With more money being pumped into the EVI industry,
...more resources could be made available for research and developing safe vapours that can provide as satisfying a ‘throat hit’ as do traditional cigs. Presently, the WHO, governmental bodies, etc, are generally saying that proper research on the hazards of EVIs aren’t out and are therefore reserving their opinion on it; focusing on it not being a smoking-cessation device, and banning it in some states. Well, enough research has been done to prove, conclusively, the hazards of smoking t-cigs, and it is true that EVIs do not contain carcinogens, tar, etc. That is reason enough to prefer it as a less hazardous alternative, and do more research on it. Hence, it shouldn’t matter if it is a ‘smoking-cessation’ device or not. All that should matter is if it is a safer alternative, that can be made even safer given further support. This would be a good start for the EVI industry to serve as a competitive pressure on the t-cig industry to produce safer cigs.
If the EVI industry is marginalised, then, there might not be any motivation for change in the t-cig industry. And all future smokers are going to be stuck with the traditional choice of not smoking or smoking carcinogenic cigs.
And with less hazardous cigs being produced by the t-cig industry, the EVI industry might also be inclined to cutting down on their nicotine content whilst keeping their clientele satisfied with the aforementioned ‘throat hits’. Currently, the advantage of the t-cig industry lies in their providing satisfying ‘throat hits’ whilst keeping the nicotine level down. The advantage of the EVI industry is that they keep out the carcinogens whilst replicating the smoking experience in other aspects. However, it seems that their current method for capturing the market is in increasing the dependency of EVI users via high nicotine content. People, being accustomed to their high-nicotine levels might just being to become dependent on the EVIs because of its stronger nicotine content compared to many t-cigs. We need the t-cig industry to check on this tendency in the EVI industry.
That’s the value of capitalist-style competition.
(I’m not saying that competition is that which moves humanity forward by the way. Rather, competition is that which moves humanity forward within a capitalist system as valuable commodities such as empathy are rendered scarce within a system that promotes, reinforces, and thrives on mutual alienation, self-absorption, and greed.) Competitors must be allowed to battle it out with each other in the same arena. If the EVI industry is marginalised, then, there might not be any motivation for change in the t-cig industry. And all future smokers are going to be stuck with the traditional choice of not smoking or smoking carcinogenic cigs.
Given that a particular number of every generation is going to pick up smoking, their starting up with EVIs, instead of t-cigs will definitely be the preferred alternative. And even if more people pick up EVIs because of its availability, it shouldn’t matter if there is nothing hazardous about it.
Choice is not matter of doing or not doing something if we are not allowed the choice of doing it safely and in an environmentally-friendly way.
That said, we should also not forget that supporting the EVI industry would be more environmentally-friendly as well. The pressure they can thus put on the t-cig industry can lead to less environmentally-unfriendly cigs being produced. Governments can go on about ‘reducing our carbon footprint’, but that has to be complemented with supporting industries that can contribute to it by its production of less environmentally-unfriendly products. It is hypocritical to talk about reducing carbon footprints on the one hand, whilst banning the use of EVIs for the sake of maintaining healthy taxation levels that come with environmentally unsafe t-cigs. Choice is not matter of doing or not doing something if we are not allowed the choice of doing it safely and in an environmentally-friendly way.