Electronic cigarettes: a new 'tobacco' industry?

[Vocalek]

Apologies if this has been posted before. I searched, but could not find it.

Noel JK, Rees VW, Connolly GN. Electronic cigarettes: a new 'tobacco' industry? Tob Control. 2011 Jan;20(1):81. Epub 2010 Oct 7. http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/20/1/81.long

Extract:

In the USA, e-cigarette promotion has coalesced around three organisations. The Electronic Cigarette Association ‘was founded to institute and promote industry-wide standards and a code of conduct, work to maintain sound professional and practices, educate the public and policy-makers on the industry's activities and potential, and ensure the ethical use of electronic cigarette technologies’ (http://www.ecassoc.org/electronic-cigarette-association-bylaws/). The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association was created to advocate for harm reduction and sustained nicotine use as an alternative to smoking and tobacco cessation (http://www.casaa.org), and Vapers International Inc. is an e-cigarette industry research organisation, who, according to their website, has utilised the services of several tobacco control scientists and advocates (http://......................../). E-cigarette stakeholders have claimed success after advocacy efforts in Illinois resulted in postponement of voting on a bill to ban e-cigarette sales (http://www.casaa.org/news/article.asp?articleID=98&l=a&;p=), and in Virginia, where the Attorney General determined that e-cigarettes were not included in the state smoking ban (CASAA.org).

E-cigarette marketing has occurred mainly through the internet. Some e-cigarette companies, such as SmokeStik and Totally Wicked, have created webpages on the social networking site Facebook (http://www.facebook.com). Others, including Gamucci and Green Smoke, have used YouTube.com to post promotional videos and many e-cigarette users have posted personal videos displaying their use of the product. E-cigarette companies have also advertised on the search engine websites Google, Yahoo and MSN. Other e-cigarette marketing includes the use of contests and giveaways. E-Cigarettes National has provided entry into a raffle for gift certificates, cash and a TV with product purchase. Additionally, industry-sponsored internet forums are used to guide naïve users and promote e-cigarette use. As of August 2010, E-cigarette Forum (www.e-cigarette-forum.com) was sponsored by 81 e-cigarette companies and claims to have over 41 000 members. Posts on the website include product reviews; instructions on how to use an e-cigarette; directions to modify e-cigarettes; and information regarding new contests, events and advocacy efforts.

 

[rothenbj]

"The emergence of the e-cigarette industry must be met with an informed public health response. Research on product design, toxicant exposure, abuse liability including dual use with tobacco products, youth initiation, and influence on cessation efforts is needed to counteract e-cigarette industry marketing and inform regulatory strategies."

RIGHT!

 

[rolygate]

I found that hilarious. Thanks, Elaine.

I'll translate your extract, if you don't mind?

In the USA, there is a terrifying new threat to pharma industry profits and therefore our grants to do pointless research with ridiculous findings unrelated to any real-world concerns: it's called the Electronic Cigarette. The trouble is, people who use it don't pay huge taxes, they don't need to buy expensive drugs that don't work to try and quit repeatedly, and they don't die - so our pseudo-medical hogwash and claptrap isn't needed. This is outrageous!

The e-cigarette industry and user community have been forced to protect themselves from our attacks and seem to be doing OK thus far. Unfortunately, sanity has prevailed and even some State authorities agree with them. No one seems to worry that if smokers convert to a safe alternative that doesn't kill them, nobody will need either us or pharma quit-smoking products that don't work. This is terrible!

They mainly sell these things on the web as it costs $100 billion to set up main street stores. For some reason we found that strange. It looks as if there are millions of satisfied users who have successfully switched and don't smoke cigarettes any more, and for some reason they want to tell the world about it on Facebook etc. This is appalling! Also there is a forum called ECF that doubles in size every year and seems to have adverts from purveyors of this dangerous machinery. Therefore the forum is owned by the evil PV industry that is hell-bent on destroying our wonderful pharmaceutical and tobacco industries, which stand for everything good about America! These e-cig purveyors are unpatriotic and only out for profit! The users are weak criminals! They are not paying taxes on tobacco and drugs!

All upstanding citizens should do their utmost to stop this evil, healthy new fad and take us back to where we belong: paying through the nose for wonderful drugs that either kill us or don't work at all and help support our bloated corporations and corrupt politicians. Let's have laws against these health communists soon!!

 

[bsb111]

The wit displayed within this forum just puts my humble abilities to shame. Would that I had the skilled command of the written word as displayed by others here.

 

[Tom09]

"Research [...] is needed to counteract e-cigarette industry marketing and inform regulatory strategies."

Read: calling for research to serve campaigning, not to accumulate scientific knowledge.

 

[D103]

The wit displayed within this forum just puts my humble abilities to shame. Would that I had the skilled command of the written word as displayed by others here.

@bsb111
The eloquent crafting of your final statement strongly suggests that indeed you do possess, that of which your yearning speaks!

 

[tommy2bad]

The emergence of the e-cigarette industry must be met with an informed public health response. Research on product design, toxicant exposure, abuse liability including dual use with tobacco products, youth initiation, and influence on cessation efforts is needed to counteract e-cigarette industry marketing and inform regulatory strategies.

Yeah conclusion already reached; find ways to back it up.

 

[Vocalek]

This looks like fun. I want to play, too.

So this:

The emergence of the e-cigarette industry must be met with an informed public health response. Research on product design, toxicant exposure, abuse liability including dual use with tobacco products, youth initiation, and influence on cessation efforts is needed to counteract e-cigarette industry marketing and inform regulatory strategies.

might translate as follows:

We tobacco prohibitionists must do everything in our power to destroy this industry. We can start by publishing pseudo-science research results that exaggerate the hazards of perfectly harmless quantities of potential toxicants, and largely irrelevant critiques of product design. We can shore up this campaign by repeatedly expressing "concerns" that have no hint of evidence to support them, knowing full well that our allies across the country will repeat them as if they were proven facts, hopefully sticking them into WHEREAS clauses in proposed laws and regulations to eradicate sale and use of the products.

• Children will buy massive quantities
• Children will then progress to smoking
• Former smokers will buy them, and then go back to smoking
• Smokers will only use them to "circumvent" smoking bans
• Smokers will use them in addition to, rather than instead of, smoking
• Smokers who had every intention of quitting within the next 5 minutes will use these instead.
• Users will take in massive quantities of nicotine
• Bystanders will be dropping dead in the streets from 2nd-, 3rd-, and 666th-hand toxic vapors.

Remember our motto: The only good smoker is a dead smoker, and e-cigs might save their lives.

 

[rothenbj]

@bsb111
The eloquent crafting of your final statement strongly suggests that indeed you do possess, that of which your yearning speaks!

Spoken by one of our finest wordsmiths.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Please note that this article was published in January. I'm pretty certain that I posted about it back then, but I don't know what ECF thread it was posted on.

The good news is that Greg Connolly (the article's key author) is no longer on the TPSAC, and some/many/most TPSAC members (and FDA staff) are pleased that Greg is no longer on TPSAC.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Jonthan Noel (one of the coauthors of this article) is no longer at the Harvard School of Public Health, as the last five e-mails I sent him bounced back claiming that his old Harvard e-mail address is not valid.

 

[DC2]

"The emergence of the e-cigarette industry must be met with an informed public health response. Research on product design, toxicant exposure, abuse liability including dual use with tobacco products, youth initiation, and influence on cessation efforts is needed to counteract e-cigarette industry marketing and inform regulatory strategies."

Straight out of the ANTZ handbook, with compliments to the Nanny State handbook.

 

[Vocalek]

It appears that the same tactics that are being used to keep less hazardous products such as snus from being widely adopted by smokers are continuing to be used to combat switching from smoking to E-cigs.

None of the toxicological testing conducted in E-cigs has shown that users or bystanders are exposed to harmful levels of toxins or carcinogens.

There is no evidence that large numbers of non-smokers are purchasing or will purchase E-cigs and become addicted to nicotine. But even if 50% of the non-smoking population should decide to addict itself to nicotine via taking up use on an E-cig, the associated disease risks, if any, would be minimal. Thus “abuse liability” is a moot point in this context.

Fears that smokers who “might have quit altogether” will instead switch to snus or E-cigs is further evidence that the tobacco control community believes that total abstinence is something that all smokers will eventually embrace, and perhaps come to love.

Not bloody likely.

 

[Mark Linehan]

It has been determined that electronic cigarette use does indeed have certain dangers present in specific situations.

1. E-Liquid can kill users! It has been determined that people can indeed drown in less than an inch depth of any flavoring or e-liquid.
2. Li-Ion batteries, if beaten, smashed, set on fire or shorted with a wire from the positive to negative ends can explode and kill a lot of people if they should fall into the hands of ...... by the millions.
3. E-Cigarettes often contain nicotine which is every bit as deadly and addictive as alcohol and caffeine, although alcohol and caffeine are okay to use under the proper supervision and taxation level.

People, perhaps we need to step back and re-think this whole e-cigarette concept. I mean think about it. If e-cigarettes catch on much better, the tobacco industry could be all but destroyed putting thousands of tobacco industry employees and ceo's out of work. These poor people would be unable to find any jobs in todays economy! What would they do for work?!?! Very few emplyment ads around saying "Socially apathetic @$$#0135 needed to addict children and kill random citizenry with addictive personalities."

Maybe I should just toss out my ego's, my 3.7v boxes, my vv boxes, my e-liquids and flavorings. Maybe I should switch back to cigarettes and give up on being able to walk almost a complete mile after more than a year of not smoking following a disabling fall of 10 feet onto a cement floor. After all, it was much easier on me to not be able to walk at all and just sit at home and smoke. Then I would not feel so guilty about what I am doing to big tobacco and the politicians they are bribing and the research agencies they are backdoor dealing and not to mention all that lovely tax money the government is losing from their easy addicted smoker prey. Heck, then the american heart association and the american cancer society would stop having backhanded reasons to cast slithgly accusative assertions about e-cigarettes that reflect nothing from any actual testing other than the fact that if people do not smoke and get heart and lung disease they make no money off of them. I feel so unamerican now.. but then, that greedy selfish part of me always comes forward and thinks...

&^%$ THEM!

 

[rothenbj]

I agree with everything that Mark said, except I don't want to fall 10 feet onto concrete to totally understand his thought process.

 

[ByStander1]

Quick question:

Has anything ever been made safer for human consumption, ingestion, absorption, etc. by burning? (other than the occasional heretic)

Nothing in nicquid that's not also found in analogs, therefore...

 

[perlionsmitnick]

I found that hilarious. Thanks, Elaine.

I'll translate your extract, if you don't mind?

I'm impressed. You're more informed about what is happening on our side of the pond than our own residents.
Or...were you talking about the UK ? Any difference?
Good show.

cheers

 

[rolygate]

It's pretty much the same everywhere. At least, the end result is. There is a different 'flavor' wherever you go but it doesn't affect the end result