3/23/09 | Senator seeks to halt sales of 'e-cigarettes'

[Sun Vaporer]

Nice Letter Terrapon--lets hope everybody takes some time and fires them off---Sun

 

[OldBiker]

Hi all, kudos to all those who have signed the petition and/or written their elected officials. I have done both and urge all others to speak up and make your voice heard. Your state senators and congressmen are easy to find, most have their own websites with email forms embedded. Write them, they do pay attention. After all it's in their best interest to do so as they are elected and most if not all would like to be re-elected. For those in Mississippi a good place to start would be Thad Cochran his website is at cochran.senate.gov (I can't post urls yet). Please take the time to write the elected representatives of your state. This is in OUR best interest.

Just an
OldBiker

 

[Duckies]

Anyone agree? Or am I nit-picking?
I can handle the truth so let me have it!!!

-Calaban

Totally agree. I am quite active in notifying my Congress Critters on issues (with the exception of the useless Career Critter in the House that we can't seem to unseat). I have not written my letter yet as I believe current drafts are too passionate and not succinct enough to gain the (IMO) deserved attention.

Here's my letter...

Dear sir, this is a thing of beauty. Thank you for sharing it.

 

[Rickgren]

Does anyone know if thetruth.com has any info on e-cigs? They spend a buttload of money against tobacco why not use these? sounds like a idea to me

 

[Terraphon]

Does anyone know if thetruth.com has any info on e-cigs? They spend a buttload of money against tobacco why not use these? sounds like a idea to me

Gotta be REALLY careful with truthers...The majority of them are batsh.t insane and can't be trusted to keep from turning on you once they've had their way with you.

Getting them involved is like asking an abused pit-bull to babysit your kids.

 

[jamie]

Does anyone know if thetruth.com has any info on e-cigs? They spend a buttload of money against tobacco why not use these? sounds like a idea to me

"TheTruth.com is an anti-smoking campaign in the United States. The campaign is run by the American Legacy Foundation and funded by US tobacco companies under the terms of the Master Settlement Agreement."

 

[firhill]

I'd like to counter Serena Chen's quote by asking her what the point of non-alcoholic beer is.

[FONT=TimesNewRoman,Bold]CONTACT:[/FONT]
Serena Chen, (510) 893-5474​

American Lung Association of California

Good analogy...You can call and ask her.

If you don't..I will.

 

[pegling]

I felt I had to write to the Senator especially since I VOTE in NJ ~ believe me if this goes thru I will make it a mission to see he isn't re elected!

Dear Senator Lautenberg,
I understand you want to halt the sale of electronic cigarettes until further studies are done. I am asking you as a New Jersey voter to please reconsider this.

I have been smoking for 40 years and quitting for half of them. I couldn't even quit when I was pregnant. After trying the e-cig I have not had a "real" cigarette in over 6 months and have no desire whatsoever to have one.

I nursed my father through his death of lung cancer. I KNOW what smoking real cigarettes will do to me but I just couldn't smoke that last one. Yes, there may be health risks with the e-cig but I'm sure they can't compare with the health risks of real cigarettes.

I know that if you are successful in the ban on e-cigs I and many others will return to smoking cigarettes and the 4000 chemicals tobacco companies put in them. If testing is to be done I have no problem with that but please allow us to stay off the tobacco while the testing is being done.

Thank You,

 

[Exylis]

Thanks, pegling! Round up a crowd of supporters for me up in NJ. I'm from AL.

 

[KDMickey]

After reading this, it seemed to me that there could be an ally in some of the physicians with such an organization. I went to the website and found the e-mail of the individual who wrote that letter. I sent him the following:

Dr. Nitzkin,

I stumbled across the letter which was posted by you on jointogether.org regarding the FDA tobacco bill. I find your arguments for implementation of harm-reduction as the method of choice regarding tobacco intake very compelling.

I decided to contact you because I have recently been worrying about the FDA banning a smoking alternative called the e-cigarette (or, I prefer, the Personal Vaporizer). Personal vaporizers use a mixture of propylene glycol and nicotine to deliver a smoking-like sensation without tobacco. As such, the product contains none of the 60 known carcinogens in tobacco (or the 3000+ other chemicals). And, of course, despite the exhalation of a smoke-like vapor, the personal vaporizer leaves no second-hand smoke in the air.

Currently, some very powerful senators are pushing the FDA to stop the importation of personal vaporizers. The claim is that the safety of the product is unknown. While I understand this take, I find it unlikely that a product with no carcinogens could be as great a health risk as continuing to smoke tobacco! I do, however, find it somewhat likely that pharmaceutical and tobacco companies both have an interest in stopping the product from catching on in the U.S.

I humbly request the support of Public Health Physicians in preventing the FDA from banning the product. I know that several hundred smokers have either significantly reduced or quit their cigarette habit with this product. Many of these individuals have been 1-2 pack a day smokers for over 20 years and have quit smoking entirely with the personal vaporizer. As a former smoker, I can say that traditional nicotine replacement therapies fail to appreciate the gratification the act of smoking brings. The personal vaporizer delivers that satisfaction with, I believe, a significantly reduced health risk. I cannot say how grateful I feel to know that my infant son does not get exposed to the smoke in my clothing or vehicle anymore!

For more information about personal vaporizers, I would recommend looking at www.e-cigarette-forum.com.

Regards,
-Kyle Mickey

I feel like we need to get support from some bigger guns.

Cheers,
-Mickey

 

[TropicalBob]

Two excellent letters, Pegling and Mickey. Others should emulate the content in their own letters. No rants. No raves. Just what we know to be true. Good job.

 

[KDMickey]

I received a reply to my earlier e-mail:

Kyle:

Thanks for your note.

I agree.

I am now in the process of drafting a response to Senator Lautenberg's proposal. I'll make sure to copy you.

Meanwhile, there are some issues that the e-cigarette manufacturers and vendors should address from a public health perspective:

1. Is there any data as to the age of purchasers -- most particularly below 18 years of age.
2. What standards are in place to assure freedom from bacterial and heavy metal contamination of the product during the manufacturing process? While the Ruyan company may be responsible with regard to these issues -- what process, if any, is in place to prevent less scrupulous manufacturers from producing look-alike products that might be heavily contaminated?
3. Has any effort been made by vendors or manufacturers to detect and document adverse effects of the e-cigarette relative to both health and fire-hazard related issues.?

Joel L. Nitzkin, MD, MPH, FACPM
Chair AAPHP Tobacco Control Task Force
(AAPHP = American Association of Public Health Physicians)

This is where I could use some help. Please compile any responses to these concerns you possibly can. I know there's the New Zealand study, and I know there are some e-liquids manufacturers that have had their juice analyzed. Please compile all of the requisite information in an uber-usable format for me to send Dr. Nitzkin. Please, vapaholics, help us all out here.

Cheers,
-Mickey

 

[LaceyUnderall]

Mickey - Suppliers are having a conference call tonight and I will bring up the response you received and see if we can come up with some answers for you.

 

[jbbishop]

A thing which may be overlooked is how all vendors require a credit card. This is a standard procedure for Internet sales for age verification.

 

[CaseyNY]

Good or bad, who knows, but I sent the following to Mr. Lautenberg, and copies to my Congressman and the NY Senators.

Dear Mr. Lautenberg,

I hate to put it this way, but Mr. Senator, may I ask you; why are you trying to kill me? Why are you trying to leave my wife and 3 children without a father?

Your recent request to the FDA to pull and shut down Electronic Cigarette sales in the United States, if followed through upon will probably not only cost the government more money in caring for my health in the future, but in the long run, kill me.

I started smoking cigarettes in 1982 when I entered the United States Navy. Although I've retired from the military, I did not retire from smoking cigarettes. That is, until almost exactly 1 week ago (in two more hours). I quit because I found the e-cigarette product.

I've tried numerous times to quit. I have tried cold turkey, Zyban, Chantix, nicotine gum and the nicotine patch. I have given them enough of my money to try and quit. None of these worked for me. I found the e-cigarette about 10 days ago. After two days of solid research, I decided that it was safe for me to try. At worse, it simply could NOT contain as many chemicals (4000) and carcinogens (60), that regular cigarettes contain.

Please trust me, I did the research and due dilignece. The E-Cig contains things that are currently in wide use and that we are exposed to. I've watched reports from CNN's Sanja Gupta, and many other Dr.'s. None of them never come out and say it is 100% harmful and should be banned. That tells me, that with a Dr's initial look at the product, they believe it 'appears' safe based on their knowledge of what is in the product, versus what is in regular cigarettes.

The ONLY argument I've heard consistently is that we don't know 'the effect of inhaled nicotine'. However I would argue that is simply not true, there are currently nicotine inhalers already on the market to help people quit smoking, so we do know. In the end, whether a person inhales nicotine, gets it through chewing gum, or a patch on their skin, those are all nicotine delivery systems, and apparently the worst delivery system we ever invented was the regular cigarette, which many people no longer use due to this product.

I QUIT SMOKING 1 week ago after 26 years! I had never gone more than 12 hours (and most of them sleeping) without a cigarette before this past week. I'm already breathing better. Although I use to be careful to not smoke in my house due to my wife and kids, they were still exposed to some extent. For one week now, not only have I personally not been exposed to cigarette smoke, neither have my wife and children!
My goal for use of this product is to quit nicotine. I have already not smoked the cancer causing regular cigarettes for one week. I did not start this product at its' highest nicotine level, I started at the medium level. One month from now I want to move down to the low level. A month after that I want to move to the zero nicotine level. After that, I hope to be done with with smoking all together.

I could provide lots of links to evidence and reports, but I'm sure you probably have researchers for that. If I could prove to myself this was better than the death sentence that the Surgeon General has given us 'past' smokers. I think you should 'support' us trying to quit the certain death we have been told cigarettes will cause.

Please think again about your request and give us what I think seems to be a very good solution that will allow some people to quit smoking, and for those who still can't, or don't want to, at least a healthier way. With this product, more Americans will stop smoking, which will save all Americans health care costs in the future.

Thank You,
Casey

 

[The Wiz]

Good or bad, who knows, but I sent the following to Mr. Lautenberg, and copies to my Congressman and the NY Senators.

Dear Mr. Lautenberg,

I hate to put it this way, but Mr. Senator, may I ask you; why are you trying to kill me? Why are you trying to leave my wife and 3 children without a father?

Your recent request to the FDA to pull and shut down Electronic Cigarette sales in the United States, if followed through upon will probably not only cost the government more money in caring for my health in the future, but in the long run, kill me.

I started smoking cigarettes in 1982 when I entered the United States Navy. Although I've retired from the military, I did not retire from smoking cigarettes. That is, until almost exactly 1 week ago (in two more hours). I quit because I found the e-cigarette product.

I've tried numerous times to quit. I have tried cold turkey, Zyban, Chantix, nicotine gum and the nicotine patch. I have given them enough of my money to try and quit. None of these worked for me. I found the e-cigarette about 10 days ago. After two days of solid research, I decided that it was safe for me to try. At worse, it simply could NOT contain as many chemicals (4000) and carcinogens (60), that regular cigarettes contain.

Please trust me, I did the research and due dilignece. The E-Cig contains things that are currently in wide use and that we are exposed to. I've watched reports from CNN's Sanja Gupta, and many other Dr.'s. None of them never come out and say it is 100% harmful and should be banned. That tells me, that with a Dr's initial look at the product, they believe it 'appears' safe based on their knowledge of what is in the product, versus what is in regular cigarettes.

The ONLY argument I've heard consistently is that we don't know 'the effect of inhaled nicotine'. However I would argue that is simply not true, there are currently nicotine inhalers already on the market to help people quit smoking, so we do know. In the end, whether a person inhales nicotine, gets it through chewing gum, or a patch on their skin, those are all nicotine delivery systems, and apparently the worst delivery system we ever invented was the regular cigarette, which many people no longer use due to this product.

I QUIT SMOKING 1 week ago after 26 years! I had never gone more than 12 hours (and most of them sleeping) without a cigarette before this past week. I'm already breathing better. Although I use to be careful to not smoke in my house due to my wife and kids, they were still exposed to some extent. For one week now, not only have I personally not been exposed to cigarette smoke, neither have my wife and children!
My goal for use of this product is to quit nicotine. I have already not smoked the cancer causing regular cigarettes for one week. I did not start this product at its' highest nicotine level, I started at the medium level. One month from now I want to move down to the low level. A month after that I want to move to the zero nicotine level. After that, I hope to be done with with smoking all together.

I could provide lots of links to evidence and reports, but I'm sure you probably have researchers for that. If I could prove to myself this was better than the death sentence that the Surgeon General has given us 'past' smokers. I think you should 'support' us trying to quit the certain death we have been told cigarettes will cause.

Please think again about your request and give us what I think seems to be a very good solution that will allow some people to quit smoking, and for those who still can't, or don't want to, at least a healthier way. With this product, more Americans will stop smoking, which will save all Americans health care costs in the future.

Thank You,
Casey

Nice Job Casey.........I think Senator Lautenberg is getting an "earfull" this week!The Wiz!

 

[KDMickey]

Draft FAX
March 25, 2009
To: Senator Lautenberg, with copies to all House and Senate Members, AAPHP list-serve, Tobacco control advocates and others
Subject: Open letter to Senator Lautenberg Opposing his proposed ban on electronic cigarettes
Honorable Senator Lautenberg:
In my capacity as Chair of the Tobacco Control Task Force of the American Association of Public Health Physicians, I must vigorously oppose your proposed ban on electronic cigarettes.
Conventional cigarettes kill about 400,000 adult American Smokers each year from cigarette-related illness. Over the next 20 years this will total 8 million deaths among current adult smokers, most of which are now over 35 years of age. Cigarettes kill about 30% of consistent adult cigarette smokers.
Smoking cessation rates among these smokers are abysmal –about 3% per year. Pharmaceutical products with counseling, quit lines, etc, are little better – resulting in quit rates no greater than 5% (as measured at 12 months post-intervention) among those willing to try these modalities. In other words, current approaches fail 95% of smokers using them.
Adult American smokers are health conscious, as evidenced by the fact that about 85% of them have switched to light and low-tar cigarettes, believing (incorrectly) that they pose less health risk.
Research to date has clearly demonstrated that smokers smoke because they are addicted to nicotine. This same research also shows that the illness and death due to cigarettes is not due to the nicotine, but due to products of combustion and, to a lesser degree, toxins in the cigarette tobacco.
Alternative nicotine delivery devices, including, but not limited to electronic cigarettes, have no products of combustion and none of the toxins in cigarette tobacco. On at least a theoretical basis, they could and should be seen as generic equivalents of the pharmaceutical nicotine products. As best we can tell, on the basis of currently available research data, these products promise a risk of illness and death well under 1% of the risk posed by cigarettes.
Stated another way – simply informing current adult smokers that they could dramatically reduce their risk of tobacco related illness and death by switching to alternative near-zero-risk nicotine delivery products could possibly save 4 million or more of the 8 million current smokers who will otherwise die of a tobacco-related illness over the next 20 years.
Both houses of Congress now seem poised to pass an FDA/Tobacco bill (H.R.1256 in the House). This bill, if passed in its current form will provide, at least on an interim basis, the FDA seal of approval on currently marketed cigarettes. That being the case, the safety standard that should be used for other tobacco products, and for alternative non-pharmaceutical nicotine delivery devices, should the hazard posed by cigarettes, not a pharmaceutical safety guideline.
All tobacco and nicotine delivery devices should be held to the same safety guideline. Exempting cigarettes, while holding alternative nicotine delivery devices to an impossibly stringent safety guideline, will not protect current American smokers. It will only protect Altria/Philip Morris cigarette sales and profits.
On behalf of the Tobacco Control Task Force of the American Association of Public Health Physicians, I therefore urge to consider the following:
Withdraw your proposal to ban electronic cigarettes.
Urge amendment of the proposed FDA/Tobacco bill to encourage the development and marketing of safer alternatives to cigarettes, under strict but fair FDA oversight, and with marketing restrictions in place to reduce the numbers of adolescents who initiate use of cigarettes and other nicotine delivery products.
The amendments we think will achieve these goals, and the results of our analyses and literature reviews, are posted on the tobacco issues page of our Tobaccolegfeb07 web site.

Joel L. Nitzkin, MD, MPH, DPA, FACPM
Chair, Tobacco Control Task Force
American Association of Public Health Physicians
c/o JLN, MD Associates LLC

Dr. Nitzkin is receiving feedback on this draft. Please let me know what changes you see that could be made to improve this.

Cheers,
-Mickey

 

[jamie]

I received a reply to my earlier e-mail..... Please compile all of the requisite information in an uber-usable format for me to send Dr. Nitzkin.

 

[Chevron07]

Just a little typo issue:

"That being the case, the safety standard that should be used for other tobacco products, and for alternative non-pharmaceutical nicotine delivery devices, should be the hazard posed by cigarettes, not a pharmaceutical safety guideline."

 

[Wally]

Sent today, by snail mail, to both Lautenberg and Torti with slight differences:

[FONT=Times Roman,Times New Roman]
March 24, 2009

Frank M. Torti, M.D.
Acting Commissioner
Food and Drug Administration
10903 New Hampshire Avenue
Silver Springs, MD 20903

Dear Dr. Torti,

I am concerned about media discussion of the FDA’s possible intent to ban the so-called e-cigarette in the United States. I have, in the past few years, seen remarkable results with habitual tobacco smokers transitioning to the various e-cigarette solutions.

In my personal, anecdotal experience as a clinical psychologist with a background in pharmacology and psychopharmacology, the e-cigarette has shown more promise in helping people discontinue tobacco use than any of the currently approved nicotine replacement therapies or oral pharmaceuticals marketed for that purpose. Known science and logic would suggest that the e-cigarette cannot be as harmful as habitual tobacco use and is a valuable harm reduction tool. I would also point out that many people use the e-cigarette withoutnicotine and that this, to my knowledge, does not fall under the FDA’s mandate or jurisdiction.

I am obviously in complete agreement that nicotine should not be sold to minors and that sellers should not be permitted to make unsubstantiated claims about the safety or utility of e-cigarettes as nicotine replacement therapy. These issues must be demonstrated in competently conducted studies. But in the meanwhile, adult Americans should have the personal option to use these devices, properly marketed, with or without nicotine, as an alternative to tobacco.

Because of the appearance of e-cigarette use, the obvious must be pointed out. It is not smoking, it has no relationship to tobacco and there is no reason to believe that it will promote tobacco use. It is almost certainly not a "second-hand smoke" problem. People are using it as an alternative to tobacco smoking. This is a step in the right direction.

So, yes, I hope the FDA will look into the matter with an eye to having the nicotine component of the product appropriately and ethically marketed. This would be of great value to the American public.

With respect and good wishes,

Sincerely yours,


[/FONT]