Since its invention in 2004 according to Wikipedia (or 2003 according to Yahoo Health) so much has been said about this new technology called electronic cigarette (or e-cigarette/eCig). Having studied the various opinions and the controversies surrounding such topics as the side effects or possible health risks of electronic cigarette and indeed so many other issues such as the diversity in brands and prices among manufacturers, I have decided to present an analysis based on a wide range of sources. I will also be comparing several electronic cigarette reviews across the web. Then, I will come up with my own evaluation of all the sources, placing the cards on the table to help anyone who has interest in this technology to decide for him/herself.
Electronic Cigarette? Why Should This Deserve Our Attention Now?
Why I deem this project very necessary is that we all know the claimed health hazards of smoking. The question now is, could it be that electronic cigarette is a healthy enough technology invented as a worthy alternative to smoking to save our embattled environment from the harmful effects of smoking and some myopic people are trying to stifle it without enough evidence? Or, are electronic cigarettes really as harmful as their tobacco/smoky counterparts but manufacturers and marketers are claiming otherwise for selfish gains? Or that electronic cigarettes are actually harmful but not as harmful as the smokies (you understand what I mean) and so should be tolerated as a realistic alternative to smoking cigarettes (a case of choosing the lesser evil, that is) for better environmental health. Or may be the single term 'electronic cigarettes' actually apply to widely differing realities so that one brand might pass an environmental test where another fails. If this were to be the case, we shall endeavor to separate the wheat from the chaff among electronic cigarette brands and manufacturers - of course with valid and made-obvious reasons. Because this concerns health, we cannot afford to get to anything less than the very truth of the matter.
A Few Explanations
As the name implies, an electronic cigarette is a battery-powered device that you can put into your mouth and you have the feeling of smoking cigarette. It is equipped with a heating element which atomizes a substance known as e-liquid or vaporizer which happens by you pressing a button or by any other mechanism that may be installed by a given manufacturer. A vaporizer when ignited looks and smells like real cigarette smoke although it is actually neither tobacco nor smoke. Generally, vaporizers consist mainly of a substance called aerosol which produces the cigarette-smoke-like appearance and effect. Now since a real smoke is not involved, instead of saying you are 'smoking' we say you are 'vaping' (from vapour or vaporizer).
Most electronic cigarettes now appear like the conventional cigarettes and are reusable. We still have them in so many other variable shapes and sizes and some still in disposable forms.
Henceforth we shall be looking at this topic under the following subheadings:
a. What the authorities say about electronic cigarette.
b. Comparing the conventional cigarettes and electronic cigarettes based on health considerations,
c. Electronic Cigarette Top Brands/Price Review
d. What the future may hold for electronic cigarette
e. My View (based on the analyses) About electronic cigarettes
f. Other Matters that Might Arise Along the Line About Electronic Cigarettes.
{This presentation is still growing as research is on-going. Meanwhile, kindly let me know how you feel by making a comment below}
A Few Explanations
As the name implies, an electronic cigarette is a battery-powered device that you can put into your mouth and you have the feeling of smoking cigarette. It is equipped with a heating element which atomizes a substance known as e-liquid or vaporizer which happens by you pressing a button or by any other mechanism that may be installed by a given manufacturer. A vaporizer when ignited looks and smells like real cigarette smoke although it is actually neither tobacco nor smoke. Generally, vaporizers consist mainly of a substance called aerosol which produces the cigarette-smoke-like appearance and effect. Now since a real smoke is not involved, instead of saying you are 'smoking' we say you are 'vaping' (from vapour or vaporizer).
Most electronic cigarettes now appear like the conventional cigarettes and are reusable. We still have them in so many other variable shapes and sizes and some still in disposable forms.
Henceforth we shall be looking at this topic under the following subheadings:
a. What the authorities say about electronic cigarette.
b. Comparing the conventional cigarettes and electronic cigarettes based on health considerations,
c. Electronic Cigarette Top Brands/Price Review
d. What the future may hold for electronic cigarette
e. My View (based on the analyses) About electronic cigarettes
f. Other Matters that Might Arise Along the Line About Electronic Cigarettes.
Analysis of What the Authorities Say About Electronic Cigarettes
Before we go ahead, it worth noting - as indeed it is obvious - that the predominant authoritative attitude to electronic cigarettes so far has been restrictive. Yet, let us henceforth, take them one on one by their words.
"In July 2014" says Wikipedia, "a report produced by the World Health Organization (WHO) found there was not enough evidence to determine if electronic cigarettes could help people quit smoking, suggesting smokers be encouraged to use approved methods for help with quitting. The same report also notes expert opinion which suggests e-cigarettes have a role in helping those who have failed to quit by other means. Smokers will get the maximum health benefit if they completely quit all nicotine use. The World Lung Foundation has applauded the WHO report's recommendation of tighter regulation due to safety concerns and the risk of increased nicotine or tobacco addiction among youth."
"In July 2014" says Wikipedia, "a report produced by the World Health Organization (WHO) found there was not enough evidence to determine if electronic cigarettes could help people quit smoking, suggesting smokers be encouraged to use approved methods for help with quitting. The same report also notes expert opinion which suggests e-cigarettes have a role in helping those who have failed to quit by other means. Smokers will get the maximum health benefit if they completely quit all nicotine use. The World Lung Foundation has applauded the WHO report's recommendation of tighter regulation due to safety concerns and the risk of increased nicotine or tobacco addiction among youth."
So amidst scanty conclusive research-based evidence as to the health implications of e-cigarettes, the concern of the World's principal health authority, the World Health Organization concerning e-cigarettes use, is not its health implication per se but the possible role e-cigarettes could play in curbing the use of conventional cigarettes. This is like the police arresting a youth and - while it's not yet proved the youth is a criminal - he is being held in custody while the police is debating the role the youth could or could not play in curbing crime in the society. This is not yet the whole picture: If the World Health Organization report quoted above "notes expert opinion which suggests e-cigarettes have a role in helping those who have failed to quit by other means" again, this is like saying a police chief believes the youth in our analogy - far from being a criminal - has been helping to curb criminality in a way no no anti-crime agency has been able to. What then is the justification for holding the young man in police custody? We shall return to this.
"In a 2015 joint statement" continues Wikipedia,"Public Health England and other UK medical bodies concluded "e-cigarettes are significantly less harmful than smoking." In 2015, the Public Health England released a report stating that e-cigarettes are estimated to be 95% less harmful than smoking, and said that "PHE looks forward to the arrival on the market of a choice of medicinally regulated products that can be made available to smokers by the NHS on prescription." The UK National Health Service followed with the statement that e-cigarettes have approximately 5% of the risk of tobacco cigarettes, while also concluding that there won't be a complete understanding of their safety for many years. As of 2014 there are clinical trials in progress to test the quality, safety and effectiveness of e-cigarettes, but until these are complete the NHS maintains that the government could not give any advice on them or to recommend their use."
But in a sharp contrast to the above authoritative views from principal global and UK health bodies, the American health authorities sound more restrictive on the use of electronic cigarettes. Again we have a recourse to Wikipedia:
"In a 2015 joint statement" continues Wikipedia,"Public Health England and other UK medical bodies concluded "e-cigarettes are significantly less harmful than smoking." In 2015, the Public Health England released a report stating that e-cigarettes are estimated to be 95% less harmful than smoking, and said that "PHE looks forward to the arrival on the market of a choice of medicinally regulated products that can be made available to smokers by the NHS on prescription." The UK National Health Service followed with the statement that e-cigarettes have approximately 5% of the risk of tobacco cigarettes, while also concluding that there won't be a complete understanding of their safety for many years. As of 2014 there are clinical trials in progress to test the quality, safety and effectiveness of e-cigarettes, but until these are complete the NHS maintains that the government could not give any advice on them or to recommend their use."
But in a sharp contrast to the above authoritative views from principal global and UK health bodies, the American health authorities sound more restrictive on the use of electronic cigarettes. Again we have a recourse to Wikipedia:
In October 2015, the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends against e-cigarettes for quitting smoking and stated among adolescents, e-cigarette use is related with reduced quitting smoking. In August 2014, the American Heart Association released a policy statement in which they support "effective FDA regulation of e-cigarettes that addresses marketing, youth access, labeling, quality control over manufacturing, free sampling, and standards for contaminants." In 2015 the California Department of Public Health issued a report that stated the "aerosol has been found to contain at least ten chemicals that are on California’s Proposition 65 list of chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm." In 2014, the US FDA said "E-cigarettes have not been fully studied, so consumers currently don't know: the potential risks of e-cigarettes when used as intended, how much nicotine or other potentially harmful chemicals are being inhaled during use, or whether there are any benefits associated with using these products. Additionally, it is not known whether e-cigarettes may lead young people to try other tobacco products, including conventional cigarettes, which are known to cause disease and lead to premature death."The question then is, which of these opposing authoritative stand-points should we accept? Or could it be they are both acceptable in some sense? We shall find out for ourselves shortly. Although I will conclude this analysis by giving my own view on the matter, my job is not to tell YOU what to believe. Instead, I am here to expose the situation so clearly and succinctly that you can take a fully informed decision regarding electronic cigarette use.
{This presentation is still growing as research is on-going. Meanwhile, kindly let me know how you feel by making a comment below}
No comments:
Post a Comment