A Philosophical Defense of Nicotine Use
When I switched from cigarettes to nicotine vapes more than a decade ago, I did so to improve my health and set a good example for my son. I’m proud to say that I achieved both of those goals, but there’s another fundamental point that often goes overlooked in the vaping debate:
Adults have a natural right to use nicotine; any attempts to infringe upon this right should be met with resistance from everyone who values their liberty.
No harm, no regulation
First and foremost, it is essential to acknowledge that the use of nicotine vaping products is a personal choice. Adults, as rational and autonomous individuals, have the right to decide what substances they consume, as long as these substances do not harm others. This principle, known as the harm principle, was first articulated by the English philosopher John Stuart Mill in his seminal work, On Liberty. According to Mill, “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.”
Smokeless nicotine is clearly not harmful in this context. It is a mild stimulant–not very different from caffeine–used voluntarily by adults for a variety of reasons, including to mitigate stress, reduce depressive symptoms and, most importantly, quit smoking. Unlike traditional cigarettes, which release toxic chemicals into the environment that can harm non-smokers, vapes emit aerosols that experts widely recognize as significantly less harmful to others.
In fact, a 2019 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concluded that “while e-cigarettes are not without health risks, they are significantly less harmful than traditional cigarettes.” In other words, smokeless nicotine reduces harm and thus there is zero reason to prevent adults from using it.
By criminalizing or heavily restricting the use of nicotine vaping products, governments are effectively denying individuals the opportunity to lead healthier lives. This is not only a violation of their personal autonomy but counterproductive from a public health standpoint. Liberty makes people healthier, in other words.
Personal responsibility, denied
Another important consideration in this debate is the role of individual responsibility. Adults who might choose to use nicotine vaping products should be aware of the potential risks and benefits, then make a decision based on that information. This is no different from the countless other decisions that adults make on a daily basis, such as whether to engage in extreme sports or drive a car—the latter of which kills people every day.Prohibiting adults from vaping nicotine because of the potential risks involved is therefore a hypocritical attempt to restrict a relatively harmless behavior more harshly than we regulate all sorts of far more dangerous activities. The bottom line is that adults have a natural right to use nicotine vaping products. It’s not a privilege granted to us by the bureaucrats at the FDA or the do-gooders in Congress. We make our own health decisions, they do only what we allow them to do. If they don’t like those rules, they can find new jobs.
