Electronic Cigarettes - Not As Completely Safe As Many Believe
92A New Wrinkle in Efforts to Quit Smoking
Important Information About Electronic Cigarettes
- E-cigarettes may be harmful, FDA says - baltimoresun.com
Electronic cigarettes - smokeless devices marketed as a way to deliver nicotine without the harmful effects of tobacco smoke - may be just as unsafe as the products they mimic, officials with the Food and Drug Administration said last week. For month - http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=309057
- FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic Cigarettes
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced that a laboratory analysis of electronic cigarette samples has found that they contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze.
|
LifeSign QuitKey Smoking Cessation Computer
Price: $49.95
List Price: $59.95 |
|
Yes! You Can Stop Smoking: Even If You Don't Want To
Price: $16.05
List Price: $18.95 |
Testing Finds Carcinogens and Toxic Chemicals in Electronic Cigarettes
Electronic cigarettes (e.cigarettes) are battery-operated devices which allow smokers to have a "smoking experience" (complete with nicotine if they choose) without actually inhaling smoke. Instead of smoke, the user inhales water vapor with flavoring and his choice of nicotine level.
The devices are generally made up of a battery, a cartridge, and an atomizer. Some e.cigarettes have cartridges that come with new atomizers built in. Others use a separate atomizer, which needs to be replaced periodically. Some e.cigarettes require the use of a separate liquid to be added to the cartridge by the user, while others come with sealed cartridges that are disposable once the cartridge has been used up.
Many of these devices are manufactured outside the US, and there are concerns with regard to regulating the substances found in e.cigarettes. (One company that points out on it website that it is an "American company" is Cloud Nine, however even their site does not specify that no ingredients/parts are manufactured outside the US.)
As of this writing, e.cigarettes are not being sold as "stop-smoking" devices. Most websites selling the devices will state that because the FDA has not approved the product to be sold specifically for that purpose, they are not allowed to market e.cigarettes as a "stop-smoking" device. At the same time, many people are using the devices as a way to wean themselves from tobacco cigarettes (called "analog cigarettes" in e.cigarettes circles). Cartridges are generally available with full-strength nicotine levels, "light" nicotine levels, and no nicotine. A variety of flavors is available, depending on the manufacturer of each brand. The devices are being sold as a way to smoke in places where smoking is otherwise prohibited. They're sold as being "safer" than "analog cigarettes". As an example, the company that offers Blu cigarettes states that the only thing in the cartridges is water, nicotine (when the user orders cartridges with it), and a "harmless" food additive said to be used in many food products. This, of course, does beg the question, "Is there a difference between eating a food additive and breathing it in?" I, personally, don't know the answer to that question; and it is not my intent to offer conclusions about the safety of e.cigarettes here.
There has been much talk about the FDA and the regulation of e.cigarettes. As of this writing the product is not regulated by the FDA. Some believe that the FDA and others are "out to destroy the e.cigarette market" because drug companies marketing stop-smoking aids (gums, patches, etc.) would suffer if e.cigarettes become the stop-smoking aid of choice. Few can argue, however, that without regulation of the substances taken in when e.cigarettes are "smoked", there is the chance that unsafe substances could be inhaled by users.
Although the FDA has not conducted extensive testing on e.cigarettes, some limited testing has been performed; and recent reports indicate that there is cause for concern when it comes to the safety of the devices. In a July 22, 2009, news release, the FDA reports the following:
"The FDA’s Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis analyzed the ingredients in a small sample of cartridges from two leading brands of electronic cigarettes. In one sample, the FDA’s analyses detected diethylene glycol, a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans, and in several other samples, the FDA analyses detected carcinogens, including nitrosamines. These tests indicate that these products contained detectable levels of known carcinogens and toxic chemicals to which users could potentially be exposed."
As with all products found to contain harmful substances, smokers considering using e.cigarettes (as long as they're available, and unless/until they are approved as stop-smoking devices) need to consider how much they plan to use the devices and for how long. It may be a little more challenging for smokers, but considering weaning from the number of real cigarettes smoked each day may make as much, if not more, sense as relying on electronic cigarettes. At the same time, people who have tried and/or continued to use electronic cigarettes often say that they are an extremely satisfying alternative to "analog" cigarettes and that they have used the devices as a way to replace their harder-to-break smoking habit with a temporary habit that is easier to break.
In any case, users and potential users of e.cigarettes should keep themselves informed, pay attention to the latest information available, and not be lulled in a false sense of security created by believing that e.cigarettes are guaranteed to be completely harmless. That it not the case, and no potential user or user should believe it is.
- Corruption | Electronic Cigarette Reviews, E Cigarette Reviews
- Response To The FDA | Electronic Cigarette Association
Video Response From ECA President, Matt Salmon: Below is the FDA press release and the rebuttal by the Electronic Cigarette Association. We also
- The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Health Group Claims FDA Performance Sta
- Press Release - Electronic Cigarette Company (eCigarettesChoice.com) Claims FDA Study Proves E-Cigar
Press release distribution and news syndication service. Affordable press release distribution site. - http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=5103
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Ask a Question
Comments
creativeMind, thanks and I agree; although I think people trying to wean themselves from that unhealthy nicotine do need to realize they may getting stuff they didn't realize they were getting.
You are rite about nicotine, but the other hazard i.e. smoke of a cigarette is reduced. BTW not many regular smoker can really switch to these cigarettes as I have seen a documentary about them on TV in which all smokers rejected it and same is with my real life experiences.
Ultimate Hubber, thanks. I don't have statistics on how many people do successfully switch to electronic cigarettes and then wean themselves off from there. I do know people who have done it. The main point here, though, is that the devices are sold as containing "only harmless water vapor", nicotine (in cartridges containing it) and a safe food additive. I do think people need to know that it appears the devices may not be as completely harmless and safe as many have believed until now.
And I though that this e-cigarette is totally safe! I was even going to give it a shot! Great info, Lisa, thanks for the warning.
shamelabboush, thanks. I'd heard of them and thought water vapor sounded pretty harmless too.
well i think it depends on if someone is addicted to the nicotine or the oral fixation... i think everyone is different and theres no 1 general thing that will work. (= ive tried alot of different things myself.
Interesting read...very informative. I quit smoking last January thankfully...and almost went this route as an alternative. Ironically I have only heard of a few people that have actually quit smoking using the E-cigarette...and they are addicted to the device now!
Cheers!
Sidney, thanks. It's great that you managed to quit. You're right about some people getting addicted to e.cigarettes. That's one of the concerns of those opposed to marketing them as a stop-smoking device.
Lisa, please do some additional research.
If you notice, the FDA did not post the lab results. However, various manufacturers of the liquids have sent their product out for independent testing, right here in the US (New Jersey, home of pharmaceutical manufacturers and MANY qualified testing facilities).
These lab reports are publicly available, and demonstrate the misinformation being provided by the FDA.
Joe, admittedly this Hub is based on information released to the public by the FDA, at least with regard to the safety of the devices.
Thank you for contributing additional information. Although it is not the aim of this Hub to dispute FDA information released to the public (although I have no reason to want to do defend it either), in response to your comment I'm adding links that "take issue" with the FDA information.
I had planed on buying so much of those E-cigarettes,I was like going nuts just thinking about it,thanks for the warning Lisa HW !:)
Waren E, I wish you would not see this Hub as a "warning", but instead as merely the mention of the FDA news that came out in July. As someone else mentioned, there are people disuputing it. Also, even reports of the FDA's result are careful to note that there were limited studies.
It's something I think people should be aware of, but I think we all have to wait to see what other information is learned.
interesting hub, I'm just curious how much could it be for a stick of e-cigarette?
leogonzales154, not sure what you mean about "how much" (money or potential hazard). Money-wise, and depending on what you get with them, starter kits begin at around $30 and can run up past $100. Some come with a certain amount of cartridges (which may or may not need atomizers or liquid).
As far as how much potential hazard could result from "vaping" one e.cigarette - nobody is certain; but I'd assume, as with real cigarettes, any potential hazard increases with how much anyone smokes/"vapes".
Great information! I use the e-cig and although it may have some potential hazard it can't compare to what the tabacco companies have put into a cigarette. I think like any new product it will take time to work out the snags
Monica, thanks. I agree about some of the "snags" that occur with some types of new products.
What I noticed the other day was that some pubs are banning the use of the e-cigarette, (in addition to normal cigarettes), so those looking for way to continue "smoking" indoors where normal ciggies are banned, may well end up being disappointed anyway.
mistyhorizon2003, thanks for contributing. I agree that that WILL be a disappointment to a lot of people who think they're going to get to "smoke" indoors. Of course, the question is whether second-hand water vapor (with whatever it does or doesn't have in it) is hazardous.
I stopped smoking via another route back on December 22nd 2008, this worked for me without drugs or artificial stimulants of any kind, yet not based on willpower alone, as I undertook a fabulous course that involved weekly phonecalls from a lady called Lela Bryan in San Francisco. I know it sounds a bit promotional, but it truly worked for me, and apparently has done for many others too. I can't possibly quote here all that it involved, but it seemed to me the best possible way to stop smoking, and all these months later I am totally convinced this has been the easiest way to achieve this. Electronic ciggies would simply have replaced one problem with another, as I would not have truly kicked the habit, or the reason for my smoking, (much like if I had used the inhalators that NRT offers).
I don't think anyone thinks they are "safe". e-cigarettes are water vapor, flavoring, nicotine (optional) and propylene glycol. The vast majority of people who smoke understand the risks. Cigarette some contains approximately 4,000 chemicals. e-cigarette smoke while not "safe" contains mostly water vapor. The FDA was given the power to regulate tobacco this summer. However the issue is not Big Pharmaceutical companies, it's the tobacco companies who do not want to give up their protected profits. It would be pretty hypocritical of the FDA to allow tobacco cigarettes and not electronic cigarettes.
Beware of electricity, it can do more than cook a meal!
Hi Lisa...glad to see you put up another great hub....this time you mentioned a very surprising item...which i never heard before....however...does it work?
This first time I saw this..was in the mall. I thought the lady was smoking inside! But she was just showing how they work.
MikeNV, thanks for contributing.
Jimcassa, interesting comment. :)
michelle.dragon99, with regard to whether or not they feel like real smoking, people generally say they do. Many I've seen/heard say they take a little getting used to but, in general, offer the feel of really smoking. They're not being marketed as a product to wean oneself from smoking, but some people have quit using them.
Bredavis, on YouTube there's an ad for an electronic cigarette that's really funny. It isn't supposed to be, but it shows a young woman smoking in all kinds of stores, etc., and then smoking under a "No Smoking" sign. :)
Good articles and good quality, thank you lisa.
Fandy, thanks for coming by.
This is really good, It will be effective for the persons who smoke regularly. It will reduce the harm produced due to smoking.
Nisha shan, thanks for coming by.
Despite get ridding of smoke suddenly, the electronic cigars could be quite handy. It solves the purpose of the smoker and doesn't spoil the health.
Shubhadevi, I'm not sure anyone is really certain about whether health may be affected at all, less than with real tobacco, or equally negatively. The ideal use for electronic smokes would be if people could use them short-term until they wean themselves from nicotine altogether.
I enjoyed reading your article lisa..Nice to meet you.
Riddick lucher, thanks very much. Nice to meet you too. :)
Very interesting topic.
I ever listened news about Electronic cigarettes.It's expensive but best seller. People most admire and it can stop smoking.
They are superb!
I have been using these electronic cigarettes for some time now and my throat has totally cleared up and i feel a lot healthier
These are interesting, I have not seen them before. Do they actually burn?
They don't burn. They do get a little warm (similar to what some cell phones do, but I don't think as hot as some of those can get). They have an LED light at the end (some have red or orange light, some have blue or green to show "onlookers" they aren't real). The light gets brighter as the cigarette is used and goes out. Part of the aim of the manufacturers is to "re-create the smoking experience".
There is a cartridge with an atomizer. When the user draws on it the water vapor comes through a hole in the top of the cartridge. The water vapor doesn't linger the way smoke does. It evaporates almost immediately after being exhaled. People can, though, blow smoke rings with it. If you look up, "electronic cigarettes" on YouTube you can see the product in action, as well as ads for different brands.
Very informative!
I've been curious to try these...not so much now...
Flowerfeeder, thanks for coming by. I agree, although it is always difficult for any of us to know whether we should believe agencies like the FDA (who have, at times, had or been influenced by "agendas"); or the private companies (not always known to be the most objective or "sleeze-free" either).
I agree that users of any product should stay informed of all of their options, particularly in something they put into their lungs. My husband has been using the e-cigs since May and he is thrilled with them. I have written a hub about our experience. They are a great alternative to smoking analog cigarettes.
Hi Lisa. I agree this was a great hub. I doubt anything is actually 100 percent safe to breath into our lungs... not even the air.
Anyways I am using the e-cig and it is a great alternative to tobacco which has been proven to kill ya. So considered one will probably, more than likely kill me or one that I can adjust to and hopefully quite smoking altogether one day, then the choice is rather clear to me.
Besides, there are so many carcinogens contained in tobacco that a couple of chemicals in the e-cig hardly have me worried. :D
Great hub though.
sandra, thanks for contributing. Based on what a lot of e-smokers say, apparently many feel the same as you do.
What a pity that the FDA is scaring people away from this quite sensible alternative. Thank you for including the article from ecigarettes.com, against the FDA warning, now that is informative! I have a neighbor who was planning to turn to e/cigs and decided against it because of the FDA scare. I still see her outside and she is still smoking and now without any alternative. A pity.
I just wanted to also note and don't be mad at me for saying this but diethylene glycol is not the chemical used in anti-freeze, ethylene glycol is. Both are derived from the same organic compounds but have very different effects.
The DEG absorbs moisture from the atmosphere. Which I am assuming is how the e-cig is able to stay moist... it makes a liquid solution. water and nicotine.
From what I understand, actually eating the deg is mildly toxic and was found to be lethal in high doses which apparently did occur in 2007. (toothpaste and cough syrup mislabeling products, china etc...)
As for nitrosamines. This is a nitrate found in foods like red meats that cause colon cancer... things of that nature. In large doses they can cause cancer because the nitrate has to either mix with something that is highly acidic such as stomach acid or fried (be made extremely hot).
Now, I know your hub was non biased and meant to be informative so I though I should add what these things are because I am one to believe that the FDA is being purposefully misleading because they do want their cut of the profits but that is totally my opinion.
rosariomontenegro, thank you for contributing. I don't really know what to think about the FDA's recent findings.
Sandra, thanks for your contribution. I don't know why you think I would ever be mad. The "safety aspects" of this Hub are based on those FDA findings; and if someone has information to refute those findings I more than welcome the contribution.
Electronic Cigrarette? I have heard this concept for the first time. I am a little bit skeptical about electronic cigarette but I am hopeful that it might reduce dependancy on cigarettes.
Vizay, I guess you are right to be to a little skeptical for now.
Non-smoking :)
Thanks for this hub and tackling the controversial subject of electronic cigarettes. I'm more than skeptical about the product but if it works for some people and there are a few less smoker's in the world because of it then why not.
I happen to think they are great. A few of us at the office use them. I haven't stopped smoking Marlboro yet, but it does keep me from going outside to have a smoke so often during the day. I also smoke much less at home. It does kill the urge and i have smoked for 24 years. SO! Even if its not completely safe look at what we get from a real cigarette! tons and tons of dangerous chemicals. I look at it this way. I would rather get shot with a BB gun than a 12 gauge shot gun. Get it? think about it for a minute.
beccas90, thanks for coming by. You've expressed my sentiments (and probably a lot of other people, apparently) exactly.
tarzan911, thanks also. You've echoed my sentiments as well (although I the gun analogy isn't one I'd thought of :) ). This concern does remain that until further testing is done nobody really knows if e.cigarettes are a BB gun or something else. One thing I think, though, is that even though nobody is allowed to market e.cigarettes as "stop-smoking" devices, many people do say they've managed to wean themselves off real tobacco with them.
I have looked at both sides, about a week ago I found a website that pointed out a study made in the 1940's regarding Propylene Glycol which is the main component of an Electronic cigarette, the results were ground breaking.
I could not believe that this product could actually be a germicide. Go to the website I found, ZigCigs.com and click on the icon “Health Concerns”, here is the link http://www.zigcigs.com
i cant bealieve that they have electronic cigarets now....... it causes cancer either way!
summerplace, thanks for contributing. I was amazed to learn that electronic cigarettes were available, and it struck me funny that real-tobacco cigarettes are now being called, "analog" cigarettes. :) In fairness to the e.cigarettes, there have no yet been enough studies to determine with certainty what kind of risk they do or do not pose.
To say that e-cigarettes must be banned because there are a couple of harmful substances inside nicotine liquid is to commit the perfectionist fallacy. There are more than 4000 harmful substances in a conventional cigarette when smoked.
Comparing e-smoking with regular smoking is like comparing two meals--one with 4% fat and the other with 4000%.
My health benefits from switching to e-cigarettes:
rainmakerrain, I agree with comment for the most part, and I, for one, don't think they ought to be banned at this point.
Still, what I would be concerned with wouldn't be (if it's accurate) the comparison is like that between a 4% fat and 4000% fat meal.
My concern would be whether, in fact, that is an accurate comparison; or whether it may eventually be discovered that risks are more serious than now believed.
Another concern I think people should have (and this may be just ignorance on my part, or at least awareness that long after substances/products have been deemed safe discoveries are often made to the contrary) is whether anyone will discover that "delivering" any e.cigarette toxins via water vapor may be a very different thing from delivering the same, or even more, toxins via smoke. In other words, might water vapor do something to the lungs or air passages that may make delivery of toxins "more effective" or "less effective" at causing damage than smoke may be. For example, I have heard that tobacco smoke is a kind of bronco-dilator, which contributes to "junk" getting trapped in the lung tissue. What I think people need to ask is, "What is the difference, in just that one way, between smoke and water vapor? Is water vapor more or less "effective" as a bronco-dilator? Might something like lung tissue actually be more receptive to water vapor than smoke, assuming (perhaps incorrectly) that there may be some kind of "defense mechanism" in place that may, in some way, make tissue less receptive (even if insufficiently so) to something as "foreign" as smoke?"
Another concern could be shown in the comparison between the meals above - only a question might be whether, fat aside, something else is present or some other process takes place with the particular combination of ingredients/elements in e.cigarettes. In other words, fat content of any meal aside; might it make a difference in the type of fat in each meal, or is there a chance something bad ingredient other than just the fat (that we know about) might be in one of the meals?
I want to stress that these "concerns" are only things I've "imagined up" on my own; and that they could be completely ridiculous, but I think they are questions people may want to ask. Might it be a good comparison to compare real versus electronic cigarettes to, say, sugar and sucralose. Sucralose is said to be safe and natural "just like sugar". Both will sweeten a cup of tea. Still, there's something in sucralose that most people's digestive systems can have real (even if harmless, we don't know for certain) difficulties that sugar just doesn't produce. Obviously, there's something "going on" with sucralose. Again, maybe it's something harmless. Maybe one day it will be discovered that it isn't. For now, sucralose is believed safe. Still, the question might be whether this comparison might be a valid one. Digestive systems generally react very differently to the two different sweeteners, even though both are considered, "safe". Might lung tissue have a similar different reaction to x amount of toxins and/or even substances considered "safe" when delivered via water vapor and in the particular combination they are? Again, I think these are questions people need to ask.
Great job explaing about electric cigarettes! I guess it theres no such thing as a smoke free cigarette out there.
maymong, thanks.
Sorry to play the devil's advocate, but like Sandra and MikeNV, I'm suspicious and outraged at the hasty, pre-mature FDA reports discrediting all e-cigarettes.
I respectfully submit some published facts that are not new:
1-Tobacco cigarettes contain over 4,000 carcinogens.
2-Smoking,(i.e. inhaling a burning product, whether it be tobacco, or lettuce, produces deadly vapors.
2-Electronic cigarettes do not burn any substance. If you analyze each ingredient using a simple Google search, you'll see that 99.5% of e-cig products contain harmless food additives and pure water. Even Propelyne Glycol is found in mouthwash, beer and baby wipes. Diethylene Glycol is not found in antifreeze, but even if it was..so is water. The word "antifreeze"got the public's attention!
3- E-cigs have been on the market for 3 years. There have been no documented health issues reported.
3- Other products approved by the FDA including the smoking cessation drug Chantix, have serious side effects.(you watch television commercials, right?) Chantrix has only recently been pulled from the market, 2 years after the FDA confirmed 39 suicides occurred despite their product "approval".
E-cigarettes are clearly tobacco-free and are a potentially life-saving alternative for adult smokers. How bizarre is it to issue scare tactics and threaten to ban what is obviously a safer cigarette while continuing to permit the sale of tobacco cigarettes?
Although everyone reserves the right to be wary of any new product, forbidding smokers to use e-cigarettes until the FDA, Big Parma, and Special Interest Groups have approved them, (or more accurately found a way to make money off them), is like telling a drowning man not to climb aboard a lifeboat because it might spring a leak.
Green Lotus, thanks for taking the time to contribute.
There is an erroneous assumption that Nicotine causes cancer... it does not. Even the American Cancer Society has stated this FACT. Nicotine is present in many of the foods we eat... Tomatoes, Potatoes, and Eggplant are known sources.
Only 1 in 10 smokers will develop lung cancer. So something in the tobacco smoke is to blame, but how do you isolate it when there are 4,000 known chemicals and radiation?
Smoking is not safe. But electronic cigarettes are considerably safer by definition. The FDA has looked at a very small sample and no long term studies have been done.
I am not suggesting that people take up smoking, but for those who do the benefits of removing the chemicals found in tobacco smoke are quite large.
MikeNV, thanks for contributing. I think many people do realize that any health problems associated with nicotine are not necessarily the same the as those caused by the other toxins in tobacco; but many may not.
Wow this is pretty interesting.. Before your hub, i wasn't aware that there were such things as e-cigarettes.
Very good posting Lisa. I don't believe these e-cigs can be any better for you then the regulars. I'm a long time smoker currently cutting back my intake regularly to stop all together. Think about this. These cigarettes are powered by a battery. Do people not think that batteries contain various poisons and toxins? Have you heard of battery acid? not sure what's all in battery acid but do we want to intake this stuff if leaking into the evaporated water? I surely don't. It's common sense to know that neither regular tobacco nor the e-cigarette is anything but bad for any of us. I'll continue cutting back and quit altogether. Thanks for the information.
bryguy1, thanks for contributing.
Great information! This is pretty interestin. Very good posting Lisa
Good post and good read, thanks
Heck, if sounds like the smoke generators that they used to help firefighters learn after several years of saying it was safe they found out it wasn't as safe as first thought. I always hear the ads on the radio for these and wondered about them for those that do smoke. Thank you for the great information!
Wow. What will they think of next. I hope this really helps people stop smoking and increase their time to live.
What an interesting hub! And the comments are amazing on this one. Never knew this was such a hot topic (no pun intended).
Thanks for doing some research on this one. I'll follow up with some of my own, and pass this one on to others to check it out as well.
Many thanks
Nice to see this debate going on. I'm still very interested in e-cigs and can definitely see why the tobacco industry would want them to be banned.
magdielqr, thanks.
articleposter, thanks.
Isabella, I'm not familiar with the smoke generators you mention. Think I'll look them up out of curiosity.
Mr. Spartrisano, Duchess, christophallen: Thanks for commenting. It would be nice if people interested in using e.cigarettes could be certain they are safe (or at least safer than real cigarettes, which are now called, "analog cigarettes" in the e.cigarette world and which kind of cracks me up - kind of like saying, "analog petunias" or something :) )
Great hub I was actually using an E Cigerette to stop smoking myself it was great for the first 2 days but my throat started hurting and the damn thing started making me light headed. when i went to the guy who sold it to me and asked a few questions he said the symptems were all in my head and that the $175.00 cigerette was non refundable what a jerk. well anyway thanks for getting this information out. anyone considering this alternative i would advise against it. maybe it was just my reaction to the new "drug" but after 2 days I had a headache for a week. Since that I was smart and got the gum that worked great. I DONT SMOKE ANYMORE. anyone reading this should choose a healthy alternative
jem, thanks. It seems like you must have been getting way too much nicotine, so I'm guessing the device either didn't have a safeguard built in or else wasn't working properly. Apparently, the gum has worked for a lot of people - so congratulations on quitting.
Thanks Lisa
interesting hub i ever seen
Filipino girls, thanks.
Well I just bought them. I have tried everything to stop smoking that was no so good either. I am going to give it a month to see. I would like to guit. To those that have never smoked. It is the hardest thing to do. please wish me luck
Trudy, good luck. Why not come back and let us know how it works out.
hmmm...I almost bought one today. Trudy please let me know how it works out. Lisa, thanks for the article...I am glad I didn't proceed with my purchase. But now I really need to stop smoking it is Hard!
It's amazing how clever advertising can make people think these will help stop smoking - even though they cannot state that! I find it incredible that anyone who already smokes would think that this could be free of any dangers - anything with nicotine in it, or smoke in it is dangerous - maybe not for the lungs, but certainly for the mouth! I remember when tobacco chewing became the rage as it didn't cause lung cancer - it ended causing mouth and throat cancer which is just as dangerous.
I ithink you make a great point that people need to keep informed about the dangers...
Tammyfrost, no doubt "breaking up is hard to do" (when you're trying to "break up" with smoking). Good luck.
Simey, thanks for reminded folks about the chewing tobacco problem; but I don't really think it's advertising that is making e.cigarettes appeal to people who want to quit. As you said, companies aren't allowed to market the product as a stop-smoking device. I think people are seeing the product, knowing that there is no smoke or tobacco involved, and seeing it as a potentially good way to wean themselves from tobacco (and eventually nicotine).
There do remain concerns about what appears to be toxins with e.cigarettes; although if it's true that they're substantially lower than in "analog" cigarettes, and if there are no hazards that are exclusive to the e.cigarette; they may still be a better choice than real smoke/tobacco.
You're right. People need to keep informed.
And I though that this e-cigarette is totally safe! I was even going to give it a shot! Great info, Lisa, thanks for the warning.
Lis HW - A very good writeup ! Here is a question that MAY need asking: What is the effect of the airborne nicotine and the propylene glycol on bystanders of these e-ciggies when they are in use? That should be a nifty new hub for you to embark upon. :-)))
Gus, it is said that the water vapor evaporates almost immediately, rather than lingering the way real smoke does. Finding the scientifically accurate answer to this question would take some research, of course, but if it's true that the numbers are dramatically lower in e.cigarettes, and in view of the fact that the vapor is somewhat less than real smoke from cigarettes, and in view of the fact that what's left of the vapor (after inhaling) evaporates almost immediately; I would assume that a second-hand "issues" would be far less than with real smoke.
Another question to ask might be from where, exactly, would the user of an e.cigarette get any toxins - from the water vapor, itself; or from that AND any "incidental" taking in of the material in the cartridges.
Yet another question to ask is (if, in fact, there are second-hand toxins from the e.cigarettes) how would any toxins/chemicals compare to other things to which we are exposed (car exhaust, smoke from wood stoves, cleaning products, municipal water supplies, food additives, etc. (My town had a perchlorate scare with the water supply; but we've also had a time when the water was unfit because of dangerous levels of chlorine. In testing something like water supplies, of course, it is usually a matter of "acceptable levels" as opposed to "zero". So, my question (with regard to e.cigarettes) is whether there is, in fact, "zero" second-hand "issues" more or less exposure to the same toxins that we may be exposed to routinely, or "acceptable levels" (and what is considered "acceptable levels").
I think that most are missing the point here. Yes, they are made in china, but most of the products you now own are made in china, including the nicotine patches that are FDA approved.
the glycols that they found are already in tobacco cigarettes, and are used as a humectant to keep the tobacco moist. There have been many studies: The e cigarette industry has sponsored three known studies on the products to prove that they are safe and the studies are public. The studies were completed by two different government approved clinical studies labs, one in the United Kingdom, LPD Lab Services, which is governmentally certified by the United Kindom Accreditation Service. In the UKAS’s own words, “accreditation by UKAS demonstrates the competence, impartiality and performance capability of these evaluators.” In light of this, the accusations that the study was biased due to it being funded by the brand that was being tested can be considered to be without merit and much the same can be said for the tests performed in New Zealand, since they were also performed by a internationally recognized company called Health New Zealand.
Health New Zealand was founded by Dr Murray Laugesen in 1995 after serving a full 18 years as an established medical officer in the Ministry of Health and in the Public Health Commission. He is one of the most recognized anti-smoking health practitioners in New Zealand and Australia and has been the recipient of numerous awards, including a medal from the World Health Organization in 1998 “for achievements deemed worthy of international recognition in promoting the concept of tobacco-free societies.” Dr. Laugesen claims that after having performed tests on e-cigarettes, they are 100 to 1,000 times safer than commercial tobacco cigarettes.
We have to ask the question of "who gaines" by e cigarettes being banned?
There was a recent study from south Africa that had a 45% quit rate over 8 weeks with e cigs. The pharma companies make 2.3 Billion a year on cessation products that average about 2% success in helping a smoker quit.
"E-Cigarettes Will Revolutionize The Face Of Tobacco Smoking And Could Pose A Threat To the Smoking Cessation Market " was the title of a pharm board meeting last spring, just for your information.
The new tobacco bill specifically protects tobacco companies. So if there was a real "problem" from the anti-tobacco lobby and politicians, they would act to BAN them, not protect them from ban.
This is politics as usual. They protect the real killer from a ban, protect big pharma against a potential 45% loss of revenue and the fed gov makes 2.33 per pack of tobacco sold. It is a win/win/win for tobacco,pharma and gov to keep the e cig out.
Now, any 5th grader can figure out that using 20 substances that are already in tobacco is safer than using the tobacco that has an additional 4 k ingredients. BTW, everything in the e cigs is on the FDA GRAS (generaly recognized as safe) list other than nicotine.
Now, do they work? I smoked for over 25 years, tried everything to quit, patches, gums, inhalers, even hypnosis, but I quit in April of this year with e cigs. I am in my 40's and can now run flights (plural) of steps, play with the kids, do not cough anymore, feel better, My appearance has improved and the list goes on and on.
I have since given 6 e cigs away, and only one of the 6 has not stopped smoking tobacco, and they are getting like results.
There is no doubt whatever that the FDA is corrupt.
The FDA’s test results prove what e-cigarette manufacturers and retailers have been saying all along: they are safer than tobacco cigarettes. The FDA has no intention of banning tobacco cigarettes (which are known to kill 400,000 people in the United States a year and contain 4,000+ chemicals) because the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act specifically prevents the FDA from banning them.
Passage Preventing Cigarette Ban:
‘(3) LIMITATION ON POWER GRANTED TO THE FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION- Because of the importance of a decision of the Secretary to issue a regulation–
‘(A) banning all cigarettes, all smokeless tobacco products, all little cigars, all cigars other than little cigars, all pipe tobacco, or all roll-your-own tobacco products; or
‘(B) requiring the reduction of nicotine yields of a tobacco product to zero,
the Secretary is prohibited from taking such actions under this Act.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=
Cigarettes may not be banned by the FDA nor are they authorized to force tobacco companies to reduce the nicotine levels in their products to zero according to this legislation.
One of the doctors responsible for the test results the FDA released this week, Joshua Sharfstein, the FDA’s principal deputy commissioner was the health policy advisor for Congressman Henry Waxman (the man who originally sponsored the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act which prevents cigarettes from being outlawed).
FDA Says…
In 2007, the FDA admitted that it is burdened with a “plethora of inadequacies” and is currently so underfunded that they are not able to properly do their jobs. As recently as July 20th of this year, the Government Accountability Office states that the FDA still doesn’t have enough money to do everything it needs to do and of the 500,000+ complaints filed against products, the FDA has no clue which complaints have been addressed and which ones have even been read.
The Truth:
That is the truth. The FDA doesn’t have enough money to do their jobs and while they focus their energy on eliminating a product that is safer than tobacco cigarettes and cheaper than the pharmaceutical drug pushers’ Chantix, Zyban, patches, and gums, people continue to die of smoking-related illness.
Before finding traces of melamine in US formula, the FDA had this to say about the melamine-contaminated infant formula in China: “FDA is currently unable to establish any level of melamine and melamine-related compounds in infant formula that does not raise public health concerns.”
Statement on Infant Formula Manufactured in China in October, 2008:
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformati
The very next month when melamine was found in trace amounts of infant formula made in the United States, the FDA had this to say:
“The levels we are detecting are extremely low. They should not be changing the diet. If they’ve been feeding a particular product, they should continue to feed that product. That’s in the best interest of the baby.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/26/world/ma
The companies whose formula contained melamine are Nestle, Mead Johnson, Abbott Laboratories make 90% of the infant formula sold in the United States.
Unfortunately, the point is this: the FDA will say anything if it fits their agenda.
Chemical and bacterial outbreaks have run rampant the past few years, salmonella being found in everything from tomatoes to spinach to peanuts and while they can’t seem to get their first priority under control (which is food), they concentrate on trying to control a product that has the potential to eliminate millions of dollars worth of tax revenue at all levels of government.
Read the FDA’s study results (not news articles about their study results) here:
http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ScienceResearch
sorry about the long rant, you know, a hub within a hub, but had to get some information out there that shows "the rest of the story"
Thanks for all the great info (including the comments) I was considering trying out these but on reflection, I think I will do a bit more research.
Jcorken, thanks for taking the time to contribute. I don't see it as a "rant" at all.
Ashley, thanks for sharing your own thoughts regarding e.cigarettes.
I read about electronic cigarettes a while ago, but this article did clear up a lot of things for me. Thanks!
First time I've read about electronic cigs, thanks!
Thanks jcorkern for posting the additional information about the FDA. I am a big proponent of e-cigarettes and broadcast the positive effects of vaping wherever and whenever I can. The more people know about this amazing, still relatively unknown product, the better.
This is very interesting. I was thinking about getting them for a family member but I think the pros and cons need to be outweighed before hand.
I think it is very important to have this device
I don't smoke alredy, thank God
Great to know! thanks for sharing.
I have a SCIO/ EPFX, a quantum biofeedback device, which works as a kind of electronic homeopathy. It has a special therapy to quit smoking that worked really well for a good friend of mine and he hasn't smoked again since 5 years ago I gave him the therapy.
I think any treatment can work but only if it has ONE indispensable special ingredient: the WILL of the person who wants to quit.
Without it, it is impossible.
Great Hub and good warning. There's only one way out of smoking, hard as it may sound: one should go cold turkey. Stop, and then you won't have to deal now with e. cigarettes. Cold Turkey, is the way to go- although its damn hard, worth a try!
Its a great idea.
Ive heard of people getting extremely addicted to these e-cigarettes, smoking twice as much as they would with normal tobacco cigarettes. Im not going anywhere near them.
I heard that they make you shake lol
partner just pointed out that her mate can't live without them
Very, Very interesting. I told my dad about these because of his terrible cough. I was hoping he would switch just to save his lungs somewhat. He ended up quitting cold turkey!
Very interesting. Pros and cons, like anything else.
I think the technology is great. I don't know much about the way the e-cigs are made, though.
I had no idea!
My thing is they are now saying that these will cause cancer. But to me everything is causing cancer. You can step outside your house and breath the air and get cancer. So really what harm is it going to do. The problem with non-smokers is they don't want to breath in the second hand smoke and they don't like the smell. I am a non-smoker and to be honest i like these alot better then the reg cigarettes. There is no smell and there is no smoke. So for people to say that it is harmful to the smoker so is walking outside your house.
Hi Jayme ,I agree with you .Everything have two side ,but we should compare the good and the bad .I think electronic cigarette is much healthier than real cigarette.
I'm not a smoker, but these things sound great. they A) remove secondhand smoke, B) contain only one 'bad' chemical (nicotene), and even that one isn't actually bad in these levels of doses, from what I've read, it contains no cancer causing chemicals in any quantity anyone should care about (Apparently one slice of toast that is slightly burned contains about a lifetime's worth of the amount of carcinogens the FDA detected in some of their tests) - I mean, hard to find anything wrong with it, aside for us non-smokers won't need to smell it or inhale second hand smoke, and if it causes the big tobacco companies to collapse then no more big advertising and kids getting sucked in to start smoking, etc. Hell, with these things, if they take off, and have even 1/10th the success rate they've been reported to have, in a couple of generations smoking will be such a small industry it'll barely be noticed.
Also, after reading all this stuff I'm curious to know how, say, a beer compares to one of these e-cigarettes in health factors.
Dan, thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts. I agree with your thoughts on amounts of potential carcinogens in any number of things. (I drank our tap water for about eight months before anyone figured out it had a chemical found in jet fuel in it - oh well....).
The electronic cigarettes do offer people the option of choosing "full" nicotine, "light" nicotine, or no nicotine.
I was a smoker for 30 years and was very concerned when I heard they found toxins in electronic cigarettes. I have been using the electronic cigarette for 16 months and my health has improved dramatically. During my research I found out what the FDA did not tell you: Many of the FDA approved quits smoking products contain nitrosamines similar to levels found in the electronic cigarette. Nitrosamines are also found in cured meats, fish, dry milk, and beer. You can use a keyword search nitrosamines in your search engine to verify this fact.
FDA Report Validates Previous Scientific Data. Findings Verify Claims By Manufacturers That Electronic Cigarettes Are Safer Than the Leading Tobacco Brand Cigarette.
On July 22, 2009 the FDA released the results of its own independent study of the electronic cigarette. The findings verify previous test results (1) which validate the electronic cigarette is up to 1,400 times safer than the leading brand of cigarettes. This is GREAT news for Electronic Cigarette users.
Previous studies on the e-cig (verified by the FDA Report) only show that electronic cigarettes contain very low levels (8.2 ng/g) of Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines versus 11,190 ng/g for the leading tobacco cigarette. (1)
(1) Laugesen M. Safety Report on the Ruyan e-cigarette Cartridge and Inhaled Aerosol. Christchurch, New Zealand: Health New Zealand Ltd, 2008.
Perhaps even more important than the findings of the FDA is what the FDA did NOT find.
The test did not reveal any of the 60 other known carcinogens (shown below)2 that are found in traditional tobacco products nor stated any other new dangers or findings that could conclude that the electronic cigarette is dangerous.
Known carcinogens found in tobacco cigarettes. (NOT found in Electronic Cigarettes)
Acetaldehyde Acetamide Acrylamide Acrylonitrile 2-Amino-3,4-dimethyl-3H-imidazo[4,5-f]quinoline (MeIQ) 3-Amino-1,4-dimethyl-5H-pyrido [4,3-b]indole (Trp-P-1) 2-Amino-l-methyl-6-phenyl-1H-imidazo [4,5-b]pyridine (PhlP) 2-Amino-6-methyldipyrido[1,2-a:3',2'-d]imidazole (Glu-P-1) 3-Amino-l-methyl-5H-pyrido {4,3-b]indole (Trp-P-2 2-Amino-3-methyl-9H-pyrido[2,3-b]indole (MeAaC) 2-Amino-9H-pyrido[2,3-b]indole (AaC) 4-Aminobiphenyl 2-Aminodipyrido[1,2-a:3',2'-d]imidazole (Glu-P-2) 0-Anisidine Arsenic Benz[a]anthracene Benzene Benzo[a]pyrene Benzo[b]fluoranthene Benzo[j]fluoranthene Benzo[k]fluoranthene Benzo[b]furan Beryllium 1,3-Butadiene Cadmium Catechol (1,2-benzenediol) p-Chloroaniline Chloroform Cobalt p,p'-DDT Dibenz[a,h]acridine Dibenz[a,j]acridine Dibenz(a,h)anthracene 7H-Dibenzo[c,g]carbazole Dibenzo(a,e)pyrene Dibenzo(a,i)pyrene Dibenzo(a,h)pyrene Dibenzo(a,i)pyrene Dibenzo(a,l)pyrene 3,4-Dihydroxycinnam ic acid (caffeic acid) Ethylbenzene Ethylene oxide Formaldehyde Furan Glycidol Heptachlor Hydrazine Indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene IQ 92-Amino-3-methyl-3H-imidazo[4,5-f]quinoline) Isoprene Lead 5-Methyl-chrysene 2-Naphthylamine Nitrobenzene Nitrogen mustard Nitromethane 2-Nitropropane N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine (NDBA) N-Nitrosodi-n-propylamine (NDPA) N-Nitrosodiethanolamine (NDELA) N-Nitrosodiethylamine (DEN) N-Nitrosodimethylamine (DMN) N-Nitrosoethylmethylamine (NEMA, MEN) 4-(N-Nitrosomethylamino)-1-(3-pyridinyl)-1-butanone (NNK) N'-Nitrosonornicotine (NNN) N-Nitrosopiperidine (NPIP, NPP) N-Nitrosopyrrolidine (NPYR, NPY) Polonium-210 (Radon 222) Propylene oxide Safrole Styrene Tetrachloroethylene o-Toluidine (2-methylaniline) Trichloroethylene Urethane (carbamic acid, ethyl ester) Vinyl acetate Vinyl chloride 4-Vinylcyclohexene 2,6-Xylidine (2,6-dimethylaniline)
I hope this information helps those who a considering an alternative to tobacco cigarettes.
Brian
Brian, thank you for taking the time to post all this additional information.
creativeMind says:
4 months ago
Still nicotine is going inside..!! Nicotine isnt safe to be inhaled.