Awful "Hit Piece" in "The Hudson Reporter"

[Mediaguy]

Hey all

It isn't so much that it's a "hit piece" - these are becoming part-and-parcel of the war on e-cigs: ignorance generated from misinformation making news writers (have a problem calling them reporters) regurgitate the same old things:

This is the link:http://hudsonreporter.com/view/full...erns-?instance=north_bergen_story_left_column

I tried to respond in the comments but frankly I didn't feel like signing up to this regional outlet just for that - so I posted it in my Facebook... This is what I wrote:

This is the sort of misinformed "reporting" doing no good for the thousands of smokers who want to go smokeless...

Although e-cigs shouldn't be sold to minors and legislation appropriately reflected this, it wasn't because the "flavors and styles were meant to appeal to them." E-Cig makers and vendors aren't appealing to kids. Adults like flavors too. The primary market is smokers.


Smokers have not turned to e-cigs in "the belief" they offer less nicotine. They are to substitute nicotine intake methods for a healthier one than burning tar smoke.


While the reporter makes claims as to how those who switch to vapor over smoke don't do their research, she contradicts herself by quoting a few well-informed vapers. Also, people who seek out electronic cigarettes are ultimately educated by the vendors and makers, who make no bones about the misinformation people like this reporter put out, without doing their own research.


She should read the FDA report. She claims they "concluded cartridges claiming not to have nicotine actually do." Not so. One of the very few samples the FDA chose did contained trace amounts - that is all.


The FDA found one carcinogen, nitrosamine, at a level about one-thousand times less than cigarette tobacco. That is all.


Diethylene glycol was detected in trace amounts in a few samples, and has not been detected in any other independent studies of e-cig liquids since. Currently, it is the position of independent researchers that the FDA used faulty methodology.


While the reporter mentions e-cigs "have malfunctioned at times", she fails to mention that of the millions sold and used over the years, only two have "malfunctioned" - both because the e-cig user wanted to save a few pennies and bought common household batteries against the makers' recommendations.


It's obvious, from the timing of the seed-study the FDA was trying to justify regulating (and taxing, let us never forget) e-cigs first as medical then as tobacco products, and failed.


The reporter should really have read a little more than the abstract for the FDA's study, and been a little less disengenuous about such matters as the "malfunctions".

Anyone from the area should really sign up and pipe in...

Maybe I should sign up just to comment - just to VENT though.

 

[Lessifer]

I'll have to check when I get home but... I don't remember cigarette packs having a list of ingredients on them either...

I also didn't know that the FDA "regulates diseases"

 

[pianoguy]

I'll have to check when I get home but... I don't remember cigarette packs having a list of ingredients on them either...

I recall my Marlboros occasionally having some ingredient that tasted like gym socks.

 

[Lilkurty]

The FDA found one carcinogen, nitrosamine, at a level about one-thousand times less than cigarette tobacco. That is all.


Diethylene glycol was detected in trace amounts in a few samples, and has not been detected in any other independent studies of e-cig liquids since. Currently, it is the position of independent researchers that the FDA used faulty methodology.

Diethylene glycol was only found in 1 cartridge tested by the FDA. It was not found in the independent 3rd party study that was used in the court case where the FDA lost.
Also, the claim that carcinogens were found is un supported. What was found were residues that are so low they are too small to quantify ie. parts per billion or trillion.
They are also btw in Nicorette, a little detail conveniently omitted from the FDA report.

This is from the report:

 The chemical content of similar nicotine-containing FDA-approved products was not completely described with respect to the presence of tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) and other tobacco-associated impurities that have also been found in nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) devices at similar, if not higher, levels.
 In the lots that were tested by the FDA, none of the key chemicals of concern in this study such as TSNAs and tobacco-associated impurities were able to be quantifiably measured in the liquid of NJOY’s cartridges because they were all below the limits of quantification (LOQ).
 All of the tobacco-associated impurities found in the NJOY products were “present but at less than the level of the Nicotrol® inhaler [manufacturer] specification” according to the FDA report.
 There is no indication in the published scientific literature that cotinine or β-nicotyrine are carcinogenic or have toxicity ratings of concern. These were the only tobacco- associated impurities found in trace levels in the vapor phase of (some of) NJOY’s products.
 The report does not reflect the actual dose of nicotine delivered to the user from the “control” Nicotrol® inhaler device when used as recommended by the manufacturer (6–16 cartridges/day or 24–64 mg of nicotine, 50 mcg/100 mL puff). By comparison, NJOY devices delivered 46 mcg/100 mL in the highest-strength cartridge tested, according to the FDA report.
 Data presented in the report does not adequately support the opinion that users of NJOY products would actually be exposed to TSNAs and tobacco-specific impurities in the vapor phase during normal device use; and if exposed, that those levels would be a health concern as compared to other FDA-approved products.

 

[Mediaguy]

Diethylene glycol was only found in 1 cartridge tested by the FDA. It was not found in the independent 3rd party study that was used in the court case where the FDA lost.
Also, the claim that carcinogens were found is un supported. What was found were residues that are so low they are too small to quantify ie. parts per billion or trillion.
They are also btw in Nicorette, a little detail conveniently omitted from the FDA report.

This is from the report:

 The chemical content of similar nicotine-containing FDA-approved products was not completely described with respect to the presence of tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) and other tobacco-associated impurities that have also been found in nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) devices at similar, if not higher, levels.
 In the lots that were tested by the FDA, none of the key chemicals of concern in this study such as TSNAs and tobacco-associated impurities were able to be quantifiably measured in the liquid of NJOY’s cartridges because they were all below the limits of quantification (LOQ).
 All of the tobacco-associated impurities found in the NJOY products were “present but at less than the level of the Nicotrol® inhaler [manufacturer] specification” according to the FDA report.
 There is no indication in the published scientific literature that cotinine or β-nicotyrine are carcinogenic or have toxicity ratings of concern. These were the only tobacco- associated impurities found in trace levels in the vapor phase of (some of) NJOY’s products.
 The report does not reflect the actual dose of nicotine delivered to the user from the “control” Nicotrol® inhaler device when used as recommended by the manufacturer (6–16 cartridges/day or 24–64 mg of nicotine, 50 mcg/100 mL puff). By comparison, NJOY devices delivered 46 mcg/100 mL in the highest-strength cartridge tested, according to the FDA report.
 Data presented in the report does not adequately support the opinion that users of NJOY products would actually be exposed to TSNAs and tobacco-specific impurities in the vapor phase during normal device use; and if exposed, that those levels would be a health concern as compared to other FDA-approved products.

Thanks for the details!

I *did* mention only one carcinogen, the TSNA, which will be found in trace amounts in any tobacco derivative...

Here's some more about nitrosamines (let's talk chocolate!)
http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/ashtray-blog/2013/02/nitrosamines-in-e-cigarettes-do-you-need-to-worry.html

 

[Bill Godshall]

Siegel wrote a nice piece on these two public health malpractivists in NJ.

Mike Siegel: When Will Anti-Smoking Researchers Stop Lying and Telling the Public that We Have No Idea What is in E-Cigarette Vapor?
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/02/when-will-anti-smoking-researchers-stop.html

 

[Bill Godshall]

I sent Vanessa Cruz a letter urging her to write a follow-up article, correcting the false claims made by the two e-cig prohibitionists, and sending her some of my testimonies to FDA, as well as Mike Siegel's posting.