This all bears repeating as research was released recently by the John Hopkins University that showed every year more people think the electronic cigarette is a dangerous device.



What The Study Found

This new research was conducted by the John Hopkins University; it looked into people’s opinion about the danger of electronic cigarettes compared to a cigarette. They collected data from the last 4 years, and saw a downward trend in people’s belief in the electronic cigarette.

In 2012 over half of people asked thought that an electronic cigarette was better for you than cigarettes. By the end of 2016 that number had dropped down to 43%.

This can been blamed on 3 things; headline grabbing stories like exploding batteries, limited or mishandled studies with biased opinions (and the media extrapolating results from them) and overzealous health figures casting doubt on e-cigarettes.



Headline Grabbing Stories

We have talked about these issues before, but to reiterate, electronic cigarette batteries are just normal batteries. They are the same batteries which are in your phone or your laptop. That means that they are lithium ion batteries, if you treat them the same way as you would treat your phone or laptop then they should be fine.

Avoid breaking or tampering with them, do not get them wet, only charge them with the correct charging equipment supplied by the manufacturer and whatever you do, don't buy an electronic cigarette from the local market. It is that simple.

All of these stories in the media are a perfect example of what we mean when we say scaremongering. Scary headlines sell newspapers. If they are attention grabbing and instil fear, you get people reading.

This happens depressingly often. Many major media outlets are hungry for stories, and will trust the press release without doing extra research to corroborate and report the true story. And the problem is that the first story will stick in people’s minds; people never remember the retraction.

Added to this, you never hear in the media when e-cigs helped someone,as that isn't news. Same as you never hear of politicians who did a good job, they only turn up in the news when something has gone wrong.



Limited Studies

The blame cannot sit solely with the media though. New "research" about e-cigarettes comes out every once in a while and is full of dire claims and extreme language which cannot be backed up.  With many of these studies the testing used is flawed, the sample size is quite limited and the findings are usually orchestrated to push a specific agenda rather than report on the science.

The most infamous study like this was conducted by the University of California in 2015. In their study they reported that e-cigarettes were dangerous, they even claimed they were more dangerous than cigarettes. It made a huge stir and got plenty of media attention for the lead scientist.

The lead scientist, Dr. Jessica Wang-Rodriguez, even went on to declare that “I believe they (e-cigarettes) are no better than smoking regular cigarettes.”

However it immediately came under fire from the scientific community due to terrible science. It turned out they were the overcharging the e-cigarettes up to 10x higher then how they can actually be used. They then claimed that at this temperature e-cigarettes could be dangerous.

To put this perspective, if a study told you that running was dangerous for you, and then you found out the participants were made to run 10 marathons a day in order to measure normal exercise, most of us would recognize that study was flawed.

As you can imagine there was a huge outcry. Not only was the science wrong, she was twisting the facts further to make a headline. Only after heavy criticism from both the scientific community and the general public did Dr. Jessica Wang-Rodriguez publicly disavow her work and retract it all.

She later claimed that the media took her research out of context and twisted her words out of proportion. This may be true. The media did run with this story and make it even more sensational then it already was. However the original science was hers and she chose to publish them.

Although this was by far the most blatant study, it is by no means the only one. So next time you see a study that claims e-cigarettes are terrible for you have a look at the study behind the headline.  



Overzealous Health Figures

Many in the international health community can be just as bad. What started as a crusade against cigarettes (we obviously believe that smoking is one of the worst things you can do) has turned to a crusade against all nicotine.

Many suggest an abstinence only approach to nicotine, just stop cold turkey. And some people can quit without any help, which is great. But that doesn't help the majority of smokers.

What makes this abstinence only approach even worse is that the same community has proven that just stopping doesn't have the same success compared to using nicotine replacement therapy. That's why for years the health community has campaigned for harm reduction as it works much better in the long run.

So why do they insist on no-one using an e-cigarette? The answer is obviously different for each person, but the biased studies mentioned above have a lot to do with it.

Much of this so-called research comes from the USA, where even the Surgeon General warns against e-cigarettes. Which by itself is not bad, after all the US has some of the finest universities in the world.

But for some reason when a study comes out of the US they almost always compare e-cigarettes against not smoking at all. Which doesn't even make sense, of course non smokers will be better off!  But that's not what e-cigs are for, they are to help smokers.

E-cigarettes are designed as an alternative to smoking. And when you compare smoking e-cigarettes to smoking cigarettes, using the right e-cigarette will always be MUCH better for you.



The problem is that scaremongering stories and research that can barely be called science are quickly spread and extremely memorable.

Even when Public Health England, The Royal College of Physicians, Action on Smoking and Health and Cancer Research publicly support e-cigarettes as a better alternative to smoking, that can still not be enough. Most media outlets and scientists who are against e-cigarettes are missing the point – when compared to smoking cigarettes and consuming the 4,000 chemicals and 50 known carcinogens that they contain – e-cigarettes will always be a better option.

Sadly it's very easy for the 100 thoroughly researched studies to be drowned out by 1 headline. That headline might not hold any weight, but it grabs your attention.


If you want to make the switch to something that has been proven by repeated research to be 95% less harmful then cigarettes then you are in luck! You can get one of our starter kits for just £9.99!


About SMOKO Premium Electronic Cigarette

SMOKO Premium Electronic Cigarette is the UK’s leading brand of e-cigarettes.  Since starting in 2012, SMOKO has helped prevent the use of over 100,000,000 cigarettes. We have also helped our customers save over £32,500,000 in extra disposable income.

SMOKO E-Cigarette contains only the highest quality, pharmaceutical-grade ingredients which have been Made in the UK. The majority of e-cigarette brands sold in grocery and convenience stores, petrol stations and on-line use Chinese-made ingredients.

SMOKO Electronic Cigarette contain only 4 ingredients vs. the 4,000 chemicals and 50 known carcinogens found in traditional cigarettes.

Amazing flavour, realistic smoking sensation and quality you can trust

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published

Welcome to the Loyalty Points Demo Store :-)

Sign up and receive 5000 pts to test out in our Store.

Earning and redeeming SMOKO Credits

Earns you
Redeems to

Ways you can earn

  • Product Purchase
  • Refer a friend
  • Share on social media

Learn more about our program