There is little or no mention of statistics that might show when, and therefore why, cigarettes grew in popularity. The author also fails to provide cultural context in many areas. So-called masculine values ​​in America are presented as fact, when there is no evidence, other than the author's words, that this is true. The arguments would be much stronger if the author had managed to differentiate between correlation and causation. Sometimes the article is unbalanced, such as the argument around post-World War II advertising. In the article, it is not proven that there has been an increase in smoking among men. Nor has it been proven that the ads had any effect. The article ignores the possibility that the increase in smoking among men is simply a consequence of reaching a few opinion leaders. Cigarettes being a very addictive product, simple curiosity for the privacy of one's home could turn some men into smokers. Overall, the article is well organized and logical. Despite the abundance of unconfirmed claims, the alleged consequences of many of the events listed are credible. The article would be significantly more credible if there was a balance of arguments, or if the arguments listed were less contestable. The article should be considered an effective, even convincing, rather absolute theory.