Electronic Cigarettes: A Survey Of Users (Essay Sample)

E-CIGARETTES
Name:
Course:
Date:
Introduction
The use of electronic cigarettes has increased rapidly globally. Electronic cigarettes can be defined as devices that deliver vapor that contains nicotine. Perceived and promoted as a healthier alternative to the normal cigarette, little data exist concerning the alleged safety of e-cigarettes and their efficacy in reducing harm and dealing with tobacco dependence. The available data, however, reveals some critical information about the overall impact of electronic cigarettes on the health of the smokers. This annotated bibliography highlights the current data on electronic cigarettes toxicity, their effect on the body, as well as their efficacy in smoking cessation and reduction.[Polosa, 2015.] [King, et.al, 2013.] [McGill, 2013.]
Annotated Bibliography
Goniewicz, Maciej Lukasz, Jakub Knysak, Michal Gawron, Leon Kosmider, Andrzej Sobczak, Jolanta Kurek, Adam Prokopowicz et al. "Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes." Tobacco control 23, no. 2 (2014): 133-139.
The article argues that the vapor produced by electronic cigarettes contain potentially harmful toxins and variable amounts of nicotine, though at levels slightly lower than that in the normal cigarettes. According to the article, the long-term toxic and lung function effects of e-cigarettes are unknown. It establishes that although some data indicate that electronic cigarettes are effective in decreasing the consumption of conventional cigarettes, no data showing the efficacy of these devices as instruments for achieving cessation exist. The article concludes that until sufficient and comprehensive longitudinal studies validate the safety of e-cigarettes and demonstrate their efficacy in dealing with tobacco dependence, their presumed role as tools of reducing harm is unclear. I consider the article a credible one, considering that it was composed by and comprises of information on studies conducted by multiple researchers and physicians of a medical school. The article can be used to warn readers about the harmful effects of using electronic cigarettes before any study confirms any effect of such cigarettes on the body.[Goniewicz, et al., 2014.]
Etter, Jean-François. "Electronic cigarettes: a survey of users." BMC public health 10, no. 1 (2010): 1.
In this article, the author attempts to explain why electronic cigarettes are better than the conventional cigarettes by giving an explanation about the nature in which electronic cigarettes work. Overall, he argues that e-cigarettes use tag lines such as "independently tested" and "made in America" to imply a higher quality. The author backs up his argument that electronic cigarettes are better by positing that they can help smokers quit smoking. The article provides insight into how electronic cigarettes work, giving an inside look at the opinions of the companies about this product. I consider the article reputable since it offers first-hand information by detailing the opinions of the e-cigarette users and that of the companies that manufacture e-cigarettes. The piece is very useful in describing how electronic cigarettes work, particularly at the most basic level. This element renders the article necessary since it is something that many other sources lack.[Etter, 2010.]
Haustein, Knut-Olaf. Tobacco or health?: physiological and social damages caused by tobacco smoking. Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.
In this book, the author delves into all matters of electronic cigarette and its harmful effects. He relies on data collected since the seventies to refute and dispel any claims that electronic cigarettes are safer and less addictive. The author establishes his stand through a comprehensive analysis of modern data while also exploring the many dangers linked to smoking electronic cigarettes. He argues that the same nicotine substance in conventional cigarettes is contained in electronic cigarettes, though in a smaller quantity. Consequently, Haustein maintains that the use of e-cigarettes can cause cardiovascular, lung, and other organ cancer just like the normal cigarette. In his book, Haustein attempts to attract an audience who is somewhat related to smoking, as well as those who could be thinking about smoking electronic cigarettes. He also draws an audience who attempts to prevent other from starting using electronic cigarettes. The book is hence an alert intended to help all those associated with e-cigarettes be cognizant of the harmful effects of e-cigarettes on the body.[Haustein, 2009.]
I consider the book credible because Haustein spent a greater part of his career exploring and examining the effects of cigarette smoking. Additionally, the book is a widely cited source in the field of cigarette research. The credibility of the book has been boosted further by its publishers, a company that emphasizes on books related to medicine, science, and technology. The piece delivers good robust information on the addictive nature of nicotine and electronic cigarettes in general and adds another substance to it by exploring the history of cigarettes. This information is useful as it shows the extent to which cigarettes are addictive and the dangers of e-cigars. The book is largely skewed towards the harmful effects of cigarettes and does not provide a single uplifting thing about electronic cigarettes. The book can hence act as a useful tool to validate that electronic cigarettes are equally harmful to the body.
King, Brian A., Suhana Alam, Gabbi Promoff, Rene Arrazola, and Shanta R. Dube. "Awareness and ever-use of electronic cigarettes among US adults, 2010–2011." Nicotine & Tobacco Research 15, no. 9 (2013): 1623-1627.
This piece examines whether electronic cigarettes are more effective in accomplishing smoking cessation compared to nicotine patches. It reports that previous research has demonstrated higher rates of cessation with nicotine patches, arguing that multimodal strategies can be more effective than the overly used nicotine patches. The authors contend that electronic cigarettes, devoid of, or with nicotine, are effective, just like nicotine patches, in achieving smoking cessation after a period of six months. In view of the authors, nicotine patches and e-cigarettes bring about similar cessation rates, indicating that the combination of conventional smoking habits with electronic cigarettes can result in the modest cessation effect. Since the authors present their arguments by documenting from various reputable medical journals, the source is reputable. The article can be a useful tool in debating for the use of electronic cigarettes.[King et. al., 2013.]
Cobb, Nathan K., M. Justin Byron, David B. Abrams, and Peter G. Shields. "Novel nicotine delivery systems and public health: the rise of the “e-cigarette”." American journal of public health 100, no. 12 (2010): 2340-2342.
In this article, the authors argue for a much sterner regulation on electronic cigarettes. Banking on old statistics, they attempt to dismiss the notion that electronic cigarettes are a safer form of smoking and the idea that it helps smokers quit the habit. To validate their point, the authors cite a specific research study that demonstrated variations in the content of nicotine, and uses this finding to extrapolate and communicate the idea that these variations prove that electronic cigarettes are not safe. The authors market themselves to individuals associated with smoking and the use of e-cigarettes to demonstrate the harmful nature and the negative aspects of electronic cigarettes.[Cobb et. al., 2010.]
Being that Peter Shields was once the leader of the American Society of Preventive Oncology, he is undeniably well versed with the field of smoking and prevention of cancer. Along with the choice of publication, the book is an extremely reliable source. The book provides a thoughtful insight into the minds of supporters of e-cigarettes. It is, therefore, useful as it provides an opposing voice to electronic cigarettes, and can hence be used to prove the fallacies of those supporting the use of electronic cigarettes.[Cobb, et. al., 2010.]
Siegel, Michael. What's Not to Like. The New York Times 20 Aug. 2013: n. pag.
In this article, Siegel claims that the denunciation of electronic cigarettes is skewed. Basing his arguments on his profound knowledge and recent evidence, he refutes the notion that electronic cigarettes are dangerous and the idea that they do not help smokers quit. To validate his point, the author cites recent evidence that reveals that thousands of people have received substantial help from electronic cigarettes in their attempts to quit smoking. He adds that these devices have helped several people cut down on smoking. In view of the author, e-cigarettes will entirely eradicate second-hand smoke. In his article, Siegel targets anybody associated with smoking, including anti-smoking advocates and lawmakers, to demonstrate the lifesaving impacts electronic cigars can have. I consider the article reputable since the New York Times is an extremely credible publication source. Besides, it is clear that Siegel has a profound background in the consequence of smoking. As a whole, this piece can be useful as it can help address the contradictory side while presenting good logical arguments.[Siegel, 2013.]
Hajek, Peter, Jean‐François Etter, Neal Benowitz, Thomas Eissenberg, and Hayden McRobbie. "Electronic cigarettes: review of use, content, safety, effects on smokers and potential for harm and benefit." Addiction 109, no. 11 (2014): 1801-1810.
This source explores the health risks posed by electronic cigarettes, focusing on the contents of the device. It claims that apart from the addictive substance that the device contain, it also produces che...