E-Cigarettes Less Harmful than Tobacco

This article discusses the significantly lower risk of e-cigarettes compared to tobacco and their effectiveness as a quitting aid for smokers. It explores the use of logos, ethos, and pathos to make a persuasive argument. The article also highlights the popularity of e-cigarettes as a quitting aid and the potential audience for this information.

Running Head: English 1
English
(Student Name)
.

English 2
E-Cigarettes Less Harmful than Tobacco
E-cigarettes are 95% less harmful that tobacco. This article is based on the smokers who
are trying to quit. The author of this article is Angus Berwick. The author is informing
individuals about the significantly low factor of risk of e-cigarettes as opposed to tobacco (Zhu et
al., 2014). Such article gives the more credibility through the use of logos as well as ethos. Such
article is rhetorically effective mainly though the application of pathos that make the individual
to think deeper emotion towards it. This article is based on the e-cigarettes that are much less
harmful that tobacco but it is not 100 per cent safe (Etter, 2010).
“Our analysis represent that bodily level exposure to establish as well as important
smoking related carcinogens is reduced by 56 percent as comparison to 97 percent in long-term e
cigarette users who have stopped smoking completely as comparison with the smoker of tobacco
cigarette”. Some of the author is against such article. They have a view those e-cigarettes also
affecting the health of the individual. It is not 100 percent safe or protected for human beings.
They also indirectly harm the body of the human being. It increases the level of addiction and
less effective in nature. The author has such view due to the reason E-cigarette also damage the
lungs if it is over used by the individuals (Callahan-Lyon, 2014).
The article affectively appeals to ethos; the scientists from health department give the
great reason to the audience to trust their research on E-cigarettes as an alternative to tobacco.
The writing style of the author is not formal however; it does not change or alter the opinion at
all. Angus Berwick, the reader discovers that he has a previous work experience as a writer as
well as education that further develops the trust of the readers towards the author.

English 3
The dominant strategy of the article was pathos even though it also used the ethos as well
as logos very effectively. The article used the pathos to affect the reader on a deeper emotional
level. Such article is relatable due to the reason it has been found that the individual who used E-
cigarettes successfully able to quit the aid as comparison to those who are still using cigarettes. It
represent that the E-cigarettes are less dangerous than other cigarette. The use of pathos in article
probably does the exact similar things for the smokers who are majorly looking to quit by
making them feel worried about their health as well as giving them the desire to try the E-
cigarettes as a quitting tool to support in preserving their heath before something bad happens to
them (Barbeau, Burda & Siegel, 2013).
The article uses logic to support their main purpose, for convincing the individual that E-
cigarettes are quite a bit safer than the tobacco, even though they are not fully safer for the
human being. Such article claim that E-cigarettes are already one of the most popular quitting
aids in both, United Sates and Britain which is claimed by the logical evidence that almost all of
the 2.5 billion users of e-cigarettes in Britain are smokers or ex-smokers that uses the tolls to quit
such addict (Cahn & Siegel, 2011).
The smokers are the main targeted audience for the article. A smoker is likely to take
such article into consideration if they do decide to try the e-cigarettes as one of the alternatives to
tobacco or one of the quitting aids. It may be possible for the smokers to faces problems in trying
to quit the cigarette, since tobacco is one of the most addictive drug as well as hard to just stop
doing after some time of use (Bell & Keane, 2012). The main aim of the author in this article is
directly towards the smokers due to the reason e-cigarette is the possible alternative to use the
regular cigarettes as well as by using the e-cigarette as they are putting themselves in much less
danger as comparison to the tobacco. In using such device in their regular routine, they are also

English 4
helping themselves to quit the smoking overall sometime down the line (Pearson et al., 2012).
The secondary audience of this article may be considered could be the parents of the teenagers,
as the teenagers are unfortunately exposed to such sort of things which is bit more often that one
might think. The parents who wanted to keep way the cigarette from their child as well as from
other kind of drugs may decide to read up on the e-cigarettes to inform their child that they are
not 100 % safer that the cigarettes even though they are still considerable safer (Choi & Forster,
2014).
From the above analysis it can be concluded that the author of the article has built a
successful argument as well as has probably achieved growth in getting more individuals to try
e-cigarettes. It is true that E-cigarettes are not fully risk free they may affect the health of the
individual but has just fraction of the harm. The author has achieved their main purpose though
pathos, making the people feels worried for the smokers and able to gain knowledge for E-
cigarettes. By using the logos, citing the logical evidence from the study that support their
argument that makes the article trustworthy to the reader.

English 5
References
Barbeau, A. M., Burda, J., & Siegel, M. (2013). Perceived efficacy of e-cigarettes versus nicotine
replacement therapy among successful e-cigarette users: a qualitative approach. Addiction
Science & Clinical Practice, 8(1), 5.
Bell, K., & Keane, H. (2012). Nicotine control: E-cigarettes, smoking and
addiction. International Journal of Drug Policy, 23(3), 242-247.
Cahn, Z., & Siegel, M. (2011). Electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco
control: a step forward or a repeat of past mistakes?. Journal of public health
policy, 32(1), 16-31.
Callahan-Lyon, P. (2014). Electronic cigarettes: human health effects. Tobacco control, 23(suppl
2), ii36-ii40.
Choi, K., & Forster, J. L. (2014). Beliefs and experimentation with electronic cigarettes: a
prospective analysis among young adults. American journal of preventive
medicine, 46(2), 175-178.
Etter, J. F. (2010). Electronic cigarettes: a survey of users. BMC public health, 10(1), 231.
Pearson, J. L., Richardson, A., Niaura, R. S., Vallone, D. M., & Abrams, D. B. (2012). e-
Cigarette awareness, use, and harm perceptions in US adults. American journal of public
health, 102(9), 1758-1766.

English 6
Zhu, S. H., Sun, J. Y., Bonnevie, E., Cummins, S. E., Gamst, A., Yin, L., & Lee, M. (2014). Four
hundred and sixty brands of e-cigarettes and counting: implications for product
regulation. Tobacco control, 23(suppl 3), iii3-iii9.