My father warned my middle school self about the dangers posed by smoking as a teenager. My grandmother’s death caused my father to resist cigarette smoking. I was discouraged from smoking due to both his warnings as well as my grandmother’s struggles to breathe. This principle also applied to vaping and electronic cigarettes. In eighth grade, vaping was more popular than ever. My freshman year in highschool saw a significant number of my peers owning and hiding their illegally obtained e-cigarettes from their parents and teachers. The popularity of vaping grew as new products were introduced, such as infinixes and juuls. As a high school senior, I found myself among a few vapers who had not used a device regularly.
Today, my resistance to peer pressure during the current vaping epidemic in America is what I am grateful for. Colin Dwyer reports in “Store owners resist state vaping bans as ‘a death sentence for their business,'” that more than 800 cases of lung injury have been reported in the US due to use of e-cigarettes and vapes. Twelve of these have resulted into death. These staggering statistics inspired the government to take action and ban vaping. However, these bans are being criticized fiercely. These bans are being criticized fiercely. Trump isn’t the only one to advocate for e-cigarette flavor bans. Dwyer points to Michigan’s ban on vaping flavors, which was followed by other states. Dwyer recognized other measures taken in states like Massachusetts to prohibit the sale of all vaping product sales. Baker described the vaping epidemic as a “public safety emergency” and banned the sale of vaping products for four weeks. Baker would like to accurately diagnose the cause of the recent lung infections, supervise vaping product distribution, and protect the safety of his citizens. Baker’s bans as well as the bans on vaping flavors are illegal without federal backing. The supremacy clause states that federal rules are superior to state laws unless they conflict with the Constitution. The federal law, which is supreme, governs all states, no matter what they may do. This ban is a clear example of executive power, violating the separation-of-powers principles in the state constitution. Many vape shop owners are unanimous in their support. Vape shop owners have filed lawsuits against the states for violating these bans since their inception. Owners who sell FDA-approved products have been furious at the bans. They feel that bans not only violate state authority but also undermine vape trade with other states. The bans by states have drawn criticisms and raised legal issues.
The editors of “The Absurd Campaign against Vaping” state that American youth have stopped smoking cigarettes since the 1990s. Dwyer however believes that banning e-cigarettes could encourage them to continue using e-cigarettes. Dana G. Smith’s “How Juul Exploited Teens’ Minds to Hook Them on Nicotine” reveals that teens used e-cigarettes 75% more in 2018 due to the invention of juul. Juul’s high nicotine dose has made it a popular product among teenagers. Many believe that vaping will become illegal and lead to nicotine addiction. Some vapers might resort to the black marketplace if they don’t want to smoke cigarettes. The Editors believe that the current lung-related deaths or hospitalizations stem from illegal vaping. Rob Kuznia (author of “Potential Cluts in Mystery Lung Conditions: Black market Vaping Products”) agrees. Kuznia believes vaping was the main reason for recent lung injuries. Many illicit products are THC-rich and contain thickening agents like vitamin E acetate. California cracked down on THC oil in California, but there is no government regulation. Bans on legally regulated vape products can have potentially negative consequences, including an increase in black-market participation.
There are several ways teens can quit using e-cigarettes, but not in the same way as a ban. Editors state that the government can regulate vaping products in a manner similar to tobacco or alcohol. The FDA appears to be already implementing these policies, Smith and Kuznia have discussed the FDA’s current actions in cracking down on minors selling juuls and investigating illicit distributors involved in the lung-related epidemics. The U.S. conducted research. Research by the U.S. Research shows that teens are willing to use ecigarettes in large quantities. Therefore, San Diego should increase the prices of ecigarette products to reduce overall teen ecigarette consumption. Another study showed a direct correlation between exposure to advertising and the incitement to smoke. San Diego should have laws that limit advertising of e-cigarettes to discourage teens from smoking. Teenagers are often unaware of the risks involved in vaping and believe that vaping is safe. Although vaping can offer many advantages over traditional cigarette smoking, there is still a lot of side effects. These potential health risks should be made more visible to teens in order to encourage healthy and non-smoking lifestyles.
San Diego has many options to help teens quit vaping. An outright ban on ecigarettes in San Diego could lead to economic overreach, increased vaping, and black-market activity that would reduce federal regulations. There are other options: black-market crackdowns to stop illicit vaping products being produced and distributed, increased vape prices, vape marketing regulations, and awareness campaigns regarding the dangers associated with vaping. There is no clear cause for the outbreak. More research is needed before banning all vape products.
