GET THE APP

A Report on Regulations for e-cigarettes in Public Health
..

Journal of Health Education Research & Development

ISSN: 2380-5439

Open Access

Brief Report - (2022) Volume 10, Issue 4

A Report on Regulations for e-cigarettes in Public Health

Mark Noha*
*Correspondence: Mark Noha, Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA, Email:
Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, USA

Received: 05-Apr-2022, Manuscript No. jbhe-22-69774; Editor assigned: 09-Apr-2022, Pre QC No. P-69774; Reviewed: 17-Apr-2022, QC No. Q-69774; Revised: 19-Apr-2022, Manuscript No. R-69774; Published: 26-Apr-2022 , DOI: 10.37421/2380-5439.2022.10.100020
Citation: Noha, Mark. “A Report Regulations for e-cigarettes in Public Health.” J Health Edu Res Dev 10 (2022): 100020.
Copyright: © 2022 Noha M. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Introduction

There are approximately 34.3 million smokers in the USA, and tobacco use continues to kill about 0.48 million Americans year. Since the government began implementing tobacco control measures in the wake of the First Surgeon General's Report on Tobacco in 1964, the use of conventional tobacco products has significantly decreased. But more lately, a brand-new thing called electronic cigarettes has emerged quickly and exposed a younger population to a variety of harmful effects. However, examining e-cigarettes from the standpoint of tobacco control presents many difficulties. Combustible cigarette smokers who move to e-cigarettes are switching to a less dangerous product. However, decades of success in conventional tobacco control will be undone if the younger generation starts smoking e-cigarettes as a result of targeted marketing, enticing flavours, and the notion that they are a "safer option." In order to ensure that non-conventional tobacco products like e-cigarettes are available as smoking cessation tools for current smokers while also preventing them from contributing to the addiction and disease that will wreak havoc on the health of future generations, governments at the federal, state, and local levels must once more implement new public health policies [1].

About the Study

Smokers of conventional cigarettes who transition to e-cigarettes are switching to a less hazardous product. However, if the younger generation starts smoking e-cigarettes due to focused marketing, alluring flavours, and the perception that they are a "safer option," decades of progress in the fight against conventional tobacco use will be rendered ineffective [2]. Governments at the federal, state, and local levels must once more implement new public health policies to ensure that non-conventional tobacco products like e-cigarettes are available as smoking cessation tools for current smokers while also preventing them from causing the addiction and disease that will wreak havoc on the health of future generations. Tobacco contains nicotine, which is known to lead to addiction and dependency [3]. It has a strong effect on children and young people in particular. High nicotine concentrations can be delivered by e-cigarettes, and these concentrations can change depending on the many components of the e-cigarette, all of which differ substantially from one another. Young individuals who use e-cigarettes run the danger of using cigarettes in the future.

The patterns of e-cigarette use are also influenced by a number of sociodemographic variables. Strong e-cigarette control measures are required for prevention because it has been demonstrated that banning tobacco products lowers juvenile smoking risk. There are many obstacles to effective ENDS regulation. Political analysis of public health concerns, from health care reform to injury and illness prevention. It starts by looking at how health issues get up on the political agenda. Governmental responses are influenced by perceptions of the problem's gravity, who is to blame, and the populations who are affected. It then looks at how, even in the face of major public health issues, political leaders typically accept gradual policy adjustments rather than complete reforms due to restricted rationality, fragmented political institutions, pushback from vested interests, and fiscal restrictions [4]. It should be illegal for tobacco corporations to continue pushing flavours that appeal to kids while downplaying the risks and highlighting e-cigarettes as a "far safer option" in order to maintain sales.

Another risk is the promotion of ENDS as tools for boosting social contact, which creates a pathway for young people to make poor decisions as a result of peer pressure. On the other hand, e-cigarettes greatly lower an existing smoker's risk of exposure to harmful tobacco smoke elements that are typically found in cigarette smoke, according to many studies. Then, it describes the circumstances in which a larger-scale reform of health policy may take place, concentrating on pivotal points in the creation of policies and the function of policy entrepreneurs in pursuing new avenues of innovation. Finally, it discusses the difficulties faced by those in charge of carrying out and overseeing the administration of health policy. Understanding the political aspects of health policy allows public health professionals to perform more realistic research and evaluations, better foresee opportunities and obstacles to governmental action, and create more effective policies and programmes [5].

Conclusion

The public health response to climate change has been found to be promising in the assessment (monitoring climate hazards, diagnosing health status, and assessing vulnerability); mixed in the development of policy (mobilising partnerships, mitigation and adaptation activities); and relatively weak in assurance (communication, workforce development and evaluation). We argue that while the CFES model is still significant, it is not in line with three ideas that have grown in significance: governance, implementation, and adjustment. These ideas can be incorporated into the model to ensure that public health realises its potential as a proactive partner fully integrated into the development of climate policy over the next 10 years.

References

  1. Lichtenberg K. “E-cigarettes: current evidence and policy.” Mo Med 114 (2017):335-338.
  2. Google Scholar, Indexed at

  3. Ebi, Kristie L., Nicholas H. Ogden, Jan C. Semenza and Alistair Woodward. “Detecting and attributing health burdens to climate change.” Environ Health Perspect 125 (2017): 085004.
  4. Google Scholar, Crossref

  5. Watts, Nick, Markus Amann, Sonja Ayeb-Karlsson and Kristine Belesova, et al. “The Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: From 25 years of inaction to a global transformation for public health.” Lancet 391 (2018): 581-630.
  6. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  7. Huang, Jidong, Bo Feng, Scott R. Weaver and Terry F. Pechacek, et al. “Changing perceptions of harm of e-cigarette vs. cigarette use among adults in 2 US national surveys from 2012 to 2017.” JAMA Netw Open 2 (2019): e191047.
  8. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

  9. Bhalerao, Aditya, Farzane Sivandzade, Sabrina Rahman Archie and Luca Cucullo. “Public health policies on e-cigarettes.” Curr Cardiol Rep 21 (2019): 1-6.
  10. Google Scholar, Crossref, Indexed at

Google Scholar citation report
Citations: 531

Journal of Health Education Research & Development received 531 citations as per Google Scholar report

Journal of Health Education Research & Development peer review process verified at publons

Indexed In

arrow_upward arrow_upward