Are e-cigarettes really safer? My Response to the Monitor.

The Monitor recently published an article titled "Are e-cigarettes really safer?" and while I do have to say they are one of the few i've seen recently who tried to get both sides of the story, I did have a few comments to share about some of the quotes. I thought I'd post them here as well.

Over all it is a good article, they actually talk to some e-cig supporters and manufacturers, something the main stream media doesn't seem to see the need to do. But, of course, the anti smoking groups have their talking points well rehearsed and a few statements made it into the article which, in my opinion, were not fully accurate.

Here are my thoughts:

Nice to see you presenting both sides of the argument! Well, mostly. But I do have to point out some things.

1- American Lung Association comments that "When the FDA looked at 19 of these cartridges, they found half the samples contain impurities that are known to be toxic to humans." fails to tell the whole story. Yes, over half the cartridges did contain impurities, those specific to tobacco. These were the tobacco flavored ones, derived from tobacco, and naturally contained some tobacco specific impurities.

Quote from the FDA Report: "Tobacco specific nitrosamines and tobacco specific impurities were detected in both products at very low levels." *1

Notice it says "very low levels". The levels detected were on the scale of parts per TRILLION and "detected" as "the published method is quite sensitive for the TSNAs (i.e. LOQ’s of approximately 40 pg/mL or 40 parts per trillion)".

It is interesting to note however, that the three TSNA's tested for in the Nicotrol Inhaler were not at "detectable levels" but rather at very definable levels. Namely: Cotinine: .5%, Myosmine: .5%, Nicotyrine: .5%. It should also be noted these same impurities are found in the patch, the gum and many other nicotine replacement therapies that derive flavors or nicotine from tobacco.

To put it in perspective, if you add up the levels of all four of the carcinogens found, here is the comparison of their totals:
 
Electronic Cigarettes: 8.18 nanograms / gram (ng/g)
Nicotine Patch: 8.00 ng/ patch
Nicotine Gum: 2.00 ng/ piece
Marlboro Cigarette: Eleven thousand one hundred and ninety ng/g *3

So while the e-cigs did indeed contain carcinogens found in tobacco at "detectable" levels, they were far below the FDA approved device and on the scale of thousands of times lower than those in regular cigarettes.

2- "claims are disputed by the Food and Drug Administration, which has warned that the smokeless cigarettes are harmful"

Dr. Elizabeth M. Whelan, the president of the American Council on Science and Health calls the recent FDA press conference on electronic cigarettes "distorted, incomplete and misleading." She further states the FDA "was violating its long-cherished tradition of sticking to sound science as the basis for its policies. And in doing so, it is putting the lives and health of millions of Americans at risk."

Dr. Whelans final opinion on electronic cigarettes? "Any alternative acceptable to addicted smokers should be taken seriously. Instead of condemning the e-cigarette, the FDA should be sponsoring studies to evaluate its safety and efficacy -- leaving it on the market in the interim." *2

3- “The fact they present them in the shape of a cigarette, they’re trying to capitalize on the social aspect of smoking and trying to promote the social appeal of smoking.”

Well, yes. Doctors and studies have proven one of the hardest parts of quitting smoking is the social aspects, the habit of holding and sucking on a cigarette. It's not just the nicotine addiction smokers struggle with.  The e-cig does mimic that behavior and is one of the reasons so many users report finding e-cigs an acceptable alternative to smoking, people who have refused to quit using any of the methods the ALA would have them use.

They would also have you believe non smokers are flocking to try e-cigs to participate in this "social aspect" of smoking. However, there is no proof that is happening. I do not see non smokers picking up ecigs in an attempt to become addicted to nicotine, rather I see thousands of smokers using the device to free themselves from harmful tobacco smoke. You'd think the American Lung Association would support something that lowers smokers risks to the health of their lungs. The fact they do not raises many questions as to their motivations in their fight against e-cigarettes.

4- "What’s next? Telling you how many cups of coffee you can have?”

Indeed I'm afraid that is what is next. One of the most outspoken opponents of e-cigs, ASH, an anti smoking group heavily funded by Pfizer, maker of many smoking cessation drugs, is lead by a man who is suing fast food restaurants because parents "didn't realize feeding their kids McDonalds four times a week would be harmful to their health." These people are motivated more by a desire to tell you what you can do, while lining their pockets, rather than a legitimate concern over health.

The mantra amongst non smoking activists is a simple one: Quit with our benefactor drug company options, or die. They tell a drowning man "don't grab that plank in the water, you might get a splinter."

I say this: Where are the reports of harm? After five years on the market, there is not one lawsuit brought against an e-cig manufacturer that wasn't brought by a drug company funded anti smoking group, the government, or a professional class action lawsuit attorney claiming "unfair business practises" because to sue under that law there doesn't need to be any actual harm. Because they simply can't find anyone who has actually been harmed.

The sky is not falling. No matter how much the anti-smoking chicken littles cry it is so, they can not find one single injured party? One single case where an e-cig user claims damage? Instead they have hundreds of thousands of very vocal supporters who claim ecigs saved their lives.

The simple fact is, unlike many FDA approved drugs designed to help smokers quit tobacco, the e-cig has no flurry of reports of injuries, no flurry of reports of serious side effects like suicide, and for once big tobacco and big pharma face a serious competitor. Is it no wonder those who are heavily funded by them are so against e-cigs?




SOURCES
*1 Read more: Final Report on FDA Analyses http://electroniccigarettespot.com/electronic-cigarettes-and-the-fda/fin...


*2 Read more: President of American Council on Science and Health says FDA Misled the public http://electroniccigarettespot.com/articles/president-of-american-counci...

*3 The Rest of the Story: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/07/comparison.html