Propaganda, half truths, twisting of scientific studies, and misreporting are running heavily rampant these days when it comes to e-cigarette research and usage. With recent reports, such as the one published by the New England Journal of Medicine that went viral through the media a few weeks back, followed by the state of California’s public health department running a statement that e-cigarettes should not be used due to their production of “chemicals” and that they can be viewed as a gateway to smoking tobacco, it seems that there is an unusual amount of negative information swirling, based on speculation, aimed at discouraging users from vaping.
What these reports fail to do, all the while playing up hype and sensation, is focus on the positives electronic cigarettes have accomplished in a short amount of time.
Smokers don’t turn to electronic smoking to gain a new habit. They do not enter the world of smoking as a result, either. They look to these products as a means of transitioning away from traditional cigarettes, as with vaping they have more control, more options, and can enjoy the experience of smoking without involving any tobacco.
“It is stunning that a public agency entrusted with the health of the population of California would promote such a one-sided, scientifically impoverished document” remarked Sally Satel, who disbunked much of the speculation and false reports in a piece for Forbes. Also noteworthy, is that even the newly appointed Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy has stated that there is a “desperate need for clarity” when it comes to electronic cigarettes. Obviously a blatantly negative, harmful label cannot be placed on e-cigarettes, so the media really needs to halt their efforts in doing so!
So, what is the deal? Why is the anti-smoking coalition so drastically anti-e-cigarette? Is it because electronic cigarettes make the idea of stopping tobacco usage too easy? Too simple? Too enjoyable? Is it the concept of an alternative, similar yet different, too hard to grasp because there should not be a pleasurable option? Whatever the reasoning may be, it’s time for these “public health experts” to take a hard look at the reality of e-cigarettes, and see the benefits right before their eyes. Instead of focusing on the idea of e-cigarettes being a scary endeavor out to tempt young people into the world of smoking cigarettes, they should be compounding their efforts into lobbying for e-cigarette regulations that guarantee product quality and purity. As this industry is in its infancy, only the future will tell, however one thing we are certain of, is that electronic cigarettes are not going anywhere!