Comment submitted - at the last minute of course!
In case it could be of interest to anyone, here it is:
I started smoking at age 14. Born in 1975, I am now 37, and smoked an average of a pack of cigarettes a day for about twenty-two years, until I was finally able to quit tobacco completely when I switched to electronic cigarettes, in August 2012.
This was not my first attempt to quit: I made several attempts using nicotine patch—three serious attempts in the last decade. While the patch did help alleviate the immediate withdrawing symptoms (irritability, anxiety), it proved unsuccessful on the long run. Each time, I did relapse shortly after completing the prescribed process of gradual nicotine reduction—a process that I always followed to the letter.
I believe the problem was that the patch—as well as other similar forms of nicotine-reduction treatment (e.g., nicotine gums)—ignores, besides nicotine addiction, many important factors in the smoking compulsion: physical aspects of the smoking process—holding, sucking, inhaling/exhaling (which involves a certain degree of “throat hit,” heat, and taste); social aspects—smoking break, and other socialization opportunities; and finally, combining the two above, the pleasurable/recreational aspect of smoking.
In contrast, electronic cigarettes, in addition of supplying nicotine, also provide an effective, less harmful substitute in all these areas. Returning to my own experience, electronic cigarettes completely suppressed my craving for tobacco—I actually now find myself being quite repelled by the smell of cigarette smoke. Shortly after (and since) switching to electronic cigarettes, I have experienced noticeable improvements to my health: recovered sense of smell and taste, improved endurance (I now jog every morning for an hour, without shortness of breath, something I could not have achieved while smoking tobacco cigarettes), and drastic reduction of respiratory ailments (coughing, snoring, etc.).
My daily usage is now stabilized at an average of 3ml of nicotine liquid, at a concentration of 12mg/ml. I use a variety of delivery devices, and a variety of liquid flavors—including non-tobacco flavors. As of now, I am not considering reducing this usage: I made the informed—and, I believe, legitimate—decision to enjoy “vaping” as a legitimate recreational activity. In addition, I find that nicotine, as a mild stimulant—very much like caffeine in this regard—provides me with a sharpened focus for my creative, intellectual work. Yet I also feel that the ability to progressively reduce the nicotine dosage of the liquid used in electronic cigarettes could provide an effective way to stop using this substance if I decided to do so.
This is why, based on my first hand experience as well as my interactions with the vibrant community of electronic cigarette users, I believe any sensible regulation of electronic cigarettes should: 1) preserve the availability of a wide variety of flavorings (including “non-tobacco” flavors), as this variety is an essential part of the what make electronic cigarettes enjoyable, and thus effective, on the long run. 2) Similarly, preserve the availability of a wide variety of devices, as each smoker is different, and finding the right type of device(s) is an important part of a successful switch to electronic cigarettes (and off tobacco products). 3) Preserve the availability of a wide range of nicotine dosages—up to at least 18mg/ml: this will ensure that people starting with a high nicotine dependence would not be required to engaged in unsafe practice, such as, for example, the use of a patch or gums in addition to electronic cigarettes.
Finally, I strongly believe that any regulation of electronic cigarettes (as well as other tobacco-cessation products) should authorize the long-term use of nicotine. Indeed, there is, to the best of my knowledge, absolutely no proven ill-effect to the long-term use of nicotine (barring some very specific pre-existing conditions), and thus no rationale for barring someone an informed adult who would need (or choose) to do so. Furthermore, depriving the public of effective, safer alternative to tobacco on the basis of an unfounded (and vaguely moralizing) aversion for nicotine usage in itself (i.e., the “quit or die” approach, which by all accounts has proven highly ineffective) would be, from the standpoint of public health, dramatically counter-productive, and would effectively constitute a negation of the purpose of regulation agencies such as the FDA, which, I believe, is to promote and protect public health.
Thank you for your attention on this matter, which is of crucial importance to me, to the vibrant and expanding community of current electronic cigarette users, and, potentially, to the millions of smokers whose life expectancy could be dramatically increased by a switch to electronic cigarettes, should they remain available to the public.
Sincerely,