The electronic cigarette is new technology that allows smokers to get the nicotine they crave and the desire to "smoke" a cigarette fulfilled. What's missing is the tar, carcinogens, gross smell, and yellow teeth. Users swear by these little electric cigarette devices and claim that the e-cig is a better alternative to the very harmful, cancer causing, date repellent, deadly traditional cigarettes. They are not being marketed as stop smoking devices, rather as an alternative to traditional cigarette smoking.

So why is the FDA and a few uptight politicians racing to get these electronic cigarettes banned in the United States? Is this really about people's health? Pharmaceutical profits? Or taxpayers money?

While it is true that the electronic cigarette is still delivering nicotine to the inhaler, an addictive drug that can raise blood pressure. What is missing is the tar, and the cancer causing carcinogens, among the numerous other harmful effects of smoking traditional cigarettes. Gone are the many harmful chemicals found present in traditional cigarettes and the many health risks they create.

Electronic cigarette companies such as the source for color electronic cigarettes, NicotineGreen, upcoming Green Smoke, and the guys you see in the malls, SmokingEverywhere are hoping that things play out well. They are hoping that the government decides that this smoking vaporizer device should be allowed as a alternative to traditional cigarettes and that it be decided the cases and movements to ban electronic cigarettes be put down to rest.

It is unknown yet though whether that will happen. There seem to be too many individuals and organizations that benefit more by not allowing a more sensible alternative to convential smoking.

So what is the FDA's opinion on electronic cigarettes? The FDA is concerned that electronic cigarettes may draw in the attention of young teens under 18. There is no evidence of this and the current counter arguement by pro electronic cigarette supporters is what would be different in banning from teens then banning traditional cigarettes?

Speaking in favor of e-cigarettes is Joel Nitzkin. As the Chair of the Tabacco Control Group of the American Association of Public Health Physicians, he sent an open letter to Heather Zawalick of the FDA's Office of Legislation. The gist of his letter stating that it was absurd to consider the ban on electronic cigarettes on the premise that it is "based entirely on the undocumented assumption that electronic cigarettes may have the potential to attract additional teenagers to nicotine use and addiction."

It is Nitzkin's opinion that based on the available current research smokeless nicotine devices and products "promise a risk of illness and death well under 1% of the risk posed by cigarettes."

And what about those politicians? The first person to request the FDA impose a ban on e-cigarettes is Senator Lautenberg. Conveniently and coincidentally from Pharmaceuticals/Health Products companies he has received over $128,000 dollars. Is he acting in his constituents best intreste or his own? http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00000659