Electronic Cigarettes and the Risk to Public Health, Research Paper Example

The analysis conducted in the following addresses the presence, and potential impacts to health, of electronic cigarettes, also known as e-cigarettes: “These are battery-operated devices designed to deliver nicotine with flavorings and other chemicals to users in vapor instead of smoke” (NIDA, 2015).  Most e-cigarettes are manufactured to look like conventional cigarettes, cigars, or pipes, and the companies manufacturing and marketing them, largely within the tobacco industry itself, tend to promote the devices as non-threatening to the smokers health, harmless to others within the smoker’s vicinity, and effective in assisting smokers in quitting completely (NIDA, 2015).  Given the relative novelty of the e-cigarette, research is by no means conclusive, and some in fact exists to support the above claims.  At the same time, new studies are indicating issues very much going to risk, as even these less harmful products  nonetheless release toxic chemicals in the smoker’s system. The following, then, explores the known realities of e-cigarettes, and leads to the conclusion that, even as research is ongoing and e-cigarettes are less toxic than tobacco cigarettes, the devices nonetheless represent a significant potential risk to public health., and federal restrictions should be placed upon their marketing and sales.

Research Status

As noted, the recent introduction of e-cigarettes into the market translates to minimal research available as to their effects. More than 250 brands exist and their popularity is growing, but little is definitively known as to potential health risks (NIDA, 2015).  At the same time, and given the public and governmental focus on the effects of any recreational substance, investigation and study is directed toward to the products.  Both the Center for Disease Control (CDC) and the Food and Administration (FDA), for example, have conducted surveys in recent years to determine levels of e-cigarette usage, as will be reported shortly.  Then, organizations like the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California have undertaken studies exploring the chemical processes in play in smoking the e-cigarette. Scientists and government agencies do not feel confident as yet in affirming the safety or risk levels presented by the devices (Raloff, 2014), as it must be reiterated that study here is recent; for example, the effect of the devices on cardiac function is still virtually unexplored.  Studies thus far do support that e-cigarettes are less harmful than those of tobacco, by virtue of the lack of combustion and different emissions (Loddenkemper, Kreuter, 2015, p. 261).  At the same time, even the minimal information gathered to date suggests very real potentials of risk from the products.  Study is ongoing but, as will be seen, sufficient evidence exists to establish that e-cigarettes are by no means the completely harmless alternative to tobacco promoted by the manufacturers.

Policy as Supported by Facts

When the documented evidence is examined, it becomes apparent that e-cigarettes may well require regulatory restrictions as stringent as those on tobacco products and alcohol.  Supporting this stance is a range of information culled from modern studies.  To begin with, the devices heat a liquid within the cigarette that evaporates, leading to the smoking of e-cigarettes as known as “vaping,” and marketers emphasize that the smoker is then free of the toxins associated with tobacco.  The FDA, however, has not uncovered any evidence that the cigarettes are harmless, as many users believe them to be, and recent investigation suggests that there may be significant risks in smoking the products. One recent study, for example, indicates that e-cigarettes may increase a bacterial infection’s resistance to antibiotics (Raloff, 2014).  Then, early e-cigarettes did not provide the nicotine smokers craved, so developers increased the voltage of the devices; the added heat then increases the release of nicotine.  The issue is then clear, as nicotine is addictive and, as research with animals indicates, likely to promote growths of atherosclerotic lesions on the lungs (Loddenkemper, Kreuter, 2015, p. 261).  Moreover, the inescapable and proven problem with the devices is that the chemical and solvents inhaled by the smoker are lung irritants.  Then, further research suggests that the vaping processes create carbonyls, and: “This group includes known cancer-causing chemicals, such as formaldehyde, and suspected carcinogens, such as acetaldehyde” (Raloff, 2014).  It seem evident then that e-cigarettes, if less harmful than tobacco, present risks.

Research further indicates another issue; increasing numbers of young people are turning to e-cigarettes, and because the perception is that the products are satisfying and present no threats to health.  In 2014, for example, it was noted that e-cigarette usage among high school students is greater than that of traditional smoking; 9.2 percent of students smoke tobacco cigarettes, while over 13 percent consistently smoke e-cigarettes (CDC, 2015).  Moreover, additional risk is evident through research: “A recent study showed that students who have used e-cigarettes by the time they start 9th grade are more likely than others to start smoking traditional cigarettes” (NIDA, 2015).  The e-cigarette promotions emphasizing the devices as lessening usage and decreasing tobacco dependence are then at least questionable.

These realities reinforce the need to more rigorously regulate the sale of e-cigarettes.  For some years, the FDA has been engaged in efforts to restrict sale of the devices as are tobacco products. In 2014 the FDA proposed a “deeming law” under which the products would be subject to the federal prohibitions on sales to minors and free sampling, federal warning label requirements, and the mandate that manufacturers register with the FDA and seek the agency’s review of all new tobacco products.  Thus far, however, no such law has been passed and e-cigarette sales remain very much a matter of local and state mandates.  California and Arizona, for example, deny the sale of the products to minors, but other states have no legislation regarding this. Then, it remains debatable as to where e-cigarettes may be smoked in public; no federal law bans the smoking in public venues, and local prohibitions vary from state to state (ChangeLabSolutions, 2014). Given the reality that ongoing study, admittedly not yet definitive, reveals strong possibilities of risks to health from the devices, the solution then goes to a federal application of restrictions mirroring those in place for other legal recreational substances. On the most basic level, it is known that e-cigarettes function through releasing artificial chemicals and nicotine in the user’s system, and it is unlikely that this would not in some manner threaten health.  Federal restrictions on marketing and sales, including warning labels, would then reflect a due caution as an obligation of government agencies in place to secure the public well-being.

Opinions and Facts

Ironically, it seems that a great deal of support for e-cigarette usage is based upon smokers’ understanding of the real dangers presented by tobacco products, and the “relieved” impression that vaping must be relatively, if not wholly, harmless in comparison.  Also, tobacco smokers are noted as turning to the devices in order to wean themselves from smoking entirely.  There is reason for such thinking, in fact.  Evidence does exist, through studies, that e-cigarette use may well reduce the smoker’s dependence on any tobacco product.  In one study in the UK, for example, smokers of e-cigarettes were more likely to abstain from all smoking than those seeking to reduce their habits or quit with no assistance (Loddenkemper, Kreuter, 2015, p. 262). The opinion that e-cigarettes are then a safe and expedient measure in quitting the habit, as well as products free from the dangerous component of tar produced by tobacco cigarettes, is to an extent rationale, and certainly explicable.

Moreover, it may be argued that legislating restrictions on e-cigarettes only perpetuates the unjust and ineffective agenda on the government’s part to enforce morality and ignore personal responsibility.  Many social critics have pointed out the ineffectiveness of the U.S. “war on drugs,” for example, and cite it as a failure based on an undue governmental insistence on legislating morality and determining what an individual may or may not choose to do, regarding choices in substance use affecting no one else.  Famously, alcohol prohibition in the 1920s was a spectacular failure (Mallea, 2014, p. 151), and there is reason to correlate this effort with potential e-cigarette restrictions.  The underlying motive is the same, in that individuals are denied the right to make personal choices because the authorities believe them to be unwise. Certainly, prohibiting any form of cigarette sales to minors is reasonable, but adults should be able to decide such things for themselves, particularly as e-cigarette usage offers no threat to others.

Counterpoint

The most important reality going to federal restrictions on the sale and marketing of e-cigarettes is that such restrictions do not translate to outright prohibition. As the above correctly claims, criminality as attached to any substance use has a consistent history of ineffectiveness at best, apart from how such bans tend to promote black markets. Legislation limiting how e-cigarettes are packaged and sold is removed from this, and more reflects the government’s responsibility to safeguard the public health through providing information and limiting access to the devices to adults. Even with research as yet inconclusive, enough is in place to warrant such restrictions, as e-cigarettes rely on the same chemical that makes tobacco so addictive: “The pleasurable, reinforcing, and addictive properties of smoking are produced mostly by the nicotine contained in tobacco” (NIDA, 2015).  Governmental restrictions then equate to care, alerting, and an ethical safeguarding of the public health.

Main Points/Conclusion

More than a few issues and realities exist regarding e-cigarettes, and the above addresses many of these. To begin with, and as has been reiterated, the relatively recent introduction of the electronic cigarette renders research as to its effect evolving and new.  Studies are not many, and further research is necessary.  At the same time, what evidence there is strongly indicates that e-cigarettes, if less harmful than tobacco, are by no means harmless.  As they provide nicotine, they promote the addictive properties of the chemical.  Then, other toxic chemicals within the devices are identified as reducing resistance to infections and promoting lung irritation and/or lesions (Raloff, 2014).  Both e-cigarette marketing and some public opinion hold that the products assist smokers in quitting smoking altogether, and some evidence supports this.  At the same time, and as corroborated by the CDC and FDA, young people are increasingly turning to e-cigarettes, likely due to the belief that they are “harmless.”  These adolescents may then be induced to smoke tobacco, given that nicotine addiction is triggered. These factors do not lead to any suggestion that e-cigarettes be legally banned, as such prohibitions historically only generate black market trade and do not lessen usage.  However, and as the above reinforces, a responsible government is obligated to protect the public from potentially harmful substances, through warnings and limited access. Ultimately, and even as research is ongoing and e-cigarettes are less toxic than the tobacco variety, the devices nonetheless represent a considerable potential risk to public health., and federal restrictions should be placed upon e-cigarette marketing and sales. 

References

Center for Disease Control (CDC).  (16 April 2015).  E-cigarette use triples among middle and high school students in just one year.  Retrieved 18 Oct. 2015 from http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2015/p0416-e-cigarette-use.html

ChangeLabSolutions. (May, 2014). Restrictions on the Use of E-Cigarettes. Retrieved 18 Oct. 2015 from http://www.changelabsolutions.org/tobacco-control/question/are-there-any-restrictions

Loddenkemper, R., & Kreuter, M. (2015).  The Tobacco Epidemic.  New York: Karger Medical and Scientific Publishers.

Mallea, P. (2014).  The War on Drugs: A Failed Experiment. Toronto: Dundurn Publishers.

National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). (Aug. 2015). DrugFacts: Electronic Cigarettes. Retrieved 18 Oct. 2015 from https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/electronic-cigarettes-e-cigarettes

Raloff, J.  (3 June 2014).  Health risks of e-cigarettes emerge.  ScienceNews.  Retrieved 18 Oct. 2015 from https://www.sciencenews.org/article/health-risks-e-cigarettes-emerge