The Iconic Vape. The Bad Habits Essay Example
In the article “We Still Don’t Know How Safe Vaping is”, the New York Times article describes the current vaping epidemic in the United States and identifies possible solutions to the epidemic. To help establish credibility with the audience, the article uses a nonpartisan writing style while also using various logical arguments to help persuade the audience.
The article begins by introducing how health officials have identified a vaping related illness that has swept the nation like a wildfire which has sickened 450 people and claimed the lives of three people. It then describes how health officials and parents have been scrambling to find answers to the epidemic and the mysterious illness. The Center for Disease and Control has advised everyone concerned to not vape. With the increase in scrutiny and mystery, several cities and states have banned e-cigarettes including Michigan and San Francisco and the idea of outright banning e-cigarettes is gaining traction across the country.
The article then discusses how e-cigarettes first appeared on the market around a decade ago and were introduced as an alternative to traditional cigarettes. The article highlights how based on existing evidence health professionals and scientists agree that using e-cigarettes is safer than using traditional cigarettes but there is no concrete evidence to corroborate this. The role of vape companies and the e-cigarette industry in the epidemic is scrutinized. Including how vape companies have recently sued the federal government over a 2020 deadline to submit data to the FDA for review and the companies sued to delay. In further scrutinizing the roles of vape and Juul companies the article describes how the companies have falsely advertised to youth and the relationship between vape companies and the tobacco companies. The article continues to highlight the deception going on throughout the vape industry and how it has contributed to the epidemic. The article concludes by further acknowledging the epidemic and the optimal way of preventing a nationwide crisis is to heighten regulations as soon as possible.
Ethos, logos and pathos are used methodically and each help to establish the audience’s trust. The contributors use pathos to play with emotions of the audience when detailing how the mysterious illness related to vaping has affected 450 people and has claimed the lives of three people. Pathos is also used when the dishonesty of the vaping companies is examined. Ethos appeals to the ethical argument being conveyed of trying to find solutions to the vaping crisis in hope to prevent it from snowballing into a nationwide health epidemic using an ethical argument lays down the foundation of trust with the audience. Logos is used in the use of logical arguments that play to both sides of the issue and are supported by scientists and health officials. Utilizing differing logical arguments helps to hook the audience into the information such as an intriguing introduction to a work of writing.
The vaping epidemic spreading across the United States has left many unanswered questions. The epidemic has led to an outcry amongst citizens demanding answers “Parents have been anxious, as many patients so far have been teenagers and young adults. Health officials are scrambling — the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have advised those who are concerned to not use e-cigarette devices. And, as uncertainty persists, states and cities are taking matters into their own hands.”(“We Still Don’t Know How Safe Vaping is”,2019) The lack of transparency on the part of vape companies and their deceptive advertising is being exposed “youth vaping rates have surged, and e-cigarette makers are at least partly to blame: A congressional investigation has found that Juul, the nation’s leading e-cigarette maker, used social media''educational and''anti-smoking campaigns to plug its products to minors. In at least one instance, the company targeted children as young as 8. In another, it told students that e-cigarettes were “totally safe.”(“We Still Don’t Know How Safe Vaping is”,2019).
The article uses a nonpartisan tone and style to gain the trust of the audience until the last paragraph which is where the contributors reveal action is needed to the crisis which in the eyes of some readers could be conceived as having a bias. The article uses various arguments that clearly bring to light the vaping epidemic but the article also uses arguments that show skepticism towards their being a vaping crisis. The medium of the article being The New York Times also contributes to the rhetorical appeal of the article. The New York Times is highly regarded for the accuracy of their works and has won 127 Pulitzer Prizes dating back to 1851.
In reading the article my personal views towards vaping have shifted. Before reading this article I was skeptical of a vaping epidemic existing but after seeing the evidence it's evident that while there are many unanswered questions revolving around vaping it's evident there is a crisis beginning to brew. I have prior experience with vaping, but I can’t confirm or deny I have experience with dab pens and I can reiterate vaping does damage your lunges and can be just as addictive as regular cigarettes. From personal experience vaping is highly addictive and spreads like the plague especially amongst teenagers. I have had friends that used to be addicted to traditional cigarettes but are now addicted to e-cigarettes and dab pens. Dab pens are vapes but instead of containing nicotine contain THC wax. THC wax is a marijuana in a liquid wax and with the abundance of vapes and dab pens law enforcement now has a method of testing to see if the liquid inside the vape is marijuana or nicotine. From reading the article the audience can gain a new insight into vaping and come away with a different outlook on the matter and possibly turn this new insight into further inquiry.