Not satisfied with its efforts to ban tobacco and demonize its users, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is now taking aim at a potentially healthier alternative to traditional cigarettes, electronic cigarettes.
Electronic cigarettes (or e-cigarettes) are battery powered devices that emulate the look and feel of traditional cigarettes and deliver a vaporized nicotine solution directly to the lungs when smoked. The devices contain no tobacco and there is no combustion involved in their operation. They also contain far fewer carcinogens than other tobacco products, which may make them an excellent alternative to products like cigarettes, cigars and pipes.
Despite their potential, the federal government is not thrilled with the devices. The FDA has already halted 50 shipments of e-cigarettes at ports and borders around the country and some elected officials have suggested that these devices be removed from store shelves until their safety can be guaranteed by the FDA, who claimed in a recently released study that e-cigarettes contain cancer-causing chemicals such as diethylene glycol and some nitrosamines. Most media outlets have followed suite by warning of the dangers posed by e-cigarettes.
What nobody seems interested in reporting about the study, however, is its conclusion—which hardly warrants the critical reception e-cigarettes have received thus far. According to the EPA’s own report, both brands of e-cigarettes they tested contained “tobacco specific nitrosamines and tobacco specific impurities […] at very low levels,” and of the 18 nicotine cartridges that were tested, only one contained diethylene glycol, and only at 1 percent.
It’s also worth noting that the same chemicals the FDA warns are present in e-cigarettes are also present in many of the nicotine replacement therapies the FDA approves of. What’s more, absolutely zero deaths have been attributed to e-cigarettes since their introduction. The same is also true of instances of lung cancer.
So what justification is there for distorting the evidence and deceiving the public about a product that has the potential to save lives? There isn’t any. This is nothing more than scare mongering on the part of the opportunistic health nannies at the FDA and their shills in the media.
Comments
Okay FDA, tell me then... are electronic cigarettes safer than tobacco cigarettes?
Good article... it should be pointed out that pharmaceutical companies who profit off largely ineffective nicotine replacement therapies such as the patch and gum are the ones who do not want e-cigs in business more than anyone. I would be curious to know the dollar amount they spend lobbying to have e-cigs banned.
Wow, you mean in the year or so since e-cigs hit these shores in force from China, no one's gotten lung cancer yet?
Puh-lease.
This swill is just more misleading blaghh from the Examiner's self-chosen stable of "reporters."
The Examiner as a legit news outlet is going down faster than a bowling ball.
Gene, if the new devices haven't been linked to serious diseases like lung cancer, what reason is there to restrict or ban them?
And I didn't cite any industry paid think tanks. I cited, and linked to, the report issued by the FDA.
I was on the call with the FDA -- they definitely used withholding of facts to the MEDIA and the general media ate it up. Not one good question came forth. We waited for the chance to ask:
Why didn't you test the E-cig against a regular cigarette? Instead of a Inhaler -- also Why didnt you test the Inhaler for the same carcigens you tested the E-cig for?
Well reason is they would have to justify banning every NRT on the market today... E-cigs have less carcinogens out of any of the products on the market and are SAFER than a regular cigarette by magnitudes.
FDA tell BIG Pharm you dont want this check and start looking out for the health of America. If the FDA stopped E-cigs they would essentially send Millions back to regular tobacco.
Gene I was in the conference call and I have lab reports on E-cigs the amount of carcinogens in an electronic cigarette is way below the FDA's suggested level for GRAS safe for human consumption. Your steak dinner would have more cancer causing carcinogens in it lol.
The FDA, EPA and CDC have positioned themselves in quite the pickle.
The levels of TSCs in the E-cigarette are comparable to those found in the "safe" drug treatments. Which have been judged safe at levels found less than one part per million.
[healthnz.co.nz/Portland2008ECIG.pdf]
If you follow this link you will find the levels measured in the "blue air" found in bars and bingo halls is also known to be in comparable levels. Levels the entire medical cabal demanded bans due to risks from a toxin that no level of ventilation could cure. "There is no safe level of second hand smoke" was the battle cry and the tobacco specific carcinogens are the only component not also found in the numerous other combustion sources found in these very workplaces.
If there is no safe level, all NRT needs to be banned or if they are safe, smoking bans were promoted by the guile of exaggeration and outright fraud, perpetrated from within Gov. agencies and through numerous tax funded
(1) NRT approved by the FDA contains all the carcinogens they found in half the e cigarettes which means half the e cigarettes is safer than NRT's sold by the FDA
(2) Diethylene glycol is FDA approved in low concenrtations
(3) Nicotine and Propylene Glycol is FDA approved which means all the chemicals in these E- ciggies are FDA approved, why does the FDA want to band these devices, its pretty obvious. If we let them do it then we deserve whats coming. Pick up the phone and phone the FDA, by law they have to awnser all the questions you have. Show them that we have all lost faith in them and that it is very clear they do not care about our health but only about their own financial gain. I have made the call, stop writing songs and filling in petitions, pick up the phone and do something about it. Send the FDA these results and arguments on a dayly basis, start a email campaign, show the world how corrupt they really are. We have power, we are the public.
Your position is ridiculous. This is a drug delivery device, it takes a nicotine solution and potently delivers it. The FDA needs authority of this.
I doubt many, if any, scientists or public health experts, believe that in and of itself the e-cigarette is more damaging than a real cigarette.
The problem is, (a) the e-cigarette is implied as a cessation device even though it continues the kinesthetic acts, (b) it does NOT replace cigarettes for avid smokers trying to quit (even the feel of smoke/burn in the mouth and lungs have been shown to be a cue for smoking), (c) it uses nicotine which as been shown to carry health risks, and finally (d) it allows another avenue to smoking (not to mention they are marketing fruit flavors...who likes those?).
I do not know how people expect for a product that delivers a deadly chemical (nicotine, and it is potent in this) NOT to be scrutinized by the FDA. Until the FDA approves, like with other drugs, this needs testing.
Need to sue to have them remove all of Nic Patches and Gums from the Market.
Sounds like the FDA says it is dangerous, so the gums and patches have to be more so.
Once the appropriate business has taken the product under their wings; Big Tobacco or Big Pharmaceutical, and the appropriate sin tax and/or heavily loaded drug profits have been applied, the e-cigarette will be legal again.
Too much potential profit/tax was seen to be thrown down the drain with these contraptions. A smoker that switched to these instead of smoking regular cigarettes or utilizing Nicorette is a loss to Big[fill-in-the-blank]
>>Gene, if the new devices haven't been linked to serious diseases like lung cancer, what reason is there to restrict or ban them?
BECAUSE IT NORMALLY TAKES 15-20 years for lung cancer to appear. You want people to drop dead on the street at a puff??
>>And I didn't cite any industry paid think tanks. I cited, and linked to, the report issued by the FDA.
And swallowed and regurgitated the interpretations of this industry-- a cabal of manufacturers in an industry FAMOUS for warping science and misleading the public. For one thing, here they cleverly forget to mention that the effects of ingested nicotine are far different from inhaled nicotine.
The point of the FDA's analysis for me is that this industry is not to be trusted, and is in fact following directly in the footsteps of Big Tobacco in its race to cash in: it claims no nicotine--has nicotine; it claims no carcinogens--has carcinogens.
And you trust them??
Gene, the point is that you don't know if e-cigarettes cause lung cancer, and the evidence so far isn't helping your cause in the slightest. In reality, if the carcinogens in tobacco are not present in e-cigarettes then smoking them for 20 years won't make any difference.
And I didn't swallow anybody's interpretation. The numbers I cited came directly from the FDA's report, which I linked to in the article. I also never said, or even implied, that we should trust what the tobacco industry says about it's products. I merely explained that the hyped over e-cigarettes is not justified by the numbers.
Warning Of E Cigarettes Side Effects
You will start to feel better
You will start to sleep better
You will have more energy
You will stop coughing
You will stop wheezing
You will start breathing better
You may stop snoring and eventually ……..
You may stop smoking
So beware of these side effects!!!
They can be better for your health!!!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!