There is little to no mention of statistics that might show when, and therefore, why, cigarette smoking gained popularity. The author also fails to provide cultural context in many areas. Alleged masculine values ​​in America are presented as fact, when there is no evidence, other than the author's word, that this is true. The arguments would be much stronger if the author had managed to distinguish between correlation and causation. Sometimes the article is unbalanced, as in the case of the argument regarding post-World War II advertising. It is not shown in the article that there was a spike in cigarette smoking in men. Furthermore, it was not proven that advertising had an effect. The article ignores the possibility that the increase in smoking among men was simply a consequence of reaching out to certain opinion leaders. Since cigarettes are an addictive product, simple curiosity in the privacy of one's home may have turned some men into smokers. Overall the article is well organized and logical. Despite the abundance of unconfirmed statements, the alleged consequences of many of the listed events are credible. The article would be significantly more credible if there was a balance of arguments, or if the topics listed were less debatable. The article should be considered a working, even persuasive, rather absolute theory