Electronic cigarette (EC) is the Electronic Nicotine Delivery System simulates the combustion of tobacco by vaporizing the flavored nicotine solution, from which the aerosol formed can have lower amount of tobacco-leaves-derived intoxicants and EC is considered to be less harmful (Lindblom, 2015). Currently, sizable smokers are puffing on the EC whilst the civilian use of EC has been restricted by legislation in some countries, this in turn, sparks contentious debate without consensus. By the meaning of restriction, that refers to only medical use under prescription is permitted. The debate has primarily focused on health, ethics and Environmental impact. Stakeholders in favor of the restriction emphasize the nicotine-containing EC is still
…show more content…
An article by Hall, Gartner and Forlini (2015) analyzed the ethical issue raised by the ban of EC which neglects the rational thinking ability of smokers and deprived their right to make decisions and to be exposed in a spectrum of free choices. However, the opponents of EC show no respect towards smoker’s autonomy based on the assumption that their use of EC is simply due to uncontrollable nicotine compulsion, which is not a matter of decision-making. Based on my evaluation, the article analysis seems more valid than the opponents of EC. Even though smokers are under influence by nicotine, it does not play decisive role in driving them to puffing on EC. According to a survey conducted by Rutten et al. (2015), three major motivations behind the use of EC are quiting smoking (58.4%), reducing smoking (57.9%), and health risks (51.9%). Such additional survey reveals there are health purposes and not just nicotine addiction driven reasons. It indicates a rational appraisal is present beneath their spontaneous decisions to use EC and smokers are capable to select what best suits their interests. Therefore, we should make sure alternatives for current smoker to choose instead of unethically twisting their arm to return to more harmful (Lindblom, 2015), not banned conventional cigarette by prohibiting EC. Those who wish to improve physical health definitely deserve …show more content…
A research by Schripp, Markewitz, Uhde and Salthammer (2013) disclosed that the EC will lead to the production of Volatile Organic Compounds and particulates responsible for indoor air pollution, non-smokers in the same enclosed area would be suffered from passive smoking. Based on my evaluation, these criticisms appears to be weak justification as they fail to take the reality into account. Indoor smoke-free policies have been introduced by many countries, in which EC has been included. Generally speaking, EC will not pose harm through pass vaping in public area. Moreover, when it comes to indoor area beyond the coverage of the ordinance — HOME, the civilian use of EC benefits non-smoker family members. Research reveals that most nicotine intake among children are from home environment as there is no reduction in the nicotine level of those children who live with smokers since the implementation of smoke-free law (Priest et al.,2008), probably due to duration of exposure. EC consequently can cover up the loophole of the smoke-free law at home environment as the children and other family members, would suffer less from secondhand smoke,(Lydall, Eadon& Woerden, 2013) since EC emission is much less poisonous than regular cigarettes ( Wagener, Siegel, Borrelli, 2012). Although EC is the culprit of indoor air pollution, it should be compared to conventional cigarette emission. The benefits
An article by Hall, Gartner and Forlini (2015) analyzed the ethical issue raised by the ban of EC which neglects the rational thinking ability of smokers and deprived their right to make decisions and to be exposed in a spectrum of free choices. However, the opponents of EC show no respect towards smoker’s autonomy based on the assumption that their use of EC is simply due to uncontrollable nicotine compulsion, which is not a matter of decision-making. Based on my evaluation, the article analysis seems more valid than the opponents of EC. Even though smokers are under influence by nicotine, it does not play decisive role in driving them to puffing on EC. According to a survey conducted by Rutten et al. (2015), three major motivations behind the use of EC are quiting smoking (58.4%), reducing smoking (57.9%), and health risks (51.9%). Such additional survey reveals there are health purposes and not just nicotine addiction driven reasons. It indicates a rational appraisal is present beneath their spontaneous decisions to use EC and smokers are capable to select what best suits their interests. Therefore, we should make sure alternatives for current smoker to choose instead of unethically twisting their arm to return to more harmful (Lindblom, 2015), not banned conventional cigarette by prohibiting EC. Those who wish to improve physical health definitely deserve …show more content…
A research by Schripp, Markewitz, Uhde and Salthammer (2013) disclosed that the EC will lead to the production of Volatile Organic Compounds and particulates responsible for indoor air pollution, non-smokers in the same enclosed area would be suffered from passive smoking. Based on my evaluation, these criticisms appears to be weak justification as they fail to take the reality into account. Indoor smoke-free policies have been introduced by many countries, in which EC has been included. Generally speaking, EC will not pose harm through pass vaping in public area. Moreover, when it comes to indoor area beyond the coverage of the ordinance — HOME, the civilian use of EC benefits non-smoker family members. Research reveals that most nicotine intake among children are from home environment as there is no reduction in the nicotine level of those children who live with smokers since the implementation of smoke-free law (Priest et al.,2008), probably due to duration of exposure. EC consequently can cover up the loophole of the smoke-free law at home environment as the children and other family members, would suffer less from secondhand smoke,(Lydall, Eadon& Woerden, 2013) since EC emission is much less poisonous than regular cigarettes ( Wagener, Siegel, Borrelli, 2012). Although EC is the culprit of indoor air pollution, it should be compared to conventional cigarette emission. The benefits