Recent legislation that is set to ban the use of all nicotine products including the Electronic Cigarette as well as smoke free nicotine products in public places is meeting with some resistance. The proponents of the Electronic Cigarette believe that including the smoking device in the legislation will cause more harm than good.
The Electronic Cigarette is a device that smokers can use to help with the transition from smoking cigarettes to leading a smoke free life. The device has helped countless smokers give up their lethal cigarettes in favour of the electronic cigarette. When the use of these products is limited, it takes away one more tool in the arsenal for smokers to finally kick the habit.
Anti smoking legislation is put in place to protect non smoker from the harmful effects of second hand smoke. Banning the Electronic Cigarette does not follow logically with this ideal. The smoke that comes from an Electronic Cigarette is not harmful and is not technically smoke. Anti smoking advocates that follow a strict abstinence only approach to smoking are seeking to control behaviour instead of the health problems that traditional cigarettes bring.
Advocates for the Electronic Cigarette believe that common sense should prevail and allow the use of these devices in public settings to help smokers combat their addiction. They believe that the banning of these products in public places only encourages smokers to go back to their old habits. If these smokers must go outside to use a nicotine replacement product, why shouldn’t they just light up a real cigarette instead?
Banning the product does not protect innocent patrons in restaurants and other locations from harmful smoke. Abstinence may work for some quitting smoking, but others may need the psychological help that the Electronic Cigarette offers.
The proponents of the Electronic Cigarette believe that banning smoking in public places is necessary to protect the public health, just fail to see how the inclusion of the Electronic Cigarette furthers that cause.