Article Text

other Versions

PDF

You have been QUALIFIED for a smokeless e-cig starter kit
  1. Kate Hunt1,
  2. Helen Sweeting2
  1. 1MRC/CSO Social & Public Health Sciences Unit, Institute of Health and Well Being, Glasgow University, Glasgow, UK
  2. 2MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kate Hunt, MRC/CSO Social & Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Top floor, 200 Renfield Street, Glasgow G2 3QB, UK; kate.hunt{at}glasgow.ac.uk

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Shortly after the shock of seeing e-cigarette adverting on television, an unsolicited e-mail arrived promoting an ‘e-cig starter kit’ (figure 1). This showed ‘Megan’ (attractive, slim, elegant, professional, confident and happy) ‘smoking’ an e-cigarette, apparently on a plane. Incongruously, the e-cigarette billows smoke. The sender's address and titles of embedded links suggest the ease of trying e-cigarettes, and that e-cigarettes are healthy and inoffensive. Ingeniously, the advert can be read as showing that holding a cigarette object is attractive and socially desirable, and that e-cigarettes are (somewhat) distinct from ‘ordinary’ cigarettes.

Figure 1

Screenshot of unsolicited email.

Emerging research raises concerns over whether e-cigarettes renormalise and reglamourise smoking and/or act as a gateway to smoking.1 ,2 Within present legislation, ‘Megan’ can ‘smoke’ her e-cigarette in public spaces because e-cigarettes are not subject to smoke-free regulation. They can also be advertised, although some may question whether a smoking e-cigarette complies with guidelines.

In 2013, US Democratic Congress members wrote to e-cigarette manufacturers regarding marketing tactics likely to ‘hook’ young people,3 and posted a presentation highlighting parallels with earlier cigarette marketing.4 As gender and health researchers, we also note the strong resemblance to images of women in adverting which so successfully drew earlier generations of women to smoking.5–7

References

View Abstract

Footnotes

  • Contributors Both authors have contributed equally to writing this short piece.

  • Funding This study was supported by the MRC.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.