We Shouldn’t Ban Vapes
To the editor,
In the article “We Still Don’t Know How Safe Vaping Is,” the controversy of vaping is brought up again, this time, explaining the alleged dangers of e-cigarette companies’ advertisements. There have been numerous cases popping up everywhere about adolescents becoming ill due to vaping, and it is very scary to read about. However, as much as this article is attempting to display the dangers of e-cigarettes and the impact its having on children, its not giving credit to what the e-cigarette companies’ ultimate intentions have been all along.
I have lived with cigarette smokers for the majority of my lifetime. Both of my parents smoked, my aunts, uncles, distant relatives, family friends; you name it. I know what cigarette smokers go through as they have all vented to me about wanting to quit but not being able to. For the past couple years, my mother has been able to quit smoking cigarettes thanks to vaping. Although vaping is still inhaling chemicals into your lungs, she has proven it to feel less harmful on her body. She has told me she can breathe better, she can exercise longer, and she just feels a lot healthier overall. So, I know that smoking is an extremely difficult habit to kick, and I believe that the e-cigarette companies held innocent intentions when creating the cigarette alternative. I don’t think that they made these vapor products in order to hurt children or to make a quick profit. It can definitely prove itself helpful for people who intend to quit smoking tobacco.
Now, I am not stating that it is smart for adolescents to vape or smoke anything. It’s not safe for anyone who has not been a tobacco user to pick up an e-cigarette, as they should be used to help existing smokers quit. It has unfortunately gotten to that point due to social media, peer pressure, and accessibility of the products. However, just as children and adolescents got a hold of cigarettes back in the day, the same age range will always get a hold of the new smoking craze. I don’t believe it’s logical to punish the e-cigarette companies, but rather possibly enforce new restrictions and laws regarding who can buy the products. Without e-cigarettes around, people will most likely resort to smoking normal cigarettes, which can be more dangerous. If we want to help people get off smoking, there needs to be alternatives, so banning these alternatives all together will never fix the issue, and will possibly make it worse.
ahntkd99
carahall
andrewbecharaa
athenapup4
bane1900
bestbaker123
bmdpiano
comp0327
compclass8
cynicalwordsmith22
doglover441
drippydoughnut
drpaleontology
gcatt310
givemeclouttokens
hershey515
iamsleepy01
imagination4421
influenza123
jackso23
Jayv23
kraemercali
lazybear8
lelebxby
lg102015
lovericeandnoodles
lucbe219
morra2024
mpsj13
roses0102
Sub2MigzFilms
smellycat23
tenere84
thefrontbottom
voxpopuli75
whosyourcookie22
yankeefan25
Newspaperlessness 
Since you didn’t ask for any particular advice, I’ll restrain myself and respond only to your first paragraph, where I think I can be helpful.
Ask yourself for every sentence: A) What does this accomplish? B) Is all of that important? C) Could it do more? D) Could it do more in fewer words?
1. In the article “We Still Don’t Know How Safe Vaping Is,” the controversy of vaping is brought up again, this time, explaining the alleged dangers of e-cigarette companies’ advertisements.
A) What does this accomplish?
—It names the article.
—It says vaping is controversial.
—It says we’re hearing about vaping again.
—It says “someone alleges e-cig ads are dangerous.”
B) Is all of that important?
—No. It doesn’t matter that vaping is controversial.
—No. It doesn’t matter that we’re hearing about it again.
C) Could it do more?
—Yes. It could specifically refute the allegation.
D) Could it do more in fewer words?
—Yes.
2. There have been numerous cases popping up everywhere about adolescents becoming ill due to vaping, and it is very scary to read about.
A) What does this accomplish?
—It says vaping has been sickening adolescents.
—It says that we’ve been hearing about it everywhere.
—It says that the news is scary.
B) Is all of that important?
—No. It’s not important that we “hear about it everywhere.”
—That is, unless we want to blame the media for over-covering just one side of a news story.
C) Could it do more?
—Yes. It could pointedly accuse the media of anti-vaping bias.
D) Could it do more in fewer words?
—Yes.
3. However, as much as this article is attempting to display the dangers of e-cigarettes and the impact its having on children, its not giving credit to what the e-cigarette companies’ ultimate intentions have been all along.
A) What does this accomplish?
—It says the article is obsessed with the dangers to children.
—It says the authors are ignoring the good intentions of e-cigarette makers.
B) Is all of that important?
—Yes.
C) Could it do more?
—Yes. It could describe the good intentions of e-cigarette makers.
D) Could it do more in fewer words?
—Yes.
Put the three together and see if we have any repetitions:
Once the sentences are made to work harder, we see they’re all performing the same functions.
The actual content of the paragraph, reduced:
Granted, not every sentence can be that dense, but if we start with that super-tight construction every time, we get a real sense of our own argument, FrontBottom.
Does that help? Please respond. I quickly lose interest in feedback loops that don’t come back.
LikeLike
Thank you for your feedback, Professor. Unfortunately I don’t have much to dispute regarding your criticism. I will take what you have discussed into consideration when editing my LTE. I especially appreciate the “say more, write less,” however sometimes it is difficult to create a dense sentence. In my second paragraph, I definitely can reduce my background experience regarding smoking, but I think the last three sentences really help my argument. What do you think? Thanks.
LikeLike
I think you’re right. The last three sentence contain an essential argument.
Can we apply the ABCD questions? Of course.
That’s not exactly your point of view, so you would be unwise to adopt it unless your ethics are very flexible. 🙂
See how quickly it makes its points, though, without sacrificing pathos? Between you and me, I think targeting kids with an addictive product like nicotine is the devil’s work, so I can’t give e-cigarettes a pass. But for addicts they’re a godsend. (And if they had a non-addictive product for kids, I think they could have avoided this whole catastrophe.)
[important side-note]. I hope you don’t find this process adversarial, FrontBottom. “Unfortunately I can’t dispute your feedback” is not the emotion I’m looking to raise. I think I understand the feeling, but I just wanted to say for sure I want you to be energized and motivated by feedback, not beaten. You’ve got a lot to share, and all the talent you need to produce a beautiful Portfolio . . . with work.
LikeLike
I’ll definitely take your recommendation into consideration! Also, I don’t find this process adversarial, I was just joking because I know that feedback is a two way street. Thank you for your feedback, Professor.
LikeLike
I sent a reply to your feedback but I’m not sure if it posted or not. Could you let me know if you see it?
LikeLike
They’re invisible if posted by “Anonymous,” FB, until I discover them in the “Unapproved” folder and approve them. I found the one you left at 12:04 before I discovered this one.
LikeLike
FrontBottom, you didn’t make a specific Feedback request. I will return to offer feedback, but first I’ll respond to your classmates who gave me guidance about the sort of responses they wanted.
LikeLike