Media Coverage

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Firm wants e-cigarettes to be considered tobacco, not drug

Submitted by SHNS on Fri, 08/14/2009 - 15:04

• business and economy
• By NICOLE NORFLEET, St. Petersburg Times

Electronic cigarettes don't contain tobacco or tar, but a Florida company is fighting for its high-tech substitutes to be identified as tobacco products, not drugs.

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. You can read the court documentation here.

You can read the remainder of this article 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

While I agree that there is a need for research into the relative safety and effectiveness of electronic cigarettes, there is also a need for anti-smoking groups and the FDA to study the experience of electronic cigarette users with this product. The passionate testimonials of hundreds of electronic cigarette users suggest that these devices are effective in helping smokers to quit and stay off cigarettes.

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 as well as the Digg site for this article. 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.

The Rest of the Story

"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 coing 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

You can read the full article by Dr. Michael Siegel by clicking here

In another recent article in the Washington Times by Dr. Elizabeth Whelan who is the president of the American Council on Science and Health, Dr Whelan bashes the FDA's scare tactics about the electronic cigarette, stating it to be a very viable option for addicted smokers. You can read the full article on the Washington Times website by clicking here.

________________________________________________________________

Friday, July 31, 2009

List of Identified, Known Carcinogens in Electronic Cigarettes vs. Conventional Cigarettes, and Which Anti-Smoking Groups are Telling Smokers to Smoke

Based on the best available scientific evidence, I have compiled a list of the identified, known carcinogens present at greater than trace quantities in electronic cigarettes compared to conventional cigarettes.

Below that list is a table listing a number of anti-smoking organizations and which of the two products they have stated or implied they would prefer that smokers smoke.

Table 1. List of Identified, Known Carcinogens in Electronic Cigarettes, Present at More than Trace Levels (defined as 1 nanogram per cigarette)

None


Table 2. List of Identified, Known Carcinogens in Tobacco Cigarettes, Present at More than Trace Levels (defined as 1 nanogram per cigarette)

Benz(a)anthracene
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
Benzo(j)fluoranthene
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
Benzo(a)pyrene
Dibenz(a,h)anthracene
Dibenzo(a,l)pyrene
Dibenzo(a,e)pyrene
Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
Quinolineb
Dibenz(a,j)acridine
Benzo(b)furan
Furan
N-Nitrosodimethylamine
N -Nitrosoethylmethylamine
N -Nitrosodiethylamine
N -Nitroso-di-n-butylamine
N -Nitrosopyrrolidine
N -Nitrosopiperidine
N -Nitrosodiethanolamine
N -Nitrosonornicotine
4-(Methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone
2-Toluidine
2,6-Dimethylaniline
2-Naphthylamine
4-Aminobiphenyl
AaC
PhIP
Formaldehyde
Acetaldehyde
1,3-Butadiene
Isoprene
Benzene
Styrene
Acetamide
Acrylamide
Acrylonitrile
Vinyl chloride
DDT
DDE
Catechol
Caffeic acid
1,1-Dimethylhydrazine
2-Nitropropane
Nitrobenzene
Ethyl carbamate
Ethylene oxide
Propylene oxide
Methyleugenol
Hydrazine
Arsenic
Nickel
Chromium
Cadmium
Lead
Polonium-210

The rest of this story

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________

Thursday, July 30, 2009

Comparison of Carcinogen Levels Shows that Electronic Cigarettes are Much Safer Than Conventional Ones

The FDA last week condemned electronic cigarettes on the basis that an FDA laboratory detected carcinogens (tobacco-specific nitrosamines) in the cartridges of several electronic cigarette manufacturers. The FDA held a press conference in which it attempted to scare electronic cigarette users into discontinuing e-cigarette use (and therefore a return to conventional cigarette smoking). In addition, a number of anti-smoking groups, including the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids and American Lung Association, have called for a ban on these products due to this carcinogen scare.

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.

The rest of this story

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.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________

BOSTON, July 27

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

BOSTON, July 27 /Standard Newswire/ -- The FDA recently went public with misleading information about the safety of electronic cigarettes and the marketing of the devices, not only using its clout but recruiting other prominent organizations to demonize a product that has great public health benefit potential.

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


____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

October 21st 2008

E-Cigarette Clinical Trials

Clinical trials have now been carried out in New Zealand by Dr Murray Laugeson of Health New Zealand.

The test found that the E-Cigarette was:

"...very safe relative to cigarettes, and also safe in absolute terms on all measurements we have applied. Using micro-electronics it vaporizes, separately for each puff, very small quantities of nicotine dissolved in propylene glycol, two small well-known molecules with excellent safety profiles, – into a fine aerosol. Each puff contains one third to one half the nicotine in a tobacco cigarette’s puff. The cartridge liquid is tobacco-free and no combustion occurs."

Source: Safety Report by Health New Zealand http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/extra%20info/e-cigarette-safety-report.pdf (PDF)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________