FOIA Request Results (Open Government Advocacy by CASAA members)

[Vocalek]

OK, thanks for that clarification, Thad.

 

[Placebo Effect]

Another bit from Madison County:

Dr. John Johnstone is a cardiologist who gave a presentation to the Madison County Board of Health about the dangers of e-cigarettes. The Richmond Register reported it as such:

Dr. John Johnstone, a cardiologist, presented arguments in favor of including e-cigarettes in the smoking ban, including data from WHO.

“Some say, ‘There is no proof e-cigarettes are dangerous,’” Johnstone said. “The real issue is, e-cigarettes have not been proven to be safe.”

In 2008, Johnstone said, the World Health Organization issued this statement:

“Manufacturers and retailers must provide evidence to define the appropriate uses of, exposure to and safety of ENDS (electronic nicotine delivery systems), and regulatory authorities should confirm the accuracy of this evidence before approving these products for sale and marketing.”

A week after his speech, a Madison County Health Department employee faxed Dr. Johnstone a copy of an editorial that was published by the Richmond Register.

Unfortunately, the editorial was not published online so I'm not sure what it said, but he didn't like it. [Edit: It may have been a letter to the editor written by CASAA's Elaine Keller]

 

[Thulium]

*redacted*

 

[Vocalek]

From reading the emails, it doesn't sound to me as if the editorial in question was written by a health department employee. It might not have been an editorial. It might have been a Letter to the Editor.

I sent this off on April 11:

To the Editor:

Cardiologist Dr. John Johnstone delivered an eloquent, but quite misleading, speech at the Madison County Board of Health Meeting on April 6. Electronic cigarettes serve as a replacement for smoking, not a medical product. They only need to be safer than smoking.

Dr. Johnstone cited the FDA Press Release instead of the actual lab report, which states, “tobacco specific nitrosamines and tobacco specific impurities were detected in both products at very low levels.” No carcinogens or toxic impurities were found in the vapor, and nicotine “was not observed in cartridges identified as containing no nicotine.”

Dr. Murray Laugesen of Health New Zealand tested the mist for over 50 smoke toxicants and found none. Dr. Laugesen also found it unlikely that any measurable quantity of nicotine is exhaled by the user, due to rapid absorption.

Like many drugs that Dr. Johnstone prescribes to his cardiology patients, nicotine can be poisonous. Dr. Johnstone would no doubt argue that he prescribes warfarin (rat poison) and nitroglycerin (explosive) in therapeutic doses. But he failed to mention that nicotine has many therapeutic effects. Nicotine and similar drugs are being studied as treatment for attention deficits, memory disorders, ulcerative colitis, depression, and anxiety, and for prevention of Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s Disease.

Up to 99% of the tobacco-related lung disease, heart disease, and cancers are caused by tar, carbon monoxide, particulates, and thousands of chemicals created by the process of combustion. These elements are not present in vapor because nothing is burned. Thus, Dr. Johnstone’s statement “e-cigarette vapor can be harmful” has no basis in fact.

Research shows that over 90% of e-cigarette consumers report their health has improved, especially lung health. If directly inhaling the vapor does not harm users, how can the exhaled vapor possibly be harmful to bystanders? That is illogical.

 

[Placebo Effect]

Ohhh, God. I just looked at my post and realized how badly I brutalized one of my sentences. Yes, the health department employee faxed Dr. Johnstone a copy of an editorial / letter to the editor that was written by an unknown individual and published in the Richmond Register.

So he may have actually been talking about you Elaine! Aren't you proud?

Elaine, maybe you could e-mail him and ask him to confirm that your letter was the reason he was filled with "contempt and rage" at us "jerks"?

 

[Thulium]

Elaine, maybe you could e-mail him and ask him to confirm that your letter was the reason he was filled with "contempt and rage" at us "jerks"?

Also be sure to ask what she meant by your "obviously proprietary and commercial organization". From the context of this email, it is clear she has dismissed CASAA out of hand, but I'm curious what she thinks "obviously proprietary and commercial" means and what it has to do with anything.

 

[Placebo Effect]

Also be sure to ask what she meant by your "obviously proprietary and commercial organization". From the context of this email, it is clear she has dismissed CASAA out of hand, but I'm curious what she thinks "obviously proprietary and commercial" means and what it has to do with anything.

I always knew that proprietary referred to owning something. Until looking up the word's alternate definitions, I never knew that proprietary also meant "a business secretly owned by and run as a cover for an intelligence organization."

Maybe Dr. Johnstone knows something I don't. Is there something about CASAA that I wasn't told when I joined its Board? I don't mind doing some dirty work for the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine, but you could at least tell me about it.

 

[crevenew]

Elaine, when dealing with *nix based systems (Android is built on Linux) "root" means full system authority (like on a DOS system if you have admin access to the root directory, you'll have access to all sub-directories) so "rooting" is the Android equivalent of "JailBreaking" an iPhone--giving yourself authority to make any changes since many carriers disable certain features like the ability to "tether" or install unapproved apps.

In some cases, Jailbreaking or Rooting your phone voids the warranty, and of course the cell phone companies are using any political clout they can find to try and make it illegal to "root" or "jailbreak" so it is certainly something that should be done at your own risk; but being able to decide for yourself what you will or won't install on your smartphone has definite advantages.

Extra clear explanation Thulium - nice job !!

 

[rothenbj]

Also be sure to ask what she meant by your "obviously proprietary and commercial organization". From the context of this email, it is clear she has dismissed CASAA out of hand, but I'm curious what she thinks "obviously proprietary and commercial" means and what it has to do with anything.

I read that as the PV eqivalent to the anti-tobacco expression, "Your actually a paid shill for the Tobacco industry". That seems to come up every time a well thought out statement is made by someone in support of smokers.

 

[Thulium]

I read that as the PV eqivalent to the anti-tobacco expression, "Your actually a paid shill for the Tobacco industry". That seems to come up every time a well thought out statement is made by someone in support of smokers.

I'm sure that is what she meant to imply, but the phrase "obviously proprietary and commercial" is very curious. If it is so obvious, why not specify the commercial interest unless "proprietary and commercial" is understood to mean "Not 'One Of Us'" and ignored.

 

[Placebo Effect]

TACOMA-PIERCE COUNTY, WASHINGTON

Thanks to a friend in Tacoma-Pierce County who was active on the e-cigarette issue, I have e-mails to and from various Department of Health employees from January 1, 2010 to May 17, 2011. I've already put in a request for e-mails from after that, as well as other e-mails.

Unfortunately, the e-mails were not provided in PDF format, but instead Microsoft Outlook. It's not easy to go through the e-mails, but I've gone through most -- there are a lot of e-mails, and the same e-mail is often presented 10 times due to the extensive indexing that was done.

Most alarming find that was that on May 17, 2011, Dr. Maxine Hayes of the Washington STATE Department of Health sent a PDF, on state letterhead, in support of the bill.

Our state's 2005 Smoke-Free Public Places law (chapter 70.160 RCW) is one of the best in the
country. The state law allows local governments to make changes that allow more effective enforcement. The state Department of Health strongly supports clean indoor air and protecting workers and the public from secondhand smoke and its harmful effects. We support your efforts to make application and enforcement of the law clear and consistent.

Electronic Cigarettes and Unregulated Nicotine Delivery Products
The issue of electronic cigarettes is a new one, and we don't have conclusive answers about all aspects of their use. But there are some things we are aware of and concerned about. The devices deliver nicotine to,the user; however, there is no evidence that electronic cigarettes are safe or effective in helping people quit smoking. Nicotine is a toxic, addictive substance.

In fact, the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has tested electronic cigarettes and determined that there are some toxic ingredients in them. Because they are not FDA-approved, there is no way to know the exact level of danger someone would get from using them. http://www.fda.govlNewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucml72906.htm.

DOCUMENT HERE: View attachment statedoh.pdf

 

[Placebo Effect]

Looks like Board of Health member Pat McCarthy, who made a ridiculous assertion about e-cigarettes that was something to the effect of "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck," was the person most in favor of bringing forth the ordinance:

I love it when people confuse me for Dr. Gregory Connelly, an individual in tobacco control from Harvard who, and I may be wrong, has not spoken out against e-cigarettes. This e-mail was in reference to a phone call I made to the media director for the Health Department some time before the e-cigarette indoor use ban was brought up. The Health Department had actually said to a news reporter for Patch.com that e-cigarettes pose the same risks as smoking. 'Similar' is still entirely wrong, but not as wrong.

Anthony Chen expressing some concern in an inter-office e-mail after he and others received invites to an event at the Vaporium.

And talking about CASAA

And a last e-mail for the night. There's some more though.

 

[JustJulie]

I find Bridget Vandeventer's 4/14/11 email particularly interesting:

She's [Kim from The Vaporium] running a fairly smart campaign, I'd say. Her Facebook page is posting somewhat compelling articles, she's asking for help from CASAA e-cigs forum and she's building her argument. The only weakness in her approach is that she's showing us all of her cards ahead of time!

It's a shame that some of the Tacoma officials see this as a battle involving strategy instead of an opportunity to have an informed discussion leading to a better understanding of the issue. This attitude is evidenced in quite a few of the emails, and I find it troubling.

Kirsten Frandsen (again, in reference to Kim from The Vaporium) noted:

The big weakness in her arguments is that most are anecdotal--not proven. Although we don't have the data to counter argue the points, I suggest that we take it from a common sense approach (difficult to enforce if we can't tell the difference between e-cigs/reg cigs and they look so similar to real cigs that kids will be getting cross messaging).

It's kind of strange to me that Kirsten criticizes Kim's arguments as being "not proven," and then goes on to say, "We don't have the data to counter argue the points." In other words, their arguments aren't proven, either?

And that's kind of where it all breaks down, doesn't it? We have government and health departments trying to prohibit activities without any scientific proof of harm to bystanders.

And the "save the children" argument is getting especially tired. We all know that alcohol use by children is a problem. Accordingly, I think we should prohibit adults from consuming alcoholic beverages in any place where a minor might see them. Of course, this means that adults could no longer consume alcohol at restaurants, but that's a small price to pay to ensure the safety and well-being of our children by preventing youth from perceiving alcohol as desirable.



As for "e-cigs can pose similar health risks of tobacco," are you kidding me? The "risks" associated with tobacco use are hardly uniform. It's a shame that health care professionals don't seem to understand that the modern forms of smokeless tobacco are much, much safer (like 98% to 99% safer) than smoking.

It's kind of like saying that eating a frozen non-fat yogurt can pose similar risks of eating desserts. Yeah, I know . . . it sounds stupid, doesn't it? "Desserts" carry varying "risks"--all the way from my deadly hot gooey fudge dessert (which is delicious, by the way), to my more "heart healthy" fat-free angel food cake topped with a few fresh strawberries. I think that a comparison of ingredients and nutritional values of various desserts would be more helpful than a statement condemning frozen non-fat yogurt.

 

[ByStander1]

Sad. So sad that people are so insecure in their own value they fail to realize, "No one's out to get You, well, because frankly, You, in this instance, Are Just Not That Important. It's the slot you occupy at the moment that has bearing." (the same slot they are quick to associate with their name at every opportunity)

How rarely those looking out for the best interests of everyone (insert sarcasm here), are willing to accept the uniqueness of the members of "the masses," yet want to be recognized themselves as unique (titles, jobs, influential position, etc). It is impossible to trust the perspective of someone who considers themselves not a member of "the masses," to be sincerely interested in the "best interest" of said masses.

What is refreshing, however, is how often I see here, and with fellow vapers in general, that when we are talking, writing, educating, sharing information about e-cigs; there's an underlying, beautiful theme: "This isn't about me. This is so much more than just me and my experience."

 

[Placebo Effect]

Planning out some talking points

Kudos to Gregory Jacoby, the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department's lawyer, for adding a provision (without being asked) that would provide attorney's fees to those who are unfairly targeted under the ordinance.

Reaction to the Lakewood Chamber of Commerce coming out against the indoor use ban

Yes, disturbing

 

[DC2]

I think the thing that becomes clear after reading all of this is that they have their minds made up.
And they are basically of one mind in their desire to get what they want regardless of any evidence to the contrary.

Their only concern seems to be not looking like idiots while trying any way they can to get as much of whatever they want.

This is nothing new, as we see it all the time.
But it is still shocking, and sobering, when we can see it this clearly.

My only question is what motivates them to behave this way?

And I think the conclusion that can be drawn from this is that the bigger stink we make, the more they have to concede.
And that is the message we should be taking away from all of this.

 

[Placebo Effect]

Guess what Ms. Frandsen never found? A youth who uses an e-cigarette who never smoked.

 

[Placebo Effect]

Letter sent by an anti

April 11, 2011

Board of Health

Re: E-cigarettes

This letter is a follow-up to the testimony I gave April 6, 2011 at the Board of Health meeting during public comment.

I have provided tobacco cessation counseling and education since 2000 at various hospitals, clinics, community centers, YMCA’s, wellness centers, schools and businesses. I have started and facilitated free tobacco cessation support groups in over 35 locations to people from all walks of life. I developed and teach Accelerate Your Quit workshops. I train tobacco cessation facilitators and medical providers. This is my full time job. My income is not based on how many people attend my support groups or workshops. I am co-chair of the Tobacco-Free Alliance of Pierce County.

I have no financial investment or gain in any products that are sold to help people quit tobacco. The products I recommend are solely based on their effectiveness and safety. I am not opposed to just e-cigarettes, but to anything that is being sold as a tobacco cessation aid that doesn’t work. For that reason I don’t recommend hypnosis for quitting tobacco because it costs money and in my experience it doesn’t appear to help people quit and stay quit.

Failed quit attempts compound tobacco use and addiction. People decide to quit because they have what we call ‘quit energy.’ They think, “Now is a good time,” or “I have to do it now,” or “It’s now or never.” This “now time” is the time for them to have the optimal support in quitting, including products that can ease the withdrawal from tobacco. I have heard from various people, including group members, that they have tried e-cigarettes, but the product didn’t work.

Each quit attempt failure preys on the tobacco user’s self esteem, confidence and ability to try again. Anything that doesn’t work makes it harder to even think about attempting another quit. This sends the addicted out to use more tobacco because that’s the only coping mechanism they have for dealing with these feelings. It is a downward spiral that feeds the addiction, makes people sicker and robs them financially. I am against e-cigarettes being considered anything other than what they are – a way to keep smoking and pay for it with money and health.

E-cigarettes:
a. Are not approved by FDA.
b. Keep people ‘smoking.’
c. Look like a cigarette, encouraging others to smoke where it is prohibited.
d. Confuse non-smokers who think someone is smoking in a non-smoking area.
e. Complicate enforcement of the Secondhand Smoke in Public Places laws.

In my experience e-cigarettes haven’t helped anyone quit tobacco permanently, because they are too familiar, too much like a cigarette, and they lead to relapse. We already have an oral device to help people quit tobacco: The oral nicotine inhaler approved by the FDA works well, is not dangerous and doesn’t emit vapors.
• The oral inhaler, along with nicotine gum, lozenges, patches and nasal spray (called NRT’s) are all designed to step a person down from nicotine dosing little by little, until they no longer need it. For the severely addicted tobacco user this can take from 6 to 12 months on average. The ingredients (nicotine and additives) in NRT (nicotine replacement therapies) are known, tested and safe.
• People who use e-cigarettes don’t seem to be stepping down or quitting them.

For consumer health and safety I urge you to consider adopting a policy similar to the Seattle-King County Health Department for regulating e-cigarettes. Thank you so much for your time and attention. If I can provide additional information or be a resource, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Sincerely,

Heidi Henson
4219 67th Ave NW
Gig Harbor, WA 98335
barefootheidi@mindspring.com
253.223.7538

BREAKING: Someone who makes her living off of smoking cessation counseling is against the e-cigarette

 

[Ande]

My income is not based on how many people attend my support groups or workshops.

Ummmm....then who pays her?

This statement may be literally true, if she's on a salary which doesn't fluctuate according to group/workshop registration.

But it doesn't change which side her bread is being buttered on.

Ande

 

[JustJulie]

Failed quit attempts compound tobacco use and addiction. People decide to quit because they have what we call ‘quit energy.’ They think, “Now is a good time,” or “I have to do it now,” or “It’s now or never.” This “now time” is the time for them to have the optimal support in quitting, including products that can ease the withdrawal from tobacco. I have heard from various people, including group members, that they have tried e-cigarettes, but the product didn’t work.

Each quit attempt failure preys on the tobacco user’s self esteem, confidence and ability to try again. Anything that doesn’t work makes it harder to even think about attempting another quit. This sends the addicted out to use more tobacco because that’s the only coping mechanism they have for dealing with these feelings. It is a downward spiral that feeds the addiction, makes people sicker and robs them financially. I am against e-cigarettes being considered anything other than what they are – a way to keep smoking and pay for it with money and health.

I don't suppose it's occurred to Ms. Henson that someone who successfully transitioned from smoking to vaping wouldn't be at one of her meetings?

But be it as it may, I do agree that multiple unsuccessful quit attempts take a toll. I got to the point where I felt like a complete failure after trying to quit with no success. That's why I'm gobsmacked that the antis are so dead set against e-cigarettes. While they don't work for everyone, all indications are that they are far, far more successful than any of the crap NRTs on the market.

But I guess the mindset is that we're still smoking because it kind of sort of looks like we're smoking and most of us continue to use nicotine. Once again, another professional confuses nicotine cessation with smoking cessation.