RR# 3

Name: RAGGIE, AHMED

PROFESSOR :-

In Megan McArdleS article, Thank you for E-smoking, she discusses the debate on
the new product in circulation called e cigarettes. One of the big questions brought
up is, are e-cigarettes as harmful as regular cigarettes? another question is will
e-smoking attract new people and former smoker to the idea that smoking is
good? The author of the article, McArdleS seems to think that e-cigarettes are not
harmful to people and that it would be a good way to reduce tobacco smokers
overall and decrease deaths .McArdleS wants the government to handle the
regulations of e-cigarettes lightly as she believes they could benefit society. After
evaluating the facts about the e-cigarettes including how they made .what is in
them, and which companies are currently selling them, McArdleS comes to the
conclusion that e-cigarettes should be used as a replacement to tobacco and to
reap the benefits of nicotine a perfectly healthy drug according to McArdleS. There
is obvious bias in the authors stance on this as we can see when she mentions that
she is a former smoker who has tried many times to quit before actually become
skeptical of the authors opinions on the matter.
In Thomas Hemphills article electronic cigarettes at a regulatory crossroads, he
also discusses the effects of the electronic cigarettes on society and whether the
FDA should regulate them. The main questions in this article is should electronic
cigarettes be treated as tobacco cigarette or should they be viable, safer
alternative? Hemphill starts off neutral to the idea of an electronic vision of a
cigarette being widely available for purchase .He states facts about how the FDA got
involved in the sottera case and that they were limited in ways they could regulate
e-cigarette .He also considers the fact that because some e-cigarette are not
tobacco based the FDA could have restrictions to the brands of e-cigarettes they
can regulate .However, after careful consideration how these products will work and
how they will be regulated he comes around to the idea that a substitute could
benefit the masses when it comes to cigarette smoking . He comes to the
conclusion that an electronic cigarette should be readily available to those who
want to continue to smoke but in a more healthy way .Bias in this article is not really
evident as he takes on both sides of the argument, he doesnt seem to have a
predisposed idea of cigarettes except for the facts that are widely known throughout
society.
The article I chose was written by Thomas Hemphill called electronic cigarettes at
regulatory crossroads this article was found in the NJIT database, business source
premier. The author is an associate professor of strategy, innovation and public
policy with the school of management at the University of Michigan which increase
his credibility rating. The source of this article is an academic journal and it is peer
reviewed which signifies it is a scholarly journal and it contains an abstract which
summarizes main points of the article. The publisher of the journal is the Cato
institute located in Washington D.C also another indication of this journal being

RR# 3
scholarly is that the source is currently up to date with issues ranging from 1996 to
the present.
The argument in both articles relate to one another because the show that two
people can agree on one thing no matter what their original stance on the topic was
in the first place .Both authors came into their article with a different mindset than
they left. They both had doubts about the effects of electronic cigarettes had on the
society and more importantly on peoples health however after careful
consideration of the facts whether it was scientific or political, they realized that ecigarette could actually be a benefits to our smoking community. The first article
showed evidence of a better cigarette through the analysis of the product itself and
the second article showed how the government is changing to adapt to these new
found facts. Bias was a factor in the first article because the author was a precious
smoker however the second article contained little to no bias which demonstrates
that the bias might not have been one hundred percent genuine because of all the
backed up evidence that showed electronic cigarettes to be healthier than
traditional ones. Overall the quality of the sources and evidence in both articles
were sufficient.

My analysis of the article I chose as well as the one I was given involved a
very careful procedure in order to pack the right article I used the NJIT library search
database and used key words to maximize efficiency. I limited my searches to
academic journals and only peer reviewed to get the most scholarly journals to pick
from .After that I went through a few article reading the abstracts and eventually
coming across one that seemed to resemble the first article. One thing that is
unclear to me about the library database is why some of the article have no link to
the full pdf or any type of access to the article, just a record of it. This lesson
thought me a lot about using database as a tool for research in ways I havent even
learned before.

Work cited
HEMPLILL, THOMAS A.Electronic cigarettes AT a Regulatory Crossroads Regulation
36.3
(2013): 10-12 Business source premier .Web. 16 sept .2014
McArdleS, Megan. Thank you for E-Smoking. (Cover story).Bloomberg
BusinessWeek 4366
(2014):54-58. Business source premier .Web 16 sept 2014.