So I wrote my own ... comments?
There's one change that would need to be made by someone sending it out, in the first line. It's pretty hard to miss. I've also used underscores for italics, so it could be sent out in plain text. It could also be used as the basis for a petition.
Since they've helped me quit [reduce] smoking, I read your article on e-cigarettes with interest.
We call them _Personal Vaporizers_
(PVs) because they have little more in common with "cigarettes" than an "air guitar" does with guitars. Vaping is _not_
smoking because _vapor_
is not _smoke_,
as cooks know.
The vaporized liquid ("e-liquid") contains vegetable glycerin (VG
vapor can arise from making pasta sauce. Some e-liquids contain artificial fog (propelyne glycol or PG
-approved for food, and asthma inhalers.
Not all e-liquids contain nicotine. Nicotine in PVs is no more dangerous nor addictive than caffeine in coffee (and less than sugar in food). Nicotine _is_
dangerous for a few, as are peanuts. No one has overdosed on nicotine from PVs, although it's possible (ditto water).
E-liquid doesn't contain diethelyne glycol, any more than salad contains salmonella. (Just one study of Chinese-made e-liquids found this.) Vapers support prohibiting contamination.
marketed to kids. Vapers support banning sale to minors. Some e-liquids contain flavors children like, just as alcoholic spirts do.
Smoking is a "gateway" to vaping - _not_
vice-versa. Virtually all vapers have been smokers, and vape to quit or reduce smoking.
A growing body of groups such as the National Drug Policy Alliance and the American Association of Public Health Physicians support vaping as an alternative for smokers who can't quit or cut down.
"Punishing" vapers through taxation, regulation and fear-mongering will yield more smoking, less vaping and higher societal costs.