Heatbar - is Philip Morris getting desperate?

[SmokeyJoe]

The heatbar is the latest product from Philip Morris - It is designed to vaporise the tobacco rather than burn it. The user inserts on of PM's specially designed cigarettes and puffs - with the cigarette still in the device!



Is this a crazy and pointless invention?

1. No bar owner in a smoking-prohibited area is going to allow his customers to smoke these, since they actually contain tobacco.
2. It probably wouldn't be legal anyway
3. No smoker is going to want to carry that thing around with them. It's got to be 2, 3 times the size of your average cellphone!
4. It's health benefits seem good on paper, but I have read that the thing actually emits more carbon monoxide than normal cigarettes.

However, this is made by Philip Morris, one of the giants of the tobacco industry, nay any industry, so it will have huge marketing clout behind it.

Why on earth didn't PM think of inventing the e-cigarette? Or would that have been an admission of sorts that their main product had, er, inherent problems.

[woody]

Although this new product is clearly clumsy and too big, it is a move in the right direction. I believe that if the big tobacco companies are able to fine tune reduced risk nicotine use they are in a good position to market a product effectively and also understand exactly what flavours and smoking experiences really appeal to their customers. I am willing to bet that they are closely examining e-cigs to see how they can develop their own variation on a theme.

[woody]

Hmmmm! Having just read all the blurb, the heatbar may still not be legal indoors as it only cuts second hand smoke by 90%. Back too the drawing board for PM.

[SmokeyJoe]

Well, as Tropical Bob has said before, it will either be the tobacco giants or the pharmas that make the push against the legality of the ecigarette.

But I wonder, if PM is developing it's own alternatives, might that not dissuade them against pursuing e-ciggies, for fear that their own technologies are banned? I'm sure that all the tobacco companies have novel devices somewhere on the drawing board, ready to pile in if they feel too much of the market is being taken by these e-cigarette upstarts!

[TropicalBob]

Truly, Big Tobacco in the United States doesn't know where to turn. Its profits now must come from food divisions and turning developing nations into new smoking sources. Some tobacco companies, however, are test marketing snus with traditional brand names like Camel, Lucky Strike and Marlboro. Then we have this funky Heatbar from PM! Suggestion: Make the end capable of holding a toothbrush and it might sell.

The information that follows was found in days of researching the chances of e-devices being allowed for sale in the US. I think it highly unlikely they will be. Neither Big Tobacco NOR Big Pharmaceutical can profit from a device made in China that vaporizes nicotine liquid.

I found how the nicotine inhaler made it to market. Remember that it went through the same rigorous procedure given all nicotine-replacement products. This is time and money intensive. But to the FDA, these are drug delivery devices -- and they better meet all FDA standards.

On May 5, 1997, the FDA approved the nicotine inhaler, writing "This nicotine replacement product ... delivers its nicotine dose through a cartridge that the person inhales from. The smoker inhales through the mouthpiece and the inhaled air carries nicotine that is absorbed through the mucous membranes of the mouth."

An article at the time in the New York Times noted, "The product, the Nicotrol Inhaler, was developed by Pharmacia & Upjohn Inc. but is marketed by the McNeil Consumer Products Company, a unit of Johnson & Johnson." Ah yes, these are the folks funding the anti-tobacco, anti-smoking movement in America (cigarettes, cigars and pipes weren't enough for these fanatics; they're fuming over smokeless tobacco now).

Another article described the inhaler: "The Nicotrol inhaler is a plastic mouthpiece with a nicotine ``plug.'' It allows smokers to inhale vaporized nicotine and satisfy their urge for an oral ``smoke'' while giving them a total of only about one-third of the nicotine in a cigarette. In addition, while it takes smokers about 10 puffs of a cigarette to inhale 1 mg of nicotine, the inhaler requires between 70 and 80 puffs, the company said."

This is the reason the things fail. Who wants to pay $10 a day and still crave a cigarette? Low nicotine is the reason inhalers are only about 3 percent of the nicotine-replacement products sold. But note the following and think of our beloved e-cigs and e-cigars:

"The company overcame FDA and panel member concerns that the device looked too much like a cigarette. Panel members said they were convinced by the inhaler's benefits though they originally found the similarities ``disturbing.'' Pharmacia & Upjohn officials insisted the device is more than a smokeless, tar-less cigarette. The nicotine is absorbed through the mouth and not into the lungs, and the device helps lower nicotine levels and encourages smokers to quit."

Think on the above and tell me the e-smoking products have a snowball's chance in hell of not being banned as soon as the FDA takes notice of them.

[mikecurse]

This ridiculous looking product must be something PM developed to satisfy whatever powers that be that they are indeed looking for a safe-smoking alternative (perhaps it helps them thwart government regulation or could help them in a law suit). They know damn well no one would be caught dead using this thing, you'd really look like a pathetic addict to be sucking on this device. They possibly even intentionally designed it so that no one would want to use it because if people did they might end up cutting back on their habit.

These are the same people that when forced to make anti-smoking ads came up with "Tobacco is Wacko, If You're a Kid". This product has the same deceptive self-serving purpose.

[Minus Sign]

Why on earth didn't PM think of inventing the e-cigarette? Or would that have been an admission of sorts that their main product had, er, inherent problems.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Premier_%28cigarette%29

RJR tried Premier back in the 80s using aerosol technology instead of the current atomizers we have today. At the tune of $1 billion for Premier alone, the smokeless fads from big tobacco died as quietly as they lived. And they didn't live long. Eclipse came next with, which proved an utter failure as a safer smoking alternative. They did learn a lesson from going smokeless: technology was not up to the task...in the 80s and 90s.

I would be surprised if RJR and PM are not eyeballing Ruyan's pending patents with a certain level of horror and distaste...or flashing dollar signs as they quietly consider a takeover, take your pick. I think every smoker/ex-smoker here can agree; if this technology continues to improve and become more effective at both delivery and durability, smokers everywhere will happily toss the white sticks they can only use in designated areas for the e-cigs they can use virtually anywhere...for less money.

The question isn't will big tobacco act. They were smart enough to sell all of us on a product that will kill us if we continue using it. The question is...will they act in time to save the big tobacco name?

EDIT: to update Bob's post. If you don't know by now, Google baby Google. The US FDA and TTF have stated that e-cigs don't fall under either branch jurisdiction.

[Meltrex]

EDIT: to update Bob's post. If you don't know by now, Google baby Google. The US FDA and TTF have stated that e-cigs don't fall under either branch jurisdiction.

I've done some googling.. Would you happen to have a link you could post here for more information about the US FDA and TTB stating e-cigs don't fall under their jurisdiction. Thanks.

[EDubai]

I've done some googling.. Would you happen to have a link you could post here for more information about the US FDA and TTB stating e-cigs don't fall under their jurisdiction. Thanks.

Here is a page from Ruyan's official site in regards to their regulatory status. It may serve the purpose: http://www.theruyanmedia.com/Regulatory_Status.html

Regards,

[TropicalBob]

The FDA has been completely quiet on this. The Supreme Court ruled years ago that the FDA could not regulate tobacco (a move Congress is at this very moment about to overturn), but you can expect major noises once any politician focuses on e-smoking. It is NOT a cigarette by legal definition, therefore it is ... a nicotine delivery device. You want hassle? Try to introduce a non-medical nicotine delivery device into the American marketplace.

Alcohol/Tobacco would not be interested; our e-cig contains no tobacco. It will be an FDA and FTC decision. If it's for quitting smoking, enter the FTC with demands for proof of effectiveness. If it's FDA, then the product cannot contain any substance that is addictive or might harm health.

E-smoking has not been approved; it's been ignored so far. Both Premier and Eclipse caught major flak from health whackos who claimed those were not cigarettes. If you remember, the first Premier had an aluminum tube to hold the tobacco, and a lump of charcoal in the tip to "vaporize" the tobacco contents. That was a touchy design from a legal standpoint. By the time Premier morphed into Eclipse, it had cigarette paper tubes. It WAS a cigarette with tobacco contents. Unfortunately, the vapor left a charcoal aftertaste.

Understand that our e-products are not cigarettes or cigars. By definition, cigarettes are tobacco products. That's why they have longstanding protection. Big Tobacco is powerful. If the FDA decides these are nicotine delivery devices, they will require the clinical trials as with all NRT products -- years of expensive study only Big Pharmaceutical can afford. Ruyan has studies underway by a New Zealand researcher, in an attempt to have something to show FDA should the worst occur. But those studies won't be complete until the end of this year. In the meantime, I suggest doing what I've been doing -- hoarding the hell out of E-Liquid, which I expect before long will be declared an addictive, illegal substance whose import and sale is banned in this country.

This fight hasn't even rung the first bell.

And Big Tobacco is betting on snus, a tobacco product, to be the winner for smokers wanting to quit. That why you now have Lucky Strike, Camel, Marlboro, Skoal Dry, Tourney and Triumph on American tobacco stores' shelves. All the Big Guys now have a snus to call their own.

You tell me: Will either Big Tobacco of Big Pharmaceutical welcome e-smoking? Will government welcome the loss of tobacco tax revenue? Will anti-tobacco forces throw open their arms to welcome a device that produces what looks like smoke from people who were or are smokers? I think the answers are obvious and troublesome for those of us who believe in the health benefits of a cleaner way to satisfy nicotine addiction.