Hey Pete.... yes the nasal spray is still prescription here, but so was the gum and patches for quite some time.
As long as folks worry about NRT being enjoyable or addictive, oncologists and pulmonologists will remain heavily booked.
The patch and the gum has been OTC since 1996-1997 ... I know for a fact the patch was OTC (Over the counter) in 1997... As it was the second time I tried to quit smoking...
The patch was prescription for only a few years... (Less than 5, if I recall) and was fast tracked to OTC status.
The
tobacco companies don't want a reasonable replacement therapy nor do the states. It is an inconvenient truth that the smokers are supporting Medicaid through tobacco taxes. Smokers put way more money in, through tobacco taxes, (and in private insurance through higher premiums) and the deceased smoker's estate gets charged back, than they take out... especially considering that smoker mortality is higher and recovery rates from cancers and heart disease are much lower than non-smokers whom suffer the same diseases (Poor diet, poor physical fitness, and exposure to env. agents + genetics can cause cancer and heart disease too)- the difference is the smoker kicks the bucket in their 60's where as the non-smoker drags it out through their 70's and even into their 80s. The net effect is smokers are putting in more cash than non-smokers and because they kick-it earlier are taking less money out, hence are subsidizing everyone else.
An effective NRT, an NRT that adequately replaced cigarettes but with less cancer causing agents, would not be taxed as heavily as tobacco as NRTs don't tend to be taxed like tobacco- the idea being they are smoking cessation products.
Ergo one that was completely successful in replacing tobacco smoke would have an advantage over cigarettes. E-Cigarettes are only economically feasible, with US retail prefilled cartridges now, because they are not taxed like tobacco. Right now with prefills the Super Mini Carts, despite marketing claims, take about 3(or more) carts to really equal 1 pack of tradditional cigarettes and the disposable cartomizers take 1.5 (or more) each. At a retail cost, for prefills, of about 1.65-2.00 (Minis) and 2.50-2.99 (Cartomizers) for US Prefills which can be had for without the taxes you are looking at 4.95-6 (Per Pack for Minis) and 3.75-4.48(A pack for Cartomizers)... This is not Chinese direct import prefill minis which can be had for .40 or Chinese direct imports for under 1.5 dollars per cartomizer. You can also refill right now for even less than that....
From my own personal experience and that of others, note these are not scientific studies, I would hypothesis that e-cigarettes are actually more addictive than regular cigarettes assuming they are optimally used by the user. I say this because I carry both the e-cigerrete and traditional cigs with me. The more I use the e-cigarette the less and less desirable the traditional cigarette is ... this is especially true once I started flavors other than tobacco. More and more I desire the e-cig over the traditional cig. One of the things I have noticed is that I can chain the e-cig with almost no ill immediate effects where as chaining the traditional cig would have immediate negative effects on my body. In fact it is very hard to put down the e-cig. E-cig fluid could also probably replace PG with Citric Acid (Vitamin C) for throat hit and VG for smoke (Don't know if anyone has played with this)- Thus making an even safer E-Cig. I also raise this point as- wouldn't the large tobacco companies release their own E-Cig product if there was demand.... I suspect that they proabbly have some studies buried somewhere that show that the e-cig is more addictive.
The e-cig thus not only is a more complete NRT for the traditional cigarette but also would be even more addictive if my hypothesis is correct. The large tobacco companies, like Phillip Morris and RJ Reynolds, could not release an e-cig product without very high scrutiny if they are in fact more addictive. PM and RJR certainly have access to vast amounts of cheap nicotine (Scrap tobacco that is to small to roll/turn into chew/snuff could be processed into Nicotine) and has an established user base + vast distribution channels but have not put out an e-cig.
The FDA is thus stuck with state/local gov and the fed gov dependent on tobacco taxes to run certain programs, thus applying pressure to keep a known deadly product on the market, versus allowing a mostly complete replacement, if not a possibly more addictive, but relativity much safer product on the market.... BTW the states and Big Pharama also are opposed to the safer product, thus applying pressure in the FDA, as it means less for them in sales and less taxes if it is a NRT. BTW the biggest win-win for everyone, except the Big-Pharama companies, is to allow e-cigs on the market as tobacco products and tax them at the same rate as smokeless tobacco or cigars.
