E-Cigarettes have existed for a number of years now. Initially, they looked like a fad that would quickly flame out as time went on. However, they have proven to be amongst the most effective ways for smokers to actually quit. Even more impressively though, the findings have finally been coming through in form of studies to confirm what many have thought to this point. The studies suggest that E-Cigarettes are more effective at helping those quit than other methods, and they are significantly healthier than other methods.

Deborah Arnott, of the Action on Smoking and Health organization points out that, “The number of ex-smokers who are staying off tobacco by using electronic cigarettes is growing, showing just what value they can have. But the number of people who wrongly believe that vaping is as harmful as smoking is worrying.” The data has been clear thus far that there is a connection, and a connection that isn’t just loosely tied. Rather the data that has been showed thus far really reflects a positive change in the habits of those who are quitting and utilizing these alternatives, instead of traditional tobacco use.


Karen Albright, who authored a study on smokers and their voting tendancies, which was published in the journal called Nicotine & Tobacco Research pointed out that, “We know from previous research that smokers are an increasingly marginalized population, involved in fewer organizations and activities and with less interpersonal trust than nonsmokers.” She went on to point out that, “What our research suggests is that this marginalization may also extend beyond the interpersonal level to attitudes toward political systems and institutions.”

Must Read: LOVE &HATE for E-cigarettes growing simultaneously, says ASH

This research solidifies that the implications of smoking have a greater scope of impact than researchers previously thought. However, as many of the researchers pointed out – when it comes to voter turnout it’s important to begin figuring out “why” these things are happening. Simply knowing that those who smoke are less likely to turn out to vote isn’t something that can simply be written off without further research. That being said though, these two pieces of information really go a long way to quelling some of the conversations that were otherwise left to debate.

It’s hard to contest the effectiveness of e-cigarettes when they are being used in such quantity, and with scientific proof backing up the fact that they are significantly healthier than the traditional means of smoking. The vapor option, instead of traditional smoke, allows the user to get a lower quantity of tobacco, as well as consume less harmful things – which means that in the long-term they are living healthier lives and reducing the medical expenses associated with long-term smoking.

SOURCEWiley Online Library


  1. That was a good article, and a service to your readers – that is, until you blew it in the last sentence. You wrote “The vapor option, instead of traditional smoke, allows the user to get a lower quantity of tobacco…”. This is total nonsense of course. There is no “tobacco” in the vapor. Rather, it contains some level of the chemical nicotine, and that is why it is an excellent substitute for smoking. I myself was able to quit almost effortlessly after many decades of smoking because of eCigarettes.

    In spite of this being well known among smokers, the public at large still wants to group eCigarettes in with regular, tobacco-based cigarettes and regulate them in a similar manner, something you alluded to in your article. This would be a big mistake. If you take my eCigarette away from me I would likly to go back to smoking tobacco.

    • Which is what government, pharma and anti-smoking groups want. More tobacco taxes if every vaper just goes back to smoking, more profits for pharma and Anti-smoking groups can then stop worrying about job security.

      What you have to understand about the public health crowd is that they really dont want to solve any problem. If they find a real solution for a problem – it would mean the government grants to solve it would stop coming in.

      As usual, opposition to ecigs has got nothing to do with public health and everything to do with vested interests, aka money.

  2. The government and their paid shill scientists are trying to align vaping with smoking to maintain a revenue stream of taxation. It is truly sad the corruption from the CDC, WHO and the various groups that say they are for health that lie to achieve this over actual progress in health. They ignore the real reason cigarettes are so addictive and what caused the whistle blowing on it in the 70’s. Which is ammonia science making nicotine pass the blood brain barrier making it as addictive as heroin. Vaping eliminates this and allows one to wean themselves off of that delivery method with a 98% harm reduction that actually works. Without the ammonia science the nicotine is only as addictive as caffeine. They do not like losing the revenue they enjoy with taxing $9+ dollars a pack on cigarettes. The government doesn’t care about what is truth or people just about what they can control and steal.

  3. Good work Ms Albright. Some great insights in this article I haven’t read anywhere before. Allowing access to tobacco then marginalizing the people who smoke must have negative social consequences. The only thing that’s ever discussed are the medical consequences. I hope there is more research looking into that.

  4. I recently found out the from an article in the British Medical Journal that the CDC takes private contributions. That explains what, up to now, had been a very weird puzzle: why would the head of the world’s foremost medical authority give press conferences that said the OPPOSITE of what the CDC’s own science pages and data say? Well, we have our answer: corruption in the U.S. is not at the individual level, it’s at the institutional level. Dr. Frieden is tasked with protecting his agency from funding cuts. That means keeping corporate donors happy, especially Big Pharma, which is the group that has been terrified of vaping from the start, and admits vaping is hurting their sales.

  5. Great article, except “allows the user to get a lower quantity of tobacco, as well as consume less harmful things –” There is not tobacco in Ecigs. just nicotine. By that argument NRT has tobacco in it as well.

  6. Some e liquid contains nicotine. Some e liquid does not.
    Public health orgs have revealed themselves to be an unexpected enemy of Tobacco Harm Reduction. This calls their credibility and trustworthiness into question.
    Big Tobacco did not invent vaping, and their products aren’t effective for anything but cutting down, not quitting, their main product, cigarettes.
    So-called Public Health is causing harm when they imply that vaping is anywhere near as harmful as smoking, because anybody smoking now would/could not quit traditionally. So every time they scare a smoker off of switching, they are causing direct public harm. Which is completely reprehensible and which needs to be challenged and corrected. I don’t want to be a martyr in a failed tobacco war, especially when I have not used tobacco for 16 months, and plan to never use tobacco again.
    Nicotine, like caffeine, I enjoy.