Electronic Cigarettes - Essay Example

Electronic Cigarettes The Food and Drug Administration have proposed new regulations on electronic cigarettes thus heightening debate over smoking, which is undeniably one of the most contentious issues. Smokers are increasingly turning to e-cigarettes to get their nicotine fix but the proposed rules may trigger huge implications for the fast growing and largely unregulated industry. Questions whether the new technology will help getting rid of cigarettes by offering safe smoking and aiding smokers quit smoking remains in the public’s head and other public health groups. Safety concerns associated with e-cigarettes may be killed if the regulations are too strict even though the real safety of the products is still in doubt. Regulators have been asked by various safety bodies and politicians especially their marketing techniques and the health concerns even though it is believed that the e-cigarettes do not contain thousands of chemicals tar or odor like other regular cigarettes that have raised issues over the last decades. E-cigarette industry has experienced tremendous expansion over the last few years because the rocketing number of users who have more than 200 brands to choose from. The industry makes huge revenues because of the ability to eat into traditional cigarettes even though it is still unclear how safe they are. Unfortunately, proposed restrictions are likely to mirror those on regular cigarettes such as to ban the sale of e-cigarettes to people under 18 as it is done by two dozen states. Moreover, regulators intend to set product standards and intend to compel e-cigarette companies to disclose their ingredients and include health warning labels on their commercials. It is however interesting to see how Federal agency will handle many flavors available for e-cigarettes where some limit offering to tobacco and menthol flavors while some other companies sell candy like flavors. There is a notion that flavored tobacco target minors and that others use sealed cartridges that hold nicotine and so ingesting the liquid or absorbing it through the skin may lead to nicotine poisoning. Although the restrictions and ban on e-cigarettes have been heightened, it provides the lesser of the real evil and lightly regulating electronic cigarettes might help the public health. INTRODUCTION AND PROBLEM STATEMENT Federal and other state governments intend to ban sales of electronic cigarettes to minors and further propose approval for new products and inclusion of health warning labels as a way of taming the fast growing e-cigarette industry. Even though some state government have already imposed restrictions, there are other significant concerns such as whether the e-cigarette can make smokers quit smoking and the clarity of the side effects of the products as claimed by various public health group bodies, the Federal and State governments and the public (Popova & Ling, 2013). Electronic cigarette industry has thrived in the last few years and its success is based on many factors including the fact that it has successfully replaced the traditional cigarettes that is believed to be more harmful for consumption because of the high content of chemicals, odor, and tar. Increased growing body of knowledge and understanding about the use of electronic cigarettes have made members of Congress and public health groups to raise concern over the products and even questioned the marketing tactics employed by the manufacturers (Levy et al., 2011). Main objectives of the regulations and bans are intended to boost public health via reduction of sales to minors, correcting consumer misconceptions, deterring deceptive health claims and further extend the authority of regulating cigars, hookah, nicotine gels, pipe tobacco, and dissolvable tobacco products. The proposed regulations are regarded as a critical step in reining in marketing of the electronic cigarettes although public health advocates think that the proposals have come after an inexcusably long delay to act. In this case, a greater damaged has been done to the public including serious public health consequences and failure to regulate tobacco products that have been misleadingly marketed (Choi et al., 2012). E-cigarette landscape have continue to evolve and grow thus spurring a consolidation of companies in the market; something that has imposed great danger to minors who are attracted to the flavored nature and the commercial campaigns supporting the use of electronic cigarettes. This article attempts to analyze the effects of electronic cigarette in the public domain as well as the effects of proposed regulations on the e-cigarettes industry. ASSEMBLE EVIDENCE Many since their invention and introduction into the market where negative campaigns have marred traditional cigarettes have hailed electronic cigarettes. The product was seen as a tool that would help smokers quit and as the best product that would mitigate the hazardous effects of traditional tobacco thereby acting as an emerging triumph of public health. The e-cigarettes are designed in a way that they mimic the actual cigarettes and that they are inhaled with less chemicals. The devices that are made in such a way that they vaporize a liquid nicotine solution are powered by battery and controlled with microchip that may control the quantity of nicotine inhaled. According to Levy et al. (2011), electronic cigarettes are generally recognized as safer alternative compared to the tobacco products even though the extent to which it guarantees safety is in question. Proponents argue that the value proposition of e-cigarette is evident because it offers the dubious pleasure of nicotine without hazardous chemicals that may cause cancer and other tobacco related conditions. However, the original goal of the e-cigarette faded when public health advocates were worried about the adverse effects the products may have on the human health and the fact that it influences even minors to start smoking (Ripton, 2014). Interestingly, even the fact that a user may control the quantity of nicotine taken in triggered an argument that smokers may be tempted to ingest excessive nicotine (Choi et al., 2012). There are also arguments that e-cigarettes may lure ex-smokers back to the act with the belief that it is not as serious as the traditional smoking and influence new smokers who would think that it is much safer than tobacco. All these issues have led to dilemma among the health regulators thus leading to questions whether regulation is intended to reduce the number of young people who may start smoking or increase the number of smokers who would want to quit the habit. The health regulators seem to have a lot to do in order to fulfill their agenda that tries to push for the regulation of e-cigarettes (Alemanno, 2012). Quite understandably, it is obvious that the tension that exists in the issue of e-cigarettes is between regulators and commercial players, which are essential in almost every sector of the economy, especially the healthcare sector (Popova & Ling, 2013). Although electronic cigarettes have played an important role in reducing smoking because millions of people convert to e-cigarettes, millions of non-smokers also convert to electronic smokes. Full understanding of the public health impact of the products needs proper market research and in depth analysis because currently, the uncertainty over health issues does not seem to have hurt the product’s popularity (Levy et al., 2011). Sales of e-cigarettes have gone very high in the recent past and the overall value of the tobacco retail market has hugely increased. A larger percentage of high school students have actually tried and an increase of the middle school students are increasing the number of electronic cigarette smokers making the product one of the disruptive technologies. Many brands that have been enabled by the introduction of electronic cigarette have increasingly threatened sales of tobacco products. Sales of traditional cigarettes have been cannibalized and the popularity of the e-cigarettes has gone extremely high; this caught the attention of regulators. Choi et al. (2012) assert that regulators felt that the e-cigarettes sale and product was completely unregulated because they could be advertised and sold to any consumer regardless of their age on the internet. However, the action that was taken by major tobacco brands of acquiring e-cigarette manufacturers and displaying them alongside the traditional tobacco raised eyebrows among the legislatures because it was a worrying trend seeing businesses selling the so called safety products with the real tobacco (Ripton, 2014). This prompted a strong action to be taken by the Federal and local governments in taming the negative effects and the consumer manipulation that was brought by the e-cigarette emergence. CONSTRUCT ALTERNATIVE POLICY RESPONSE Popova and Ling (2013) argue that there is a lot of unconfirmed information regarding electronic cigarette that makes regulators, the public and the local governments doubt its significance. The influence the e-cigarette has on the young people is serious especially the rising number of high school students as well as colleges who are flocking in it (Pokhrel et al., 2013). The other unconfirmed information regarding e-cigarette is the fact that it is safer than the traditional tobacco because it has low nicotine and other chemical content as compared to tobacco smoking. Electronic cigarette is actually in the middle of an image war and the $1.5 billion industry asserts that the nicotine vaporizers are not as harmful as smoking traditional tobacco even though rules that are more restrictive are required. Public health officials are convinced that “vaping” may allow more kids to start smoking tobacco even though the truth behind the argument is inconclusive thus making authorities concerned such as FDA to remain somewhere in the middle. At one point, the regulators argue that flavored e-cigarettes appeal to children while professionals who help smokers quit smoking assert that there are misperceptions regarding e-cigar’s benefits that make their work harder because their clients find it easy to switch to the e-cigars. Pearson et al. (2012) assert that there is no proven evidence that electronic cigarettes actually help people stop smoking and even though puffing the e-cigarette is less harmful, it is clear that breathing clean air is better than it and therefore its safety cannot compare with clean air. Many current smokers are willing to quit and have at least made an attempt of quitting and most e-cigarette users’ sight that they use it because they want to quit smoking as smoking cessation aides. Electronic cigarettes are not safe alternative as deemed by the proponents because the users still inhale the nicotine vapour and enjoy the different available flavors provided in the market (Codourey, 2013). There is also no sufficient evidence that people who use e-cigarettes quit smoking and many people would use e-cigarettes where smoking tobacco is prohibited and have time with tobacco some other times. This therefore implies that e-cigarettes acts as an alternative in case tobacco is not around especially amongst tobacco smokers and because complete stopping of smoking is the only healthy way to avoid the health consequences, e-cigarettes do not provide the lasting solution that is required. Because e-cigarettes have never been tested and proved to be healthy, public health officials have never told people to use them. The quantity of nicotine inhaled cannot be determined because it varies with brands and very little information about the nicotine content is available in the public domain (Pokhrel et al., 2013). For smokers using electronic cigarettes as a quitting aide, it is quite a challenging personal choice because no public health officer is ready to issue a statement that endorses the idea. There are however recommended medicinal nicotine replacement therapy that have been operational in the last few decades that may be of great help to smokers who want to quit. Proper use of the prescriptions with the aid of quit counselors, friends, relatives, or family members may better serve the objectives of people who want to smoke instead of using unproven e-cigarettes. It is apparent that electronic cigarettes experience a boom in popularity but this comes with some negativity because the product’s unknowns and potential impact on public health raises many questions (Miller, 2013). It is still unclear whether introduction of e-cigarettes will increase smoking cessation or act as a setback towards the achievement of reducing or cutting out nicotine because of what users derive from it and the only thing that can help the situation is when proper analysis is done. Science regarding e-cigarette is still catching up amid the huge concern of public health benefits and risks of electronic cigarettes such as the notion of helping public to quit (Ripton, 2014). There is also no surety concerning what happens after a very long exposure to e-cigarettes especially eventual effect on the smokers’ brains. If someone would quit tobacco smoking to e-cigarettes, there may be some huge benefits but there are many “caveats and buts” that still go around the issue because of the unconfirmed reports (Born, Tepper & Caulfield, 2014). In addition, use of e-cigarettes in open places or even anywhere may act as a backward incident that may interfere with air quality and further affect someone who may have quit nicotine or just affect people around them because nicotine is a psychoactive substance. Electronic-cigarettes do not produce smoke because their users usually exhale a smoke-like vapor, which cannot be smelt by someone else thus minimizing second hand smoking. However, absence of secondhand smoking does not still seem to give e-cigarettes an advantage over tobacco smoking but it is preferable in situations where second hand smoking is considered a great risk (Silcox, 2014). Moreover, teenagers and many young people tend to be influenced by the flavored e-cigarette that has been introduced in the industry especially the marketing of the product. Many young people in high school and even colleges find e-cigarette appealing to them and therefore make attempt to try it. This is actually one of the reasons the government has thought it important to propose regulations that can see the product prohibited among minors just like tobacco smoking (Gopinath & Siciliano, 2014). Although young people use e-cigarette believing that it is safer compared to the traditional smoking, nothing good has been confirmed about it. The fact remains that it still carries nicotine that traditional tobacco has except that users can vary the quantity of nicotine. SPECIFIC CRITERIA USED IN MAKING EVALUATION It is essential to explore the avenues that will influence the sales of e-cigarettes in the context of proposed regulations and ban that the Federal government and other public health regulators are trying to push. While carrying out the evaluation, four major research questions were considered and they included: 1. What are the safety benefits that electronic cigarettes have over traditional tobacco? 2. What are the factors that influence the rapid growth of e-cigarette industry especially among the young people? 3. Do e-cigarettes help smokers quit smoking? 4. What are the policies that may best respond to the challenges that arise from electronic cigarettes? Methodology Issue of electronic cigarettes is almost everywhere in the media especially the fact that it is touted as a safer alternative to smoking even though this has not been proved. The government and other public health regulators are working tirelessly to reduce the number of smoking related diseases thus making the avenue to be fully explored to understand the risks and benefits of e-cigarettes. It is apparent that there are differing responses to the replication of the act of smoking derived from electronic smoking where some people see a unique opportunity to promote a mass switch to vaping. At one point, e-cigarette imposes a great risk that may see people getting close to their smoking habit and that there is no rigorous test that may guarantee their effectiveness and safety as claimed by the manufacturers. The methodologies that will be undertaken in ensuring a proper decision making regarding electronic cigarettes are therefore crucial in addressing all the questions raised about the product. This article relates to a justified and very informed account of the manner in which the regulations will be approached. Various epistemological and ontological issues that are related to the research of the regulations are provided. It is therefore significant to note that the methodologies applied in the regulations address the actual methodologies, which will be used in the research process from its time of inception to the end. It addresses what the role of both the secondary and the primary data in the process of addressing the various research questions will be. Additionally, the manner in which data will be collected and later analyzed to reach a reliable conclusion is discussed. This will be done with an in-depth reflection of the research design and other related ethical issues that may result into a positive outcome. Consider the research methods and the various research methodologies together with the methodologies justification of the instruments and methods and how the correspondents will be chosen is also. On choosing the best design, several factors will be considered like the availability of resources in terms of finances and time. An evaluative case study approach will be done for in this research. Qualitative approaches to descriptive and non-experimental research methods will be used. Questionnaires designed and will be used to collect data on different personal views will apply. This research incorporated phenomenology in carrying out the study. Phenomenology research was best suited for the proposed study because it corresponds with the study question. The investigation and evaluation will focus on the explanation of people’s experiences and how they are affected by those experiences. This is an important issue especially if there may be people who feel that electronic cigarettes have helped them quit smoking or influenced them positively. The evaluation probes to find out the main underlying reason or meaning of the experience or the invariant structure. It therefore, emphasizes on the intentionality of perception in situations where experiences have both inward and outward consciousness basing on meaning, memory, and image. However, report by many institutions both educational and public health institutions may also be used to guide future research and provide the most important issues regarding the risks and benefits of electronic smoking (Carrera, 2014). There are institutions that may provide comprehensive report that tends to restrict marketing tactics as well as implementations of many proposals that have been put in place by the researchers. Bodies concerned with medicine and medical services as well as public health information may be acquired to provide feedback on how e-cigarette can be regulated in case it also has some risks such as the availability of nicotine and perhaps how to control or avoid it completely (Codourey, 2013). APPLYING CRITERIA AND PROJECT OUTCOMES Proposals that have been made by the regulators on electronic cigarettes have become the most controversial debate related to tobacco control. Although the product is advertised as a safer alternative to smoking and that it can help smokers quit, the truth of the claims have not been proved and there are a lot to be done by researchers to confirm all the allegations (Public Health News: In Brief, 2014). The sales increase in the recent years is an evidence of the thriving market in the e-cigarette industry and this hugely worries the bodies concerned such as the FDA because the risks and benefits have not been proved (Pearson et al., 2012). It is apparent that the action that is already taken by some local governments and the FDA proposals will regulate the sale of e-cigarette to minors and make sure that the nicotine level in the products are reduced or contained properly although the restrictions may result into slow growth of industry and retard innovation (Born & Caulfield, 2014). Aggressive restrictions is very dangerous to the manufacturers because they will not be able to do their business freely as they used to before restrictions and the public awareness will also increase thus affecting sales of e-cigarettes. This may therefore mean that the economy will be slightly affected and perhaps who were employed because of boost in sales will be laid off because the restrictions will definitely reduce production. According to Codourey (2013), anti-tobacco groups are indeed more anxious and under proposed regulations, e-cigarettes manufacturers will find it hard offering flavored versions as it is assumed that the flavoring appeals to the minors. This is an absolute disappointment to the electronic cigarettes industry even though regulators may be happy with the decisions believing that it is the best way forward. It is undeniable that e-cigarettes have raised serious safety concerns that are unfortunately not confirmed including the issue of nicotine, which is still found in e-cigarettes despite the campaigns that it is safer, compared to tobacco (Dasgupta & Klein, 2014). The implication of e-cigarette to the regular smokers and the eventual health impact is however the greatest worry of the public health groups who think that the product does very little or even nothing g to stopping smoking. The groups feel that e-cigarette may not actually help people to quit but encourage even new people to start such as high school students. Pearson et al. (2012) argue that tobacco use has caused many deaths and is associated with numerous diseases such as cancer and heart disease yet it is a preventable cause of death. Subjecting cigarettes to extensive regulation is therefore paramount because it will reduce tobacco-related death cases that have highly gone up. Extensive regulation that cigarettes have been subject to serves as an important tool that may greatly help in curbing sale of e-cigarettes to minors, engaging in misleading marketing and entailing the ingredients of the products by the manufacturers. Federal and local governments have taken serious actions by banning smoking and use of e-cigarettes in public places and employed other measures such as minimal age purchasing laws and other campaigns that can remarkable reduce the rate of e-cigarette consumption (Dasgupta & Klein, 2014). Achieving the result of fewer and fewer people using e-cigarettes requires that the users should not be allowed easy access of the product by cutting off the supply of smokers. The number of people who quit smoking have remained constant and more new comers tend to enter the market yet no one has ever figured out the best way of helping smokers quit and ending the increased use of nicotine and other chemicals (Pearson et al., 2012). However, the action taken by the FDA and other local governments in regulating e-cigarette consumption will definitely produce better results. There is no absolutely little to no evidence connecting e-cigarettes with quit smoking as claimed by some supporters but what is evident is the fact that e-cigarette does not contain as much chemicals as the traditional tobacco. Many children start experimenting with the smoking habit because of the campaigns that tend to appeal to the young generation. RECOMMENDATION Strong voices for and against electronic cigarettes have not been proven and therefore more research is urgently needed to establish the overall benefits and risks. However, e-cigarette use is really growing and it is likely that the market will continue to grow to about $10 billion and the profit margins for the industry will surpass that of tobacco. Public health policies regulating e-cigarettes should be tightened to protect the health of all users, reduce minor involvement, and promote smoke free society (Pearson et al., 2012). Some of the policies that may be of great help include: A high quality research should be carried out to determine risks and benefits of e-cigarettes before making any decision by the regulators. Sale regulation by the FDA may be one of the important steps that may help regulating e-cigarette use because they have the authority of controlling the sale of tobacco products. The government may therefore reduce risks of selling the e-cigarettes to minors and sold only to adults (Alemanno, 2012). Federal and local governments may also regulate marketing techniques that lead to false or misleading claims and serve the best interest of public health. Consumer protection and unfair trade practices should be closely examined and manufacturers be encouraged to strictly follow the practices. References Levy, D. T., Blackman, K., M.S., Tauras, J., Chaloupka, F. J., Villanti, Andrea C, M.P.H., Niaura, R. S., PhD., . . . Abrams, D. B. (2011). Quit attempts and quit rates among menthol and nonmenthol smokers in the united states. American Journal of Public Health, 101(7), 1241-7. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/877968443?accountid=45049 Choi, Kelvin,PhD., M.P.H., Fabian, L., M.P.H., Mottey, N., B.S., Corbett, A., M.P.H., & Forster, Jean,PhD., M.P.H. (2012). Young adults' favorable perceptions of snus, dissolvable tobacco products, and electronic cigarettes: Findings from a focus group study. American Journal of Public Health, 102(11), 2088-2093. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1220633364?accountid=45049 Pearson, Jennifer L,PhD., M.P.H., Richardson, A., PhD., Niaura, R. S., PhD., Vallone, Donna M,PhD., M.P.H., & Abrams, D. B., PhD. (2012). e-cigarette awareness, use, and harm perceptions in US adults. American Journal of Public Health, 102(9), 1758-1766. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1045925729?accountid=45049 Popova, L., & Ling, Pamela M,M.D. (2013). Alternative tobacco product use and smoking cessation: A national study. American Journal of Public Health, 103(5), 923-930. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1349241165?accountid=45049 Codourey, M. (2013). THE PUBLIC HANDSHAKE, THE PUSHED GOSSIP AND THE HEALTHCARE MARKETING. Economics & Sociology, 6(2), 11-27. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1471985444?accountid=45049 Pokhrel, P., Fagan, P., Little, M. A., Kawamoto, C. T., & Herzog, T. A. (2013). Smokers who try E-cigarettes to quit smoking: Findings from a multiethnic study in hawaii. American Journal of Public Health, 103(9), E58-E62. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1431589535?accountid=45049 Miller, J. (2013). CDC seeks answers on e-cigarettes. Formulary, 48(10), 315. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1450034883?accountid=45049 Public Health News: In Brief. (2014). Occupational Health, 66(4), 7. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1520016281?accountid=45049 Alemanno, A. (2012). The tobacco challenge: Legal policy and consumer protection. Common Market Law Review, 49(3), 1233-1235. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1037014135?accountid=45049 Carrera, P. M. (2014). The difficulty of making healthy choices and "health in all policies". World Health Organization.Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 92(3), 154. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1518534076?accountid=45049 Silcox, S. (2014). E-cigarettes and the workplace. Occupational Health, 66(4), 19-21. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1520016257?accountid=45049 Ripton, Nancy. (2014). Are Electronic Cigarettes Safe? Canadian Living. Retrieved from http://www.canadianliving.com/health/prevention/are_electronic_cigarettes_safe.php Born, K, Tepper, J & Caulfield. (2014, March 20). Regulating the “Wild West” of e-cigarettes. Healthy Debate. Retrieved from http://healthydebate.ca/2014/03/topic/politics-of-health-care/e-cigarettes-canada Dasgupta, A., & Klein, K. (2014). Antioxidants in food, vitamins, and supplements: Prevention and treatment of disease. Burlington: Elsevier Science. Gopinath, C., & Siciliano, J. (2014). Strategize: Experiential exercises for strategic management. Mason, OH: South-Western, Cengage Learning. Read More