E-Cigarette Banned in an Inhalator Scam
I have read so many comments on forums recently, mostly in American ones, complaining about how the FDA are trying to prohibit the sale of Electronic Cigarettes in the USA.
It seems so crazy to me that they have all the statistics right in front of them, all the information in the world telling them how dangerous cigarettes are and all the benefits of the E-Cig and they have the audacity to ban it! Aside from that, the majority of American smokers are in favour of electronic cigarettes, in fact they highly rate them!
One user of the Smart Smoker electronic cigarette said ‘This is the best alternative out there by a mile!’
Bill Godshall of Smokefree Pennsylvania said that, “denying 45 million cigarette smokers access to exponentially less hazardous smokefree nicotine alternatives would result in millions of preventable deaths among smokers, millions of nonsmokers continuing to be exposed to tobacco smoke pollution, and tens of thousands of e-cigarettes users reverting back to smoking cigarettes.” He also said, “it is absurd for the FDA to even contemplate protecting the deadliest nicotine products (cigarettes) from market competition by the least hazardous nicotine products.”
Smart Smoker is a very popular electric cigarette company all over the world and smokers who are trying their hardest to kick their habit are being forced to use other methods that are not neccesarily as effective or as wallet friendly.
What really gripes me though and I’m sure it will you too, is that the person influencing regulations on electronic cigarette sales in the USA is Senator Frank Lautenberg who has a vested interest in not allowing electronic cigarettes to become the most popular, healthier alternative to smoking. Known for putting a stop to smoking on aeroplanes, Lautenberg has now lost the plot in his crusade for a healthier America and rather than helping smokers, banning electronic cigarettes is just going to reverse all the good work they’ve already done for a vast amount of the public.
Let us know what you think!
July 24th, 2009 at 1:35 am
It’s sickening that the FDA allows drugs like chantrix to be sold to stop smoking.It’s already proven itself to be a dangerous substance,people have become suicidal on that drug.
That same agency wants to stop me from harming myself accoriding to them by stopping my use of a personal fog machine mixed with nicotone,flavorings and propelene glycol.
If this gets taken away from me I’ll just go back to smoking regular cigarettes.
Surely with the 400 plus chemicals in those including MAOI inhibitors,arsenic and tar I’m not harming myself.
The FDA could care less about me,they just want more power to tell me what I can or can’t put in my body.
Regarding Diethylene Glycol:
Looking at the Health New Zealand study1, the presence of Diethylene Glycol was not tested for. They seem to have based their tests on manufacturer ingredient lists and known tobacco carcinogens.
So what is Diethylene Glycol? The MSDS2 shows that chronic exposure to Diethylene Glycol can cause lesions on the liver and kidneys, as well as damage to the same organs. In the case of inhalation, the only first aid recommended is removal from the source to fresh air. The toxicalogical information is as follows:
Quote:
Oral rat LD50: 12565 mg/kg. Skin rabbit LD50: 11.89 g/kg Irritation: eye rabbit, standard Draize: 50 mg mild. Investigated as a tumorigen and reproductive effector.
——–\Cancer Lists\——————————————————
—NTP Carcinogen—
Ingredient Known Anticipated IARC Category
———————————— —– ———– ————-
Diethylene Glycol (111-46-6) No No None
This shows that Diethylene Glycol is not a known carcinogen, nor is it expected to be found as one in the future. In addition, the dose required to kill half of the sample of rats tested is 12.565 g/kg and 11.89 g/kg for rabbits. Assuming this can be extended to humans, an average adult male would have to ingest 855.925 g to receive a lethal dose.
Is Diethylene Glycol the main ingredient in antifreeze? The EPA3 has this to say about antifreeze variations:
Quote:
Antifreeze typically contains ethylene glycol as its active ingredient, but some manufacturers market propylene glycol-based antifreeze, which is less toxic to humans and pets. The acute, or short-term, toxicity of propylene glycol, especially in humans, is substantially lower than that of ethylene glycol. Regardless of which active ingredient the spent antifreeze contains, heavy metals contaminate the antifreeze during service. When contaminated, particularly with lead, used antifreeze can be considered hazardous and should be reused, recycled, or disposed of properly.
Ethylene Glycol is the main ingredient in antifreeze. While straight antifreeze is toxic, the main hazard is from used antifreeze, which absorbs heavy metals.
What about Nitrosamines? Nitrosamines are carcinogens. Tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) are found in the liquid used by Ruyan in their cartridges. According to the Health New Zealand report1, the amount increases with the amount of nicotine, and the average is 3.928 Ng (or parts per billion [ppb]). The breakdown is as follows:
Quote:
Nitrosamines
0mg – 0.260 Ng (ppb)
6mg – 3.068 Ng
11mg – 4.200 Ng
16mg – 8.183 Ng
The highest amount found was in 16mg liquid, which had an average of 8.183 Ng. In comparison, Nicorette Gum (which is approved as an NRT) contains about 8 Ng. To put that number into perspective, Swedish moist snuff contains between 1000 and 2400 ppb nitrosamines, and unburned tobacco from cigarettes contains around 1230 ppb.
Study Links here
http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2ndSafetyReport_9Apr08.pdf
http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/o8764.htm
http://www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/materials/antifree.htm#alternate
July 25th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
The FDA is a joke,What makes tobacoo cigarettes and better than an electronic cigarette? We know that the tobacoo & pharmaceutical companies are over a 100 billion dollar industry a year,which will be a hard backbone to break plus this electronic device is made overseas which is obviously not in the best interest of our nation to be sold here since the Economy is in great turmoil & our companies are falling apart, but god bless America and hopefully this new device will be judged for it’s safety and not for its profits!
August 6th, 2009 at 5:03 am
Electronic cigarettes are harmless. You get the nicotine, but without the 4000+ harmful chemicals that are in regular cigarettes. After using this product I can smoke anywhere .
Really it is an incredible invention by human being.:)
October 10th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
I’m pretty sure it’s all about money. I 2nd Tony’s comment,. it has nothing to do with safety,. it’s all about profits.
October 19th, 2009 at 11:33 pm
I am really interested in purchasing one of your products but I noticed at the bottom of the page that people with heart disease or high blood pressure should not use theis product why?
The doctor on one of the video’s stated that there was no cancer of harmful effects from electonic cigarettes.
I hope you can satisfy my curiosity as I am axious to purchase one of these for obvious health benefits.
Regards
Dizzy
January 17th, 2010 at 10:35 pm
I think the biggest advantage of the e cigarette is definately that you dont bother other people with your smoke anymore. I often felt bad for “poisoning” other people with my smoke.
I wonder why the FDA is causing troubles with the e cigarette. Its a great tool for many smokers to slowly quit. Just reduce the dose nicotine once in a while until you reach zero.
Created my own small german blog about the e cigarette. Its not very popular here yet. Might be the only e smoker here in germany haha.
Thanks for your article. Love your blog keep it up!