Ethical Dilemma #1: Nicotine in Beverages
Smoking and nicotine are bad for your health -- that's a fact. So why would an American company create a lemon-flavoured drink laced with nicotine? This 8 oz soda contains the same amount of nicotine as two cigarettes. The company is marketing this drink to smokers who find themselves in places where smoking is prohibited. But nicotine is a highly addictive drug. Those who oppose this product claim that it is the equivalent to putting a drug in a soda can. Meanwhile, supporters say that the lack of second-hand smoke from these drinks will make nicotine use safer for others. Moreover, because the drink is legally classified as a dietary substance rather than as a drug or cigarette, it is not currently subject to the rules that regulate the sale of drugs and cigarettes. The introduction of this product appears to be serving consumer want.
Read the following articles to further your knowledge:
Read the following articles to further your knowledge:
- Canadians may soon be able to drink their nicotine : http://www.canada.com/topics/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=e7d26bae-b5cf-4fac-99de-a9a2940a5c30&k=15452%20
- FDA Urged to Stop Marketing of “Nic Lite” Bottled Water Containing Nicotinehttp://www.tobaccofreekids.org/press_releases/post/id_0928
- New Nicotine Drink Takes Off At Los Angeles International Airport http://www.bevnet.com/news/2006/06-22-2006-NicLite.asp
- Nicotine Drink Touts Alternative to Smoking: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Health/story?id=2114263&page=1
So... what do you think?
What are the ethical questions that this product raises? Should it be legal to sell this drink in a corner store? Why, or Why not? Explain your position using information you have learned from the course so far as well as your own person opinions.
Hello Matthew
ReplyDeletehello mrs.browne
ReplyDeleteThe ethical question is : "Is it a better and less harmful alternative than smoking?" In my opinion, it should be illegal to sell this drink in a corner store. Due to health concerns raised by the public and that nicotine can lead to a risk of harmful blood clots, plaque forming on the artery wall, enlargement of the aorta and many more side effects. It shouldn't be allowed to be sold in public corner stores instead sold by private licensed retailers.
ReplyDeleteThis is Marcus btw
DeleteFor the most part I do agree with you Marcus although, I feel this product may have potential to be beneficial in some ways therefore, we should not shut down the idea so quickly.
DeleteHey Marcus, I'm curious. Is it the nicotine or the tar and other chemicals in cigarette smoke that cause all of those cardiac problems?
DeleteI also agree with you Marcus. Is NIC-Gum an alternative to smoking? These can not be purchased without ID. They are sold in pharmacies and some stores in Canada but are produced in America.
DeleteThe product should have labels to indicate that it is a nicotine containing product that is addictive and harmful.
Deletei agree with Marcus that it should not be easily accessible and should be restricted with who can sell it
DeleteI agree with Marcus that they should have more control of who sells it and who they sell it to.
DeleteI agree that in areas were one can't purchase a cigarette from a corner store, they shouldn't be able to buy Nico-Lite from there either. But I also think that the rule applies in both ways, and places that are authorized to sell cigarettes should be allowed to sell this product.
DeleteThe unknown is me.
DeletePosted on behalf of Devon:
DeleteI agree it shouldn't be sold in corner stores ,but I think a more useful solution would be to create awareness and not allow young people to get a hold of it rather than just remove it from stores because people will always find a way to get a hold of it anyway.
I agree it shouldn't be sold in corner stores ,but I think a more useful solution would be to create awareness and not allow young people to get a hold of it rather than just remove it from stores because people will always find a way to get a hold of it anyway.
DeleteI found the ethical question raised in these articles was "Is the beverage NIC lite a better alternative for smoking, not only for the person choosing this alternative but for the people around them?". Personally, I found two sides to this argument benefits and downsides to both. For example, it does clearly represent to be helping diminish the crave of nicotine for smokers at times at which they can not smoke; "I drank two bottles during the five-hour flight to New York, most relaxing flight. I’ve ever had,” said Dan K. who was a light smoker himself. This product can very easily reduce second hand smoke or a even be healthier alternative. With all the potential this product may have there was bound to be a disadvantage, selling this in corner stores allows easy access for children (even if this drink has an age restriction, fake ID's can be used) or people who think this beverage will not cause a nicotine addiction considering it can be observed as normal soda. Therefore, in my opinion, I think with further testing to show if this product is beneficial then it should be allowed to be sold by either private sellers or prescribed but a trusted doctor.
ReplyDeleteI was curious why the drink would be prescribed by a doctor if the drink has a drug in it?
Deletei agree with carter further study should been done and then if deemed safe should still be closely monitored by a doctor or someone in that field
DeleteI agree mostly agree with Carter that the product could only be sold in a store that is certified to sell this beverage, in the other hand I don't agree in the need of a prescription to buy this product, in my opinion you should only need an ID.
DeleteI found it very interesting to hear how it can help individuals on things like long term flights carter, but it would be interesting to see if airports would have to adapt and have ways of testing for nicotine.
DeleteI have a few questions: Are these products international? Why are they sold at shops as oppose to pharmacies? These products are being produced by, "an American company", What is the name of said company? I believe that these should not be sold at stores unless ID is presented. We know the contents and effects of said contents. This product should be classified a drug. This is so the consumer knows what they are paying for.
ReplyDeleteCan you please make sure to respond while logged into your google account? Otherwise, we can't see who you are. Alternatively, sign your name at the bottom of the post, please. Thanks!
DeleteSorry this is Kaam
DeleteThe ethical question being raised is: Are nicotine-laced drinks a healthier and more convenient option for nicotine users, or a harmful and addictive product that misleads its customers with false claims?
ReplyDeleteI personally think that both sides of the argument have valid points, and there is no one “right” answer to how this product should be handled. Obviously, nicotine is an addictive drug that is known to be harmful to one’s health. It is irresponsible to label these drinks as anything other than drugs when they contain the same amount of nicotine as two cigarettes. The company saying that their product is “safe” is false advertisement, full stop. That being said, there are obvious advantages Nic Lite. It is healthier for nicotine users to avoid the smoke from cigarettes, and nobody likes cigarette smoke being all but blown into their face as they pass by. Besides this many public spaces don’t allow smoking, and nicotine withdrawal can become dangerous. I believe that Nic Lite should face the same regulations as cigarettes when it comes to distribution and advertising.
I agree with Maggie, I think its dumb that they are labeling nicotine as a drink and not as a drug. I can also vouch that having cigarette smoke into your face is not fun (I am a hockey player) cigarettes are more dangerous to second hand smokers then the people who smoke.
DeleteI also agree with Maggie, its ridiculous of why nicotine is now being labelled a drink instead of a drug. The drink still contains the addictive substance and people will still get addicted. Nic Lite also still contains it and should face the exact same regulation as cigarettes.
DeleteI agree with most of Maggie's point's, but I disagree when Maggie claimed that it was false advertising when the Nic Lite company said that their product was safe. I disagree because I don't think that there is any harm in consuming nicotine other than addiction. Could you perhaps explain what is not "safe" about this product?
DeleteI just looked at the effects of nicotine (not smoking) on the body. I wanted to be sure before replying. I found that it can cause "dangerous blood clots, peptic ulcers, complications of the coronary artery, a risk of diabetes, decreased fertility, a larger chance of stroke, etc." Of course, I do agree that it is safer than cigarettes because the smoke is eliminated from the equation.
DeleteI used this article to research: Felman, Adam. "Everything You Need To Know About Nicotine". MedicalNewsToday. Thursday 11, January, 2018. https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/240820.php . Accessed :Tuesday 25, June, 2019 . (Reviewed by Deborah Weatherspoon, PhD, RN, CRNA)
I agree with Maggie that the label should have a warning that says that the product contains an addictive drug and a small not that warns you about the risk of using this product.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy ethical question is: Is the Nic lite beverage better than smoking? In my opinion I think the drink is just as bad as cigarettes and dangerous as cigarettes. My reasons for this are nicotine is dangerous and highly addictive by its self, nicotine may also contribute to the hardening of the arterial walls, which in turn, may lead to a heart attack. So, drinking it will have the same effects as smoking it. Nicotine is poisonous, 50 to 60 milligrams of nicotine is a deadly dose for an adult weighs about 150 pounds. But I also think it is better than smoking because it has the same amount of nicotine as two cigarettes but also, they might be more expensive so they would buy less. I think the advertising of the drink is bad because nicotine can cause birth defects and not a lot of people would know that, so I think when they advertise it they should mention pregnant woman should not have this drink. Fun fact: a light smoker will smoke less then 10 cigarettes a day and a heavy smoker will smoke a pack of cigarettes a day.
ReplyDelete"they might be more expensive so they would buy less." is a really good point, and one I hadn't considered. My only question is if one may consider the drink to be more healthy because of the lack of smoke.
DeleteHaving drinks instead of a stick to smoke is more convenient in places that prohibit smoking,
ReplyDeletethough some people way think this is better because you do not smoke it therefore it might make more people that have never had tobacco try it and get addicted to it, causing more addiction problems and deaths. And having tobacco in liquid will make people sneak it in to places where it is not allowed.
For the most part I see your point although, why would people be encouraged to drink it more then smoking if the ingredients are posted and easily visible to show the negative effects?
Deletesmoking tobacco has more cancer risk than drinking nicotine
DeleteMy ethical question is "Is the NIC lite a healthier option than nicotine?" For me, I don't believe that it's a better option, because there are two cigarettes in the NIC lite and it's a smaller bottle which leads people to drink more of the product which eventually gets more unhealthy. Also, we know the affect of inhaling nicotine into the lungs, but the NIC lite isn't getting inhaled and could have even more dangerous affects on the body. I think since people should get to chose whether they want to buy a product or not they it should be available in corner stores but with an age limitation because the brain still has to develop as a child and drinking that would be extremely unhealthy for a child. But, when the brain is fully developed, people should have the freedom of making their own choices, alcohol is not healthy but some people make the decision to drink it and others don't. the size of the drink will leave people wanting more, to prove my point cigarettes are expensive but because people are addicted they will pay anything to get the cigarettes. In one year people have spent 5-8 billion on cigarettes. Also, the drink shouldn't be categorized as a dietary substance whenever it is a drug because it has nicotine in it.
ReplyDeleteIt's cam, I'm logged in but it's not showing my name.
DeleteI completely agree with Cam, just because it contains a lighter dose of Nicotine doesn't mean it's still harmful. Nicotine can still get addictive so matter how large the dose is. Beverages that contain nicotine should also be categorized as a drug due to it's ingredients involving nicotine. It's also crazy of how people spend so much money on cigarettes.
DeleteThe big ethical question is…Should we be selling proven addictive substances to people? It should be legal to sell this drink at corner stores with an age restriction of 19, like alcohol. It’s important that young kids not be able to buy it and get addicted. It could be sold with nicotine gum and nicotine patches. Nicotine is addicting but at least it is not doing damage to people’s lungs when it’s in water. Nicotine in water may get people addicted to water and the water will hydrate them, so it is a win-win. They are satisfying their wants and they are also staying healthy by drinking it. I think that nicotine water is a want and not a need. If market research shows there’s a demand, than someone will come up with the supply. Since gum and patches already exist, I am for this product because it provides another alternative to smoking, which causes lung cancer and I don’t want to breathe the second hand smoke. I don’t like the idea of it being sold in a plastic bottle which is terrible for the environment if it doesn’t get recycled.
ReplyDeleteI agree with William on the point that these harmful yet addictive substances should not be legal to sell, I do not understand the moral behind these kind of businesses. My question is: since Nic Lite does not damage people's lungs because it is a water substance, does it do any damage to the digestive system? Wouldn't it be even worse than smoking?
DeleteAfter further research on nicotine I have discovered that is actually quite nasty. And yes it does do damage to the digestive system. Check out this link about the harms of nicotine https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4363846/ .
DeleteThe dilemma is that people can stop smoking and start drinking the nicotine beverages, but is it a better alternative way than smoking. The ethical question is, "Will the existence of the nicotine beverage do more good than harm to the public or will it do more harm than good?" People know there is a better and less harmful way to de-stress themselves other than smoking. And also how about the people who are already addicted to smoking, will the nicotine beverage be a less harmful alternative to smoking? Will it be more expensive than e-cigarettes or cheaper? If family members stop smoking to switch to this nicotine drink, will it be an overall benefit? For people who are already addicted to smoking, it's a healthier way to de-stress themselves but they could also get addicted to the drink instead and consume loads which will then lead to the danger of their health. It could be cheaper than e cigarettes which will lead to more consumers purchasing the product as it's also a better alternative way to consume nicotine. Smokers can benefit if the nicotine drink is cheaper, and it is healthier for them and their family members due to the fact that it doesn't involve tar or smoke. The government might be affected by less money received from taxes on cigarette products if more people switch away from regular cigarettes to alternatives.
ReplyDeleteI agree, my only worry about this drink is what it does to the digestive system, smoking nicotine hurts the lungs, chewing it hurts the gums, drinking it could eat away at the digestive systems like it does to the gums.
DeleteNicotine is in its self a big ethical dilemma that has been going on for years, from smoking to Nic Lite and now vaping. i think Nic lite is to much and is not a needed way of people getting there needed nicotine as there are plenty of other options and methods. i think ethically it is a bad option as just given it is a drink it would be more appealing to kids and teens which is a problem we are dealing wiith now with vaping and it is a good thing that some sort of stop was put on Nic lite. it all seems to have blown up and then fallen back down pretty quickly back in 2006 and i think thats a good thing and means we aren't still dealing with that problem today at least not on a large scale.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jonty. I was also very concerned about kids and teenagers would think it was "trendy" to drink Nic Lite, just like vaping. My question is do you think vaping or smoking would ever be banned like Nic Lite was? What do you think was the main reason that put a stop to Nic Lite?
DeleteMy ethical question is “What is the bottom line in business ethics?” According to the article, Nic Lite was invented to allow smokers to satisfy their cravings for nicotine when they are in places where nicotine is prohibited, like restaurants, airplanes and offices, places that were meant to be shared to spend quality time with their friends, family, and colleagues. We have to understand the fact that these places are the only restriction for some heavy smokers, but now that they have Nic Lite, they have access to nicotine 24/7, with absolutely no restriction. Is Nic Lite really providing smokers with convenience, or leading them to damage their health conditions even more. Although the lack of second hand smoke might be safer for people around the smokers, would you be able to sit comfortably and watch a dear friend of yours sipping on a perfectly advertised soda that contains the same amount of nicotine as two whole cigarettes. I think the company that created Nic Lite values their profits more than their ethics, it seems like they did not care much about the affect that can be caused: children and teenagers might mistakenly drink Nic Lite and become addicted to nicotine since it is not being considered as a drug or a cigarette, heavy smokers might loose the very few qualities time they could have spend with other people etc. I do not deny utility of Nic Lite but it should at least be labeled as a drug or a cigarette in the market.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Chole. This product allows an easier passage to addiction. If nicotine c can drink their Nicotine where ever, they will use nicotine more often. It is similar to nicotine gum,
DeletePosted on behalf of Devon:
DeleteI agree with this idea of how it creates a false sense of safety by not labeling it as nicotine like they do with other ways to have nicotine. I would like to point out that one of the major problems is that it allows people to use nicotine more often in non smoking areas and therefore increases risk and health danger.
I agree with this idea of how it creates a false sense of safety by not labeling it as nicotine like they do with other ways to have nicotine. I would like to point out that one of the major problems is that it allows people to use nicotine more often in non smoking areas and therefore increases risk and health danger.
DeleteMy ethical question is "Is Nic Lite a better option than smoking, vaping, or other products that could contain nicotine?" In my opinion this product could be better than smoking because you aren't inhaling any smoke or chemicals that you could find in a normal cigarette, but in the other hand cigarettes are not allowed everywhere especially in buildings and with the Nic lite beverage you could drinking it at al times, not like smoking.
ReplyDeleteOther thing is that minors could get easy access to it because they sell it in corner stores and change the container to a normal water bottle and drink it with out anyone noticing, or even worst they could take it to school and make use of it there or also sell it to other students.
I agree Gonzalo that this is a safer alternative, but can also be easily accessed by children. if you had to buy it behind the counter would that make a change for you?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe big ethical question for me is why should this product be aloud into the streets of our country and others. For me this brings up questions like where and when do people smoke, and it's fair to say that by having a concealed way for people with and addiction to get a fix, is much safer than smoke being permitted into the air.
ReplyDeleteAs I understand this has already been said, but I feel this product should not be sold at corner stores. but if this product where to be sold it should be treated and handled, like any other smoking or nicotine product.
Introducing this product to our communities could one of two ways, it could either become a safer way of getting people there fix without intercepting other peoples health in a harmful way. or it will become another gateway for people to get addicted to smoking and nicotine. Therefore i feel this product should not be permitted by the government or any government bodies.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNicotine in Beverages Post
ReplyDeleteNicotine is harmful to your health and just as addictive as heroin. So why are we letting younger and more irresponsible people get addictive substances like nicotine through easier ways? I think putting nicotine in drinks just ruins more lives and makes helping people harder. We should be helping those people to get off these items and help them help others. We can do this by making addictive items harder to get through ways like putting an age limit on them or a least only make them purchasable by people with an adult over a certain age with identification. In my opinion drugs, alcohol, and other addictive substances should only be able to be purchased from government certified places. We should also help those who are addicted so they can help others in the same situation.
Thanks for reading. I had a longer paragraph, but It got deleted and I forgot to save it. I think this summarizes the points I made in my larger article. I learned my lesson though. :0 ;)
-Devon Hansen