigarettes on the short and long term health of individuals. As such, the old adage of “batter the devil you know” seems to apply in this situation. If one must smoke, then smoke the regular cigarettes since health precautions, warnings, and studies have already been done on its effects on people. Until more is known about the effects of the nicotine and carcinogen / nitrosamine properties in e cigarettes on the population is known, it would be best to err on the side of caution and avoid using the product for the meantime. Works Cited “Are E-Cigarettes Safer Than Real Cigarettes?”. Home. Health and Life. n.d. Web. 31 Oct. 2012. “Comparing Electronic Cigarettes with Regular Cigarettes”. Comparing Electronic Cigarettes with Regular Cigarettes. ecigaretteinfo.com. n.d. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. “Electronic Cigarettes Not a Safe Alternative to Conventional Cigs”. Discover Magazine. blogs.discoverymagazine.com. n.d. Web. 3 Nov. 2012. Maugh II, Thomas H. “FDA: Electronic Cigarettes are a No-No”. Booster Shots. Los Angeles Times. 22 Jul. 2009. Web. 2 Nov. 2012. Norton, Amy. “Study Finds E - Cigarettes Affects Airways, and Quickly”. article. Reuters. 5 Jan. 2012. Web. 29 Oct. 2012. Siegel, Michael. “Comparison of Carcinogen Levels Shows that Electronic Cigarettes are Much Safer Than Conventional Ones”. tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com. tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com. 30 Jul. 2009. Sohn, Emily. “How Safe are E-Cigarettes?”. Discovery News. discovery.com. 26 Jan. 2011. Web. 1 Nov. 2012. Read More