Smoke versus Vapor
The Tobacco Industry vs the Electronic Cigarette
Media Updates
Judge OKs imports of e-cigarettes, blasts FDA
In a sharply worded decision, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon scolded the Food and Drug Administration for trying to assert jurisdiction over the cigarettes, which are battery-powered or rechargeable devices that vaporize a liquid nicotine solution.
Read more on the "Vapor & the Law" page.
ASH UK’s position on e-cigarettes
Continued
Monday, 12 October 2009
To the Members of the California State Senate:
I am returning Senate Bill 400 without my signature.
While I support restricting access of electronic cigarettes to children under the age of 18, I cannot sign a measure that also declares them a federally regulated drug when the matter is currently being decided through pending litigation.
Items defined as tobacco products are legal for anyone over the age of 18. If adults want to purchase and consume these products with an understanding of the associated health risks, they should be able to do so unless and until federal law changes the legal status of these tobacco products.
For this reason, I am unable to sign this bill.
Sincerely,
Arnold Schwarzenegger
"I believe it shows wisdom on the Governors part by understanding that just because an arm of the government "declares" something illegal does not in fact mean that it is illegal and should be banned. We applaud the Governor for acting on the understanding that the FDA does not have the ability to "declare a law", but rather, they are an instrument and enforcement arm of the laws that are made and decided on by our judicial system and lawmakers" says Ellis, " It is about time a high level politician stood up for the rights of the people of the United States, and not for government and special interest."
Only time will tell if the lawmakers of California will get the message from the people and the governor and halt any attempts at banning e cigarettes prior to a federal ruling, or pushing for a 2/3 vote to override the governor and the people of California.
Saturday, 10 October 2009
Enough is enough, the Danish have said in response to calls for a total smoking ban in Holland.
The government has denied attempts to extend restriction on smokers.
This came about as a response to a suggestion to ban smoking rooms in hospitals.
According to the blog Velvet Glove Iron First, Danish health speaker said smokers were being harassed and; "Nobody is going to die, because they smell a little smoke. We must have places for the Danish smokers."
Ont. launches $50B tobacco lawsuit
Tue Sep 29, 7:40 AM
The province said in a news release it is seeking damages "for past and ongoing health care costs linked to tobacco-related illness."
"Ontario is taking the next step towards recovering taxpayer dollars spent fighting tobacco-related illnesses. We are joining British Columbia and New Brunswick in initiating a lawsuit to recover health care costs from tobacco companies," said Attorney General Chris Bentley.
The $50 billion figure represents the cost the province says it has footed for providing health care to smokers since 1955.
Relatives of Dallas musician who passed due to Chantix file a suit against Pfizer
Author: admin | Filed under: Tobacco NewsThe death of well-known guitarist Carter Albrecht shocked Dallas two years ago and became most famous case in the row of reports of severe health complications witnessed in people who started taking Chantix to get rid of smoking. Albrecht passed away on September 3, 2007, being accidentally shot to death by his neighbor, who didn’t recognize the musician in a furious man smashing the windows of that neighbor’s house at 4 am.
Continued
On Thursday, September 10, 2009, an ad-hoc group of electronic cigarette users, calling themselves the Alliance of Electronic Smokers, filed an amicus brief in the litigation against the FDA by two electronic cigarette suppliers.
Here is the information regarding their brief:
MOTION OF ALLIANCE OF ELECTRONIC SMOKERS FOR LEAVE TO PARTICIPATE AND FILE BRIEF AS AMICUS CURIAE
The Alliance of Electronic Smokers (AES), as an interested nonparty, respectfully moves the Court for leave to participate and file a brief as amicus curiae in this litigation in support of Plaintiff’s and Intervenor-Plaintiffs’ Motions for Preliminary Injunction.
ARGUMENT
As set forth in greater detail in the accompanying Brief of Amicus Curiae, AES is an ad hoc group consisting of current consumers of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) that would like to preserve their current choice of tobacco products – a right that is being eliminated by the efforts of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) improperly to exert regulatory authority over e-cigarettes. AES and its members are concerned that their right to choose a preferred vehicle for smoking pleasure could be infringed based on the outcome of the present case. Accordingly, AES and its members have significant interests in the outcome of this litigation. Moreover, AES believes that its perspective would be helpful to the Court in evaluating the merits of this matter. In particular, AES responds to points raised in the submissions by Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), which this court has granted permission to appear as amicus curiae. AES is including as Exhibit A hereto its proposed amicus brief with this motion.
Because the proposed brief responds to points raised in ASH’s previous submissions in this matter, AES believes its participation will not prejudice any party. Pursuant to Local Rule 7(m), undersigned counsel has conferred by telephone with counsel for the Plaintiff and Intervenor Plaintiff, and they do not oppose this Motion. Also, AES conferred with counsel for Defendants regarding their consent and, as of the time of this filing, was still waiting for a response
What is Going on with the FDA and the Electronic Cigarette?
For a continually updated report on the legalities regarding the electronic cigarette, please feel free to check in on this page here
Despite 98 Suicides and 188 Suicide Attempts, FDA Favors Chantix Over Electronic Cigarettes
Tobacco Control Expert Dr. Michael Siegel Calls for a Scientific, Not Ideological or Political Response to the Electronic Cigarette Issue
At the same time, the FDA which has approved Chantix, seems focused on keeping electronic cigarettes, which have yet to be proven harmful, from the public.
A growing number of tobacco control experts and medical professionals are questioning the motives of the FDA. Dr. Michael Siegel, associate chairman and a professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences at the Boston University School of Public Health, wonders why the FDA is threatening to take electronic cigarettes off the market.
Continued
Media Updates
I just couldn't resist passing this information on ... I can definitely feel a Class Action Lawsuit coming on alright, but I believe it will be the Electronic Cigarette Manufacturers investigating those possibilities when the proverbial smoke clears.
E-Cigarette Lawyers
Keywords: E-Cigarette Electronic Cigarette Lawsuit Health Dangers Lawyer
E-cigarettes (electronic cigarettes) could be dangerous to your health! Recent tests by the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) found that two popular brands of e-cigarettes contained carcinogens and other dangerous substances. Yet some companies that market e-cigarettes claims they are not as harmful as traditional cigarettes. What's worse, e-cigarettes are often marketed and sold to young people - even children.
Most e-cigarette users would be shocked at what was found in these devices. The hazardous substances included a highly-toxic chemical used to make antifreeze. The FDA also found that some e-cigarettes labeled as having no nicotine actually contained the addictive substance.
Our e-cigarette lawyers are investigating a potential class action lawsuit against the distributors of these highly dangerous products. If you smoke e-cigarettes because of claims that they are safer than traditional cigarettes, you may be entitled to compensation. Please contact one of our e-cigarette lawyers right away to protect your legal rights.
You can visit this website hereThis one is an older article, but I wanted to post it for you. It makes you wonder if they ever go back to read the posts that follow ...
Electronic cigarettes no safe alternative to tobacco, WHO warns
Last Updated: Friday, September 19, 2008 | 4:58 PM ET Comments Recommend 71
CBC News
Electronic cigarettes do not help smokers to quit as marketers claim and may be toxic, the World Health Organization said Friday.
The devices resemble a real cigarette, but consist of a stainless steel tube with a chamber that holds liquid nicotine. The E-cigarettes have been marketed as a healthier alternative to tobacco, and since they do not need to be lit, some people are using them to evade smoking bans in public places, the UN health agency said.
ContinuedE-Cigarette Supporters Grow Angry Over FDA Attempt at Prohibition
As trust in the government fades fast in the United States, they may be on the verge of another critical mistake: outlawing electronic cigarettes and giving smokers only two options: quit or die.
A recent laboratory study performed at the request of the Food and Drug Administration revealed ingredients in e-cigarettes that skeptics suspected all along. The minuscule presence of diethylene glycol, an ingredient that is found in antifreeze and certain levels of nitrosamines, were found in some cartridges.
Concern over the safety of these products is at a peak and the opposition questions the effects of the product on people’s health as well as the theory that the different flavored cartridges will attract children. Continued
E-Cigarette Public Smoking Bans Begin Use Of "Illegal" Product Prohibited Wherever Smoking Is
Also Included In: Regulatory Affairs / Drug Approvals
Article Date: 20 Aug 2009 - 1:00 PDT
E-Cigarettes Have Been Declared "Illegal" By The Food And Drug Administration [FDA], Their Sale Has Been Banned In One State And Several Countries, Paypal Has Stopped Facilitating Their Sale, Facebook Has Reportedly Dropped Their Ads, And Now One County Was Banned Their Use Wherever Conventional Smoking Is Prohibited.
Other Restrictions And Problems Are On Their Way For E-Cigarettes, Says Public Interest Law Professor John Banzhaf Of Action On Smoking And Health (Ash), Who Has Been Behind Many Of These Steps To Protect The Public From This Untested Product. A Letter From Ash Helped Trigger This Latest Restriction, One Which Will Prevent The Use Of E-Cigarettes In Any Public Areas And Workplaces Where The Smoking Of Conventional Tobacco Products Is Now Prohibited.
Ash Filed A Legal Petition Asking The Fda To Assert Jurisdiction Over The Product - Which The Agency Has Done By Prohibiting Their Importation Into The Country. Ash Wrote To All 50 Attorneys General, Asking Them To Take Legal Action Against This Illegal And Potentially Dangerous Product. One Attorney General Has Argued That Selling Them Constitutes An Unfair Trade Practice, And Has Obtained A Court Order Prohibiting Their Sale. Other Attorneys General Are Considering Similar Actions.
Ash, In A Legal Letter Sent To Paypal, Advised The Company That Providing A Payment Mechanism For E-Cigarettes "Appears To Be Aiding And Abetting The Sale Of These Illegal Products By Providing Payment Vehicles To Internet Sites Which Are Selling Them, And Doing So In Interstate Commerce And In Possible Violation Of Consumer Protection Laws In The Individual States."
Paypal Was Also Warned That: "As The Fda And Others Have Noted, E-Cigarettes Pose A Wide Variety Of Potential Dangers To Users, And Perhaps Also To Those Around Them, Both Of Whom Inhale A Mixture Of Nicotine (A Dangerous Drug) And Propylene Glycol (Which Is Used In Antifreeze, And May Cause Respiratory Tract Irritation)." In Response, Paypal Is No Longer Facilitating The Sale Of This Product.
In Addition To Nicotine And Propylene Glycol, The Fda Recently Reported That It Found In Samples Of E-Cigarettes A Variety Of "Toxic And Carcinogenic Chemicals"
Including Diethylene Glycol, "An Ingredient Used In Antifreeze, [Which] Is Toxic To Humans"; "Certain Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines Which Are Human Carcinogens"; And That "Tobacco-Specific Impurities Suspected Of Being Harmful To Humans - Anabasine, Myosmine, And ?-Nicotyrine - Were Detected In A Majority Of The Samples Tested."
There Is Every Reason To Believe That Many Of These Cancer-Causing Chemicals Are Also Found In The "Vapor" Given Off By E-Cigarettes, Says Banzhaf, Which Nonsmokers In The Vicinity Are Then Forced To Inhale. These Secondhand "Smokers" May Include Infants And Toddlers, The Elderly, And Those With Pre-Existing Medical Conditions Which May Make Them Especially Susceptible To Exposure To These Chemicals.
When Smoke Clears, E-Cigarette Foes Hazardous To Health
The agency also reported that of 18 cartridges tested, one contained diethylene glycol, an ingredient in antifreeze. The FDA threatened to remove electronic cigarettes from the market and to take enforcement action ” including potential criminal sanctions ” against product distributors.
Backed by the finding that e-cigarettes contain carcinogens and diethylene glycol, a number of anti-smoking groups and several other states in addition to Connecticut have jumped on the bandwagon, considering or enacting legislation to remove these "harmful" devices from the market.
However, the FDA failed to mention in its press conference that the levels of tobacco-specific nitrosamines (the carcinogens) detected in electronic cigarettes were extremely low, below the level allowed in nicotine replacement products, such as nicotine patches, inhalers and gum. The agency is not threatening to take nicotine patches or gum off the market, although they too contain detectable levels of carcinogens.
The level of the same tobacco-specific nitrosamines in conventional cigarettes is at least 300 to 1,400 times higher than what has been detected in electronic cigarette cartridges. In other words, you would have to smoke as many as 1,400 electronic cigarettes to be potentially exposed to the same amount of these carcinogens as smoking one conventional cigarette.
In fact, the FDA failed to perform the laboratory test of most importance: a comparison of the presence of, and concentrations of, toxins and carcinogens in electronic cigarettes and conventional ones. Scientific studies have demonstrated that conventional cigarettes contain 57 identified carcinogens, while electronic cigarettes have not been found to contain any carcinogens at higher than trace levels.
Take the time to read the rest of this article ... here
ATTORNEY GENERAL WARNS OF E-CIGARETTE DANGERS CITING RECENT FDA ANALYSIS FINDING CARCINOGENS AND ANTIFREEZE
By States News ServicePublication: States News Service
Date: Tuesday, August 18 2009
The following information was released by the office of the Connecticut Attorney General:
E-cigarettes, which lack FDA approval, are battery-powered nicotine delivery systems that produce heated vapor instead of smoke. Manufacturers and retailers claim e-cigarettes are a safer, healthier alternative to smoking.
The FDA, however, recently tested two brands, Smoking Everywhere and NJoy, finding both contained nitrosamines, known carcinogens. An antifreeze ingredient -- diethylene glycol -- was found in a Smoking Everywhere cartridge. In addition, nicotine levels varied more than 60 percent in cartridges labeled as containing a high concentration of the drug. Researchers also found nicotine in cartridges marked nicotine-free. Continued.
Firm wants e-cigarettes to be considered tobacco, not drug
- business and economy
- By NICOLE NORFLEET, St. Petersburg Times
Why struggle to be grouped with a product vilified for killing millions of people each year? At least for Smoking Everywhere Inc., it would be a step up from having its product regulated as a drug.
Smoking Everywhere distributes e-cigarettes, which can't be lit and don't have tobacco. They are battery-operated and contain cartridges filled with nicotine, flavor and other chemicals. The steel tube that is made to look like a cigarette turns nicotine and water into a vapor that is inhaled.
Company representatives will be in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 17 for a hearing in federal district court to challenge the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which wants e-cigarettes labeled as drug devices under its jurisdiction.
The FDA has not approved e-cigarettes as safe and has seized shipments being imported into the country.
Smoking Everywhere filed a lawsuit against the federal agency in April and sought a restraining order claiming that the FDA doesn't have the authority to control its products.
"It is an electronic cigarette, and a cigarette is not designed to stop someone from smoking ... so practically speaking, it would not fall under the definition of a drug," said Walt Linscott, a lawyer for Smoking Everywhere.
Smoking Everywhere and another e-cigarette company, NJoy, which is a plaintiff in the suit, have had about 50 shipments confiscated by the FDA, Linscott said.
Smoking Everywhere imports all its cigarettes from China. With shipments not able to pass through U.S. Customs, its distributors will eventually run out, he said.
The FDA asserts it is protecting consumers. Right now, it's unclear how e-cigarettes would affect users' health, said Judy Leon, an FDA spokeswoman.
"It is important for the American people to know what is in electronic cigarettes in terms of the chemicals and the dose of nicotine," Leon said.
In a court filing, the FDA proposes that e-cigarettes fall in the category of drug devices as defined in the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. They are designed, the FDA argues, to help in the treatment of nicotine addiction, which some medical experts have labeled a disease.
No matter how the companies market the product, e-cigarettes deliver nicotine, so the FDA has the authority to regulate them, Leon said. Smoking Everywhere claims that unlike nicotine gums and transdermal patches that the FDA regulates, its e-cigarettes are a safer alternative to smoking, not necessarily a means to quit smoking.
"A regular cigarette has no therapeutic value. ... It's not designed to provide a health benefit. It's quite the opposite," Linscott said.
David Drobes, a researcher who works in the Tobacco Research and Intervention Program at the Moffitt Cancer Center in Tampa, Fla.said that if e-cigarettes are not regulated now, the public may regret it later.
"If history proves anything, it is that companies that say they offer safer cigarettes really don't have the data to support that," he said, referring to light cigarettes advertised to have less tar and nicotine, claims that health advocates say are misleading.
The FDA announced July 22 that a laboratory analysis of e-cigarettes found that they contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, used in antifreeze.
Matt Salmon, president of the Electronic Cigarette Association, criticized the report as too narrow in scope and for not including a peer review.
"My personal feeling is that it was a lot more about public relations than public health," Salmon said.
(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service ScrippsNews | current events, culture, commentary, community)
Must credit St. Petersburg Times.
You can read the court documentation here.
Friday, August 07, 2009
Experiences of Electronic Cigarette Users Suggest that These Could Be Life-Saving Devices and that They are Effective for Smoking Cessation
I challenge the anti-smoking groups and the FDA to read all of these comments and then to reiterate their position that electronic cigarettes must be taken off the market.
These are all the comments from electronic cigarette users in response to Dr. Whelan's Washington Times op-ed piece. They are taken from the Washington Times site. I have not omitted any comments from electronic cigarette users, which is remarkable because there is not a single comment from a user who has not found these devices to be effective in smoking cessation.
"I smoked traditional cigarettes for 27 years.... 2+ packs a day. On June 11th, my first e-cigarette starter kit arrived in the mail. I opened it up and started using it. I have not had a traditional cigarette since that day!! Even if there are some risks associated with these products, it can NEVER be as dangerous as traditional cigarettes so WHY would the FDA (or anyone else) want to stop me and other smokers from using them??? THANK YOU Dr. Whelan for putting this in proper perspective!!"
"Do not allow this product to be taken off the market. It saved my life (my smoker's morning cough disappeared in 3 days after switching to an e-cig) and many thousands more. The FDA is being unbelievably hypocritical in this matter and it shows how politics and money, rather then genuine concern for public health, is behind everything they do. And this is coming from a registered Pharmacist."
eSmoke Cartridges - Lab Tested and Diethylene Glycol free
Posted on 7th Aug 2009 @ 5:26 PM
In response to the recent FDA report that found Diethylene Glycol in cartridges from our competitiors. We are pleased to announce that a recent third party analysis of the eSmoke cartridges was found to be free of DEG.
The FDA's report also backed up it's initial statement that e-cigarettes are no safer than real ones in an attempt to scare electronic cigarette users into returning to real cigarettes by alarming them about the carcinogens detected in the product, without telling them that that the levels were no higher than in nicotine replacement products and that they are 1400 times lower than in Marlboros.
Dr. Michael Siegel, a professor in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Department, Boston University School of Public Health with over 20 years of experience in tobacco control, primarily as a researcher stated in his blog titled "The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary" the levels of carcinogens found in the Electronic Cigarette compared to traditional FDA approved NRTs and real cigarettes. His numbers based on scientific findings showed the following:
| Maximum Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamine Levels in Various Cigarettes and Nicotine-Delivery Products (ng/g, except for nicotine gum and patch which are ng/patch or ng/gum piece) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product | NNN | NNK | NAT | NAB | Total |
| Electronic Cigarette | 3.87 | 1.46 | 2.16 | 0.693 | 8.183 |
| Nicotine Gum | 2.0 | ND | ND | ND | 2.0 |
| Nicotine Patch | ND | 8.0 | ND | ND | 8.0 |
| Swedish Snus | 2,400 | ||||
| Winston | 2200 | 580 | 560 | 25 | 3365 |
| Newport | 1100 | 830 | 1900 | 55 | 3885 |
| Camel | 3100 | 1400 | 2800 | 150 | 7450 |
| Skoal | 4500 | 470 | 4100 | 220 | 9290 |
| Marlboro | 4300 | 1800 | 4900 | 190 | 11190 |
FDA smoke screen on e-cigarettes
Cigarette substitute produces no deadly smoke
Article By Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan | Thursday, August 6, 2009 ... you can read her full article here it is extremely enlightening. Please also read the posting by Dr. Michael Siegal entitled "The Rest of The Story" posted August 7, you can find this posting here. It is important that the general public is aware of this controversy. Our Government needs to be informed so that this product is once again made available to the consumer.
The question being asked is: "'Are electronic cigarettes safe?" ... let's change that to "Are electronic cigarettes much safer than traditional ones?'" ......... the answer ....... YES
The reason the electronic products are being pulled off shelves and banned at our borders is because our Government and Health Canada are so concerned for our safety and are worried about our health. Okay ... if you believe that one, you're gullible enough to believe almost anything.
They are advising those Canadians who have used e-cigarette products and are concerned about their health to consult with a health care practitioner. As it turns out the only concern they seem to face regarding their health, lies in the fact that they are no longer able to purchase this product and are being forced to return to the deadly tobacco products they were trying to rid themselves of.
Health Canada reminds us that it has authorized the sale of a number of legal smoking cessation aids, including nicotine gum, nicotine patches, nicotine inhaler and nicotine lozenges. Here's a tidbit of info for you ... detectable amounts of carcinogens are also present in nicotine replacement products such as Nicoderm CQ and Nicorette Gum although both are approved by the FDA and nitrosamines can also be found in food and beverage items such as bacon and beer.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Comparison of Carcinogen Levels Shows that Electronic Cigarettes are Much Safer Than Conventional Ones
The FDA (and the anti-smoking groups), however, failed to do three important things:
First, they failed to disclose the levels of tobacco-specific nitrosamines that were detected in the electronic cigarette cartridges.
Second, they failed to test the control product (a nicotine inhaler) to determine the carcinogen level in that product.
Third, they failed to report the tobacco-specific nitrosamine levels in conventional tobacco products, including cigarettes.
- Name: Michael Siegel
- Location: Boston, Massachusetts
Michael Siegel ... I am a physician who specialized in preventive medicine and public health. I am now a professor in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Department, Boston University School of Public Health. I have 20 years of experience in tobacco control, primarily as a researcher. My areas of research interest include the health effects of secondhand smoke, policy aspects of regulating smoking in public places, effects of cigarette marketing on youth smoking behavior, and the evaluation of tobacco control program and policy interventions.
Warning to consumers
FDA Analysis Finds Toxins, Carcinogens in Electronic Cigarettes
By David Mitchell
7/28/2009
The idea that electronic cigarettes offer tobacco users a safer alternative than, say, a pack of Marlboros recently seems to have gone up in smoke.
Electronic cigarette works
Wed, 29 Jul 2009 15:31
The findings of a local medical survey into electronic cigarettes has shown that the technology can help smokers kick the habit. Doctors reported that 45 percent of South African smokers who used e-cigarettes were able to quit tobacco smoking within two months.
Over an eight week study period, doctors supplied 349 patients with Twisp (www.twisp.co.za). Of Dutch origin, the Twisp e-cigarette is an electronic device that delivers nicotine through vapour but without the tar, carcinogens or smoke found in standard cigarettes. All participating doctors agreed that e-cigarettes are a significantly more healthy alternative to conventional smoking.
BOSTON, July 27, 2009
Prominent Public Health Physicians and Tobacco Researchers Expose Double Standard in the FDA's Recent Study of Electronic Cigarettes and Challenge the FDA's Alarmist Attitude Toward the Devices
Contact: Thomas R. Kiklas, Director of Media, inLife LLC, 949-250-9600 ext 108, tkiklas@myinlife.com
A group of prominent doctors and tobacco researchers, including Dr. Michael Siegel at the Boston University School of Public Health, Dr. Joel Nitzkin of the AAPHP Tobacco Control Task Force, and Dr. Brad Rodu, Endowed Chair, Tobacco Harm Reduction Research University of Louisville, challenge the FDA to provide the full quantitative data of the study upon which the FDA has based its warning against electronic cigarettes. They are concerned that the FDA's disingenuous targeting of electronic cigarettes through a biased presentation of the scientific data has had significant negative impact upon the public perception of electronic cigarettes, when the best available evidence suggests that these have shown that the devices offer great potential to reduce serious health issues among traditional tobacco smokers.
The rest of this story
The FDA and electronic cigarettes
Page One ExaminerTim Worstall
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released the results of their study into the safety or not of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes). My colleague the National Examiner has a good round up of those results: or at least, the results as announced.
Your humble reporter has a nastily suspicious mind though: much of what has been said looks more like a combination of bureaucratic turf war combined with puritanism rather than impartial scientific research. The puritanism is that there are those who heartily desire to get rid of smoking, or anything like it, altogether and the turf war, well, which bureaucracy would ever say that they didn't want to regulate some aspect of life or a product? That's simply not what bureaucracies do. Continued
FDA Scams Public On E Cigarette Test!
Posted on July 23rd, 2009excerpt from Electronic Cigarette Reviews
A few months back, 2 of the top electronic cigarette companies in the US sued the FDA for stopping, seizing and sending back products that the FDA does not want in the US. So why do they not want them in the US? Because special interest NGO’s like the American lung association, american cancer society, ash, and a few other anti smoking Nazi groups hit the campaign trail to make examples of them. They completed preliminary test on 18 cartridges, and only ONE (1) had something in it that is supposedly harmful. This is the same government agency that leaves Chantix on the market after it is known to have killed over 100 people in the US and put thousands in danger and in mental stresses because of the affects it has on the mind (makes people want to commit suicide). This is just concerning cessation and alternatives for tobacco, read about other FDA corruption here.
“Electronic Cigarettes Not a Safe Alternative to Conventional Cigs”
Thursday, July 23, 2009
posted by Michael Siegel @ 12:40 PMFDA Lunacy: Product We Know Will Kill 400,000 People This Year - APPROVED; Product that May Well Help Prevent Many of Those People from Dying: BANNED
At the same time that the FDA made a big hullabaloo over the finding of traces of carcinogens in electronic cigarette cartridges, the FDA hid from the public the fact that it would be nearly impossible not to have detected these carcinogens in the cartridges because the nicotine is derived from tobacco and there are residual traces of carcinogens even in nicotine replacement products.
Moreover, the FDA also hid from the public the fact that conventional cigarettes contain and result in human exposure to diethylene glycol, not to mention the fact that they also deliver extremely high exposure to more than 40 different carcinogens, just a few of which are tobacco-specific nitrosamines.
While there is a theoretical risk posed by the diethylene glycol (DEG), it is not clear how high the level of DEG is in the vapor produced by the electronic cigarette and thus the dose delivered to the user is unclear. It is also not clear whether the DEG is present in just this one cartridge or whether the problem is more widespread. Thus, there is no clear evidence that e-cigarettes pose any harm.
What is clear, however, from the FDA testing, is that electronic cigarettes are essentially confirmed as being far, far safer than conventional cigarettes.
Thus, the FDA's decision to ban the much safer electronic cigarettes while approving the deadly conventional ones, is nonsensical.
I prepared the following table to illustrate the FDA's inconsistent treatment of various types of nicotine-delivering products:
| Nicotine-Delivering Product | Known Serious | Known Serious Adverse Effects | Effectiveness for smoking cessation | FDA Position |
| Electronic cigarettes | None | None | No proof, but anecdotal evidence suggests they are more effective than NRT | BANNED |
| NRT | None | None | No evidence they are more effective than cold turkey quitting | APPROVED |
| Chantix | None | Suicide | No evidence they are more effective than cold turkey quitting | APPROVED |
| Cigarettes | Will kill more than 400,000 people this year | Will kill more than 400,000 people this year | None | APPROVED |
You can easily see the insanity here. The product that we know will kill more than 400,000 people this year is APPROVED. The product which has no known serious health risks (although there remains some concern about DEG in some varieties) is BANNED.
The product which delivers nicotine, DEG, and 10,000 other chemicals (including toxins and carcinogens) is APPROVED. But the product which delivers nicotine, DEG, and none (or only traces) of the other 10,000 chemicals, toxins, and carcinogens is BANNED.
Even the FDA's position on Chantix is inconsistent with its position on electronic cigarettes. E-cigarettes are not known to be killing anyone, but they are BANNED. Chantix has been documented to have death as a serious side effect, and it is APPROVED.
Newsroom: Press Releases
Lautenberg Urges FDA to Remove Electronic Cigarettes from the Market Until Proven Safe
Electronic cigarettes, alternatives to cigarettes and other tobacco products, are battery-powered devices that use a vapor to deliver nicotine to smokers. When the smoker inhales through the device, air flow is detected by a sensor, which activates a heating element that vaporizes a nicotine solution stored in the mouthpiece.
Continued
"Popcorn Lung" Symptoms and Causes
What is, and what causes popcorn lung?
In 2004, The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported several cases of bronchiolitis obliterans in workers in a microwave popcorn plant in Missouri in 2000. Bronchiolitis obliterans is a serious and irreversible condition in which the tiny air sacs in the lungs become scarred. After investigation by the NIOSH (National Institute of Occupation Safety and Health), it was discovered that a flavoring agent, diacetyl, was used to give the popcorn a buttery taste, and that inhalation of this flavoring likely contributed to the development of the illness.
Do e-cigarettes cause popcorn lung?
It is not only microwave popcorn that contains dangerous chemical flavorings such as diacetyl. A study published in 2015 in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives showed that harmful chemicals associated with "popcorn lung" are present in many types of flavored e-cigarettes, particularly those with flavors like fruit and candy that may appeal to young smokers. Of the 51 flavored e-cigarettes tested, flavoring chemicals were found in 47 and diacetyl specifically in 39 samples. This suggests a potentially dangerous level of exposure via e-cigarettes to chemicals that can cause severe lung damage.
July 23rd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
It’s sickening that the FDA allows drugs like chantrix to be sold to stop smoking.It’s already proven itself to be a dangerous substance,people have become suicidal on that drug.
That same agency wants to stop me from harming myself accoriding to them by stopping my use of a personal fog machine mixed with nicotone,flavorings and propelene glycol.
If this gets taken away from me I’ll just go back to smoking regular cigarettes.
Surely with the 400 plus chemicals in those including MAOI inhibitors,arsenic and tar I’m not harming myself.
The FDA could care less about me,they just want more power to tell me what I can or can’t put in my body.
Regarding Diethylene Glycol:
Looking at the Health New Zealand study1, the presence of Diethylene Glycol was not tested for. They seem to have based their tests on manufacturer ingredient lists and known tobacco carcinogens.
So what is Diethylene Glycol? The MSDS2 shows that chronic exposure to Diethylene Glycol can cause lesions on the liver and kidneys, as well as damage to the same organs. In the case of inhalation, the only first aid recommended is removal from the source to fresh air. The toxicalogical information is as follows:
Quote:
Oral rat LD50: 12565 mg/kg. Skin rabbit LD50: 11.89 g/kg Irritation: eye rabbit, standard Draize: 50 mg mild. Investigated as a tumorigen and reproductive effector.
——–\Cancer Lists\——————————————————
—NTP Carcinogen—
Ingredient Known Anticipated IARC Category
———————————— —– ———– ————-
Diethylene Glycol (111-46-6) No No None
This shows that Diethylene Glycol is not a known carcinogen, nor is it expected to be found as one in the future. In addition, the dose required to kill half of the sample of rats tested is 12.565 g/kg and 11.89 g/kg for rabbits. Assuming this can be extended to humans, an average adult male would have to ingest 855.925 g to receive a lethal dose.
Is Diethylene Glycol the main ingredient in antifreeze? The EPA3 has this to say about antifreeze variations:
Quote:
Antifreeze typically contains ethylene glycol as its active ingredient, but some manufacturers market propylene glycol-based antifreeze, which is less toxic to humans and pets. The acute, or short-term, toxicity of propylene glycol, especially in humans, is substantially lower than that of ethylene glycol. Regardless of which active ingredient the spent antifreeze contains, heavy metals contaminate the antifreeze during service. When contaminated, particularly with lead, used antifreeze can be considered hazardous and should be reused, recycled, or disposed of properly.
Ethylene Glycol is the main ingredient in antifreeze. While straight antifreeze is toxic, the main hazard is from used antifreeze, which absorbs heavy metals.
What about Nitrosamines? Nitrosamines are carcinogens. Tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) are found in the liquid used by Ruyan in their cartridges. According to the Health New Zealand report1, the amount increases with the amount of nicotine, and the average is 3.928 Ng (or parts per billion [ppb]). The breakdown is as follows:
Quote:
Nitrosamines
0mg – 0.260 Ng (ppb)
6mg – 3.068 Ng
11mg – 4.200 Ng
16mg – 8.183 Ng
The highest amount found was in 16mg liquid, which had an average of 8.183 Ng. In comparison, Nicorette Gum (which is approved as an NRT) contains about 8 Ng. To put that number into perspective, Swedish moist snuff contains between 1000 and 2400 ppb nitrosamines, and unburned tobacco from cigarettes contains around 1230 ppb.
Study Link here
www.healthnz.co.nz/2ndSafetyReport_9Apr08.pdf