The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Should electronic cigarettes be regulated the same as tobacco cigarettes?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/29/2013 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 911 times Debate No: 39587
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




There has been much debate about electronic cigarettes and whether they should be classified in the same group as tobacco cigarettes. Is further regulation all about the money, a sensible approach and review of health matters or is the FDA bowing down to the large conglomerates with a vested interest in clamping down on electronic cigarettes?


As an ex-user of electronic cigarettes I'm very interested in this issue. I look forward to having a lively debate with you.

Let us first examine the varied types of electronic cigarettes. Some use antifreeze, some don't; some use dry herbs and some use liquids. Are we talking about electronic cigarettes under that umbrella description, or are we going to talk about each individual type?

Let's keep this friendly. I look forward to hearing from you.
Debate Round No. 1



I am also very keen to keep this all balanced and sensible as there is far too much misreporting of electronic cigarettes in the mass media at the moment.

I appreciate your points regarding unacceptable substances and those using electronic cigarettes to smoke other substances but my argument revolves around well manufactured, tested and legally sold electronic cigarettes. First of all no responsible ecig retailers wants these to fall into the hands of minors and no responsible ecig retailer/manufacturer has an argument against clinical trials - even thought the worldwide media often give a different impression.

Are the FDA, and other regulators, more interested in protecting government income streams than the health of the nation? It is not widely reported but there have been no health issues directly associated with ecigs and while nobody is saying there are not issues to consider when inhaling nicotine, many ex-smokers have found them a useful substitute to smoking tobacco cigarettes. So, is it right for the FDA to over regulate ecigs? Will this give the power back to tobacco cigarette manufacturer?

One last argument - the ecig market is not some kind of wild west market as it is still covered my manufacturing and retail regulations around the world.


It was found by the FDA that some brands of electronic cigarettes contain dangerous toxins. The problem with this is that so do cigarettes.

We have to think about what exactly electronic cigarettes are for. Are they a system for quitting regular cigarettes, or are they an alternative? Some of the major brands that I've come across market their product as an alternative to regular cigarettes, stating that you can continue to smoke without the adverse health effects. It would be great if this was true, but it isn't.

Not only can the vapour produced by e-cigs contain substances that are harmful to humans, but it has been found to affect a person's lung capacity. 'Vapers', as they call themselves, can find their lung function declining the more they use this 'alternative'. Still more studies have suggested that the difference in harm being caused to the users of both kinds of cigarettes small, e-cigs being almost as harmful as regular cig retting. How could any sane person see these studies and still argue that electronic cigarettes should not be regulated like their regular counterparts.

If you would like to read up on these claims, I suggest visiting the following links:

As stated in the national geographic article, though they may not be AS HARMFUL as regular cigarettes, e-cigs are still harmful enough to cause worry.

Were we to consider these devices as a method of quitting smoking, we would also have to view the other, less harmful alternatives. Gum, inhalers, tablets - these are all far better for you and, at the same time, only affect the user. An electronic cigarette produces vapours and releases chemicals into the air which could be inhaled by others around you. Even if we do consider e-cigs to be a method of quitting, we have to admit they they can be addictive and harmful. Bearing this in mind, how can one say that FDA regulation should not apply?

Electronic cigarettes are harmful. They can be addictive. They are marketed as an alternative to regular cigarettes and are often intended to be smoked, or 'vaped' like their paper-and-vegetable (tobacco) counterpart. For these reasons FDA regulation should apply to electronic cigarettes as much as they do to regular cigarettes.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2


tmark938 forfeited this round.


The_R3d_Fury forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.