Monday, April 27, 2009

E-cigs big tobacco ploy; Smoke Free Wisconsin

The electronic cigarette is under increasing attack from anti-smoker cultists who take a quit or die approach to tobacco control. The question is why?

In a recent article on their blog, Smoke Free Wisconsin declares unequivocally: “E-cigarettes: the latest ploy by Big Tobacco to hook kids”

The blog entry offers this advice: “Right now, e-cigarettes can be purchased in kiosks across the country and on the Internet. The FDA has not approved the use of e-cigarettes and there are no controls to monitor the age of purchasers. E-cigarettes are often made to look like conventional tobacco products and are marketed to kids by producing them in fruit flavors”.

The problem is that there is absolutely no evidence that the e-cig has any connection to the tobacco industry or that it is being marketed to children or to hook kids on smoking, despite coming in “fruit flavours”. And, it should be noted that the NRT (nicotine replacement therapy) products (Nicorettes, the Nicorette Inhaler, etc.) offered by Pfizer and other pharmaceutical companies also come in fruit flavours and are also available to children.

Smoke Free Wisconsin is following the lead of other public health advocates, including the American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. These groups have issued a press release commending US Senator Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey for demanding that the FDA remove e-cigarettes from the marketplace.

The press release notes that: "Makers and retailers of these products (e-cigs) have been making unproven health claims about their products, claiming that they are safer than normal cigarettes and asserting that they can help people to quit smoking. Absent scientific evidence, these claims are in blatant violation of FDA rules."

But that assertion is misleading. Visits to many different websites found no evidence that they were being touted as “smoking cessation aids.” Those sites reviewed carried a disclaimer that the e-cig was not intended for use by non-smokers, adult or otherwise, nor was it intended as a smoking cessation aid.

There are claims made on these sites that, because there is no combustion involved, the e-cig is free of the toxic compounds encountered smoking conventional cigarettes. But, this is a legitimate claim.

And there are a number of reliable experts in the field of tobacco control who support that claim.

Dr Joel Nitzkin, Chair of the Tobacco Control Task Force for the American Association of Public Health Physicians, for example, says: "...we have every reason to believe that the hazard posed by e-cigarettes would be much lower than one percent. So if we can figure that the nicotine in the e-cigarettes is basically a generic version of the same nicotine that is in prescription (NRT) products, we have every reason to believe that the hazard posed by e-cigarettes would be much lower than one percent, probably much lower than one tenth of one percent of the hazard posed by regular cigarettes."

Dr. Nitzkin notes the lack of any real research or clinical trials on the e-cig, and points out that what safety information is available is on delivery as a straight nicotine product. But, he notes clinical trials may not be possible. Any trials would require the participation of non-smokers, for example, because the outcome would be compromised by previous smoking habits if smokers were used. Such studies might never be approved. And, even if they were, they would likely take a decade or more.

So, an outright ban on the e-cig would deprive smokers of the potential harm reduction available through its use, likely in perpetuity. But if clinical trials are impossible, how could the relative safety of the e-cigs be determined?

Says Dr. Nitzkin: “Well, the first thing which I don't really see as research is quality controlled assessment by an independent lab on an ongoing basis, batch by batch, to make sure that the chemical content is not contaminated by heavy metals or cancer causing substances. They would also need to make sure that the doses are accurate as stated”.

Unfortunately, the anti-smoker cult doesn’t intend to endorse the harm reduction strategy advocated by some public health organizations and activists, because it may encourage young people to take up smoking.

But, let’s give Dr. Nitzkin the last word. “There is a danger. We don't know how much of a danger there is. Now let me put it yet another way. Cigarettes currently cause 400,000 deaths a year in the United States. If we get all those smokers to switch from regular cigarettes to e cigarettes or one of the other alternate nicotine delivery products we would reduce that death toll from 400,000 a year to less than 4,000 a year, maybe as low as 400 a year. Now, if we addicted every man, woman and child in the United States to e-cigarettes - we currently have 20% of the American population using tobacco products - and we'd multiply that by 5, so even at our worst estimates of 4,000 deaths a year you'd have 20,000 deaths a year that's still a huge reduction from 400,000 a year.”

A potential 95% reduction in deaths? So, just why is the anti-smoker cult so dead set against the e-cig.

3 comments:

  1. Excellent as always Rambler! :)

    I love this quote from the Antis: "Makers and retailers of these products (e-cigs) have been making unproven health claims about their products, claiming that they are safer than normal cigarettes and asserting that they can help people to quit smoking. Absent scientific evidence, these claims are in blatant violation of FDA rules."

    So here we have something that gives nicotine without the "4,000 deadly chemicals" from burning tobacco, yet the Antismokers say there's no "scientific evidence" that removing those chemicals makes the product any safer! Conversely it has to follow that theres no "scientific evidence" that the "4,000 deadly chemicals" pose any health threat to safety!

    Amazing.

    Now you know why I like to dissect their brains...

    :>
    Michael J. McFadden
    Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for sharing this great information, appreciate your openess to share this with the world. Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  3. The industry that funds the bans and funds the negative research, who also MAKES AND SELLS the No-Smoke products, does NOT want the competition. ... Kind of blows the 'second hand smoke' argument, doesn't it!!!

    ReplyDelete