Huffington Post- Story on E-Cigs

[PaulB]

Good work, Elaine (and probably others here)! The comment trail at Huffington Post is sparse (21 comments at HP = sparse) but I think unanimous in lambasting Dr. Seidman's position. Except of course for Dr. Seidman's own attempts to shore things up.

 

[Vocalek]

The doctor has left a couple of responses in the Comments section. I responded to this one:

FYI The nicotine oral inhaler delivers nicotine to the mouth and throat, none goes to the lungs. With NRT your lungs are completely protected. Obviously no one knows what the long-term effects of using e-cigs will be on the lungs. I understand why so many people are disappoint.ment with NRT; it is a helpful tool, but it is not meant to carry the whole burden of making this important change in a smokers life. Many smokers also need to shift their beliefs and perception.s about smoking and develop new ways to handle the "triggers" to smoke in their lives like other smokers, alcohol and stress.

with this comment, awaiting approval.

Dr. Murray Laugesen of Health New Zealand studied the liquid, the vapor, and effects on human subjects and concluded, "E-cigarettes are akin to a medicinal nicotine inhalator in safety, dose, and addiction potential."

I have been using an e-cigarette for 23 months. I have noticed the following effects on my lung health: the wheezing is gone, so is the "productive" morning cough, I can breathe more deeply, and the pitch of my voice has gone from tenor back to alto. Unusual? Several surveys of e-cigarette users show that over 90% of users report health benefts ranging from increased stamina to measurable improvements in lung function. I don't credit the devices themselves or the vapor with these health benefits--at least not directly. Using these devices enabled us to stop inhaling the tar, CO, particulates, and thousands of chemicals in smoke.

Shifting beliefs and perceptions may work for smokers who have no imbalances in neurotransmitters. For those of us with attention deficits, memory problems, depression., anxiety, chronic fatigue, ulcerative colitis, etc., nicotine provides relief from our symptoms and--once we shift our source of nicotine away from inhaling smoke--does so with a fraction of the adverse effects that FDA-approved treatments cause (e.g., Ritalin, Lialda, Aricept.)

Actually, the doctor is wrong about the Nicotrol inhaler. According to Pfizer's information, "Most of the nicotine released from the NICOTROL Inhaler is deposited in the mouth. Only a fraction of the dose released, less than 5%, reaches the lower respiratory tract." Five percent is a small amount, but it is more than "none." Nevertheless, I had more important points to make, so I left this out of my response.

 

[wv2win]

It's the Huffington Post which is the most biased, slanted "rag" in the media world.

 

[Turnkeys]

With all due respect, Dr. Seidman seems to have a dog in this hunt. He's selling his own book and an audio book promoting his own method of quitting smoking. Besides, he's one one of Oprah's experts.

Conflict of interest, perhaps? E-cigs cutting into his bottom line?

This was my first impression reading the article. He's slamming PV's and crowing about his own book at the same time. He certainly has an adgenda here.

Vocalek,
I didn't use gum or other items while I smoked, but only because: (1) it didn't occur to me, and (2) the warnings on the box of patches about smoking while using them and possible overdose. Else I'm sure I would've.

I'm also a bit dubious of the paper in general, that they need to approve (and filter?) responses.

 

[maxx]

This guy is yet another smoking profiteer. No different than the hucksters peddling "all-natural" weight loss pills and penis enlargers on late night infomercials. He recognizes a fear or a problem, and capitalizes on it. Remember...Huffpo is a blog...not a news service, so no attempt is ever made to be fair or accurate, but rather to make a personal point. Or in this case...personal profit.

 

[Turnkeys]

I didn't realize 'till afterwards, that there was a 250 chr limit, so I'm hopeing the "moderators" approve the multi post..

Up until a month and a half a go, I was a packa day smoker of menthol cigarettes. My girlfriend's co-worker introduced her to a Blu-Cig and I got curious. After weeks of research I ordered to starter kits and today we're both smoke free.

Yes still use nicotine, but I no longer smoke. Day by day, and week by week, I can feel my health improving. "Traditional" NRT's were simply not effective for me. The original nicotine gum tasted like pepper to me, and left a sores on my cheek and gums. Nicotine patches gave me a rash and vividly disturbing dreams, disrupting my sleep. Hypnotherapy, while partially effective was not a long term solution. I tried welbutrin, but I may as well have taken sugar pills. I never tried Chantix, by that time I was quite leery of side effects. So yes, I still use nicotine. But it's never made me want to kill myself or climb a clock tower with a high powered rifle.

The argument that they might attract children or youths, is spurious at best. Only in the past few weeks one underage user been found, a 17 year old in Spokane, WA. He began using it to break the smoking habit he started at age 11.

E-cigarettes simply don't appeal to minors. The high entry cost of $70-$150 over the counter is prohibitive. And they simply don't have the 'cool' appeal an easily aquired $7 pack of smokes does. Given that barrier, the issue of fruity flavors as a 'gateway' enticement dwindles.

The liquid for e-cigarettes is offered in flavors for the same reason nicotine gum is. The original is wrenched. To me, the first nicotine gum tasted like chewing pepper. Furthermore the various candy, fruit and dessert flavors are quite appealing to many adults. It is more enjoyable and helps many to further disassociate the experience from smoking.

"Or will e-cigs become another financial burden to them, like their cable bill, but without the programming?" I actually spend far less on my e-cig supplies than I did on cigarettes.

"History shows that without properly regulating and testing new cigarettes, you run the risk that you find out problems later." Like the history of cigarettes which are still a federally protected product for sale on every street corner?

"For example, clinically, many people I have seen use the e-cigarette and then switch back and forth with their regular brands. They are using e-cigs to control, not quit, smoking." Is your use of the word 'clinically' intended to infer greater understanding of users you've observed because of your medical degree? If they're switching back and forth than they're reducing the tar and thousands of other pollutants they're inhaling.

I would agree that the FDA got the definition of an 'e-cigarette' correct, however the accuracy of the remainder of their 'study' is suspect at best. They tested only 18 cartridges and these were selected from only two companies; Njoy and Smoking everywhere. It's interesting to note that these two companies were suing the FDA. While there may have been manufacturing inconsistencies in that small industry sample, numerous subsequent studies have proven the FDA's results to be factually inaccurate. The "anti-freeze" reported by the FDA was diethylene glycol and a contaminant in only 1 of the 18 tested. It detected at trace levels, and not found in the vapor. Toxicity is determined by dosage. At the levels found by the FDA one would need to use 100,000 cartridges in a single day. At 1ml of liquid each, that would be over 26 gallons. That's assuming it's present in the vapor, which it wasn't.

"In contrast to this new, unregulated product, which is now a big and growing business on the Internet," WE KNOW by personal experience and repeated disappointment and failure, that traditional NRTs are not effective. The NRTs
I was warned specifically against smoking while using them to avoid the risk of nicotine overdose. Pre-Quit Treatment with Nicotine Patch? Continue smoking for two weeks using this new treatment? How will this be more effective than patches currently available in the US? Many e-cig users stopped smoking cigarettes in a day, most within a week.

"Another problem with the mad rush to promote e-cigs as "harm reduction" is the constant and, I believe, unfair bashing of NRT." There is absolutely nothing unfair about bashing NRTs. They are big business, very expensive, promoted by huge ad campaigns, and their numerous side effects are continually minimized. I challenge you to find an e-cig user who has had any lasting success with NRTs.

Dr. Seidman I would urge you, should you continue you write on the subject, to attempt an objective approach. Stop quoting the junk science promoted by the FDA and review some of the dozens of other available studies. The FDA approached their research with an agenda, and obviously so did you writing your article. Next time skip the self promotions.

Here's 2 to start with.
http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/centers-institutes/population-development/files/article.jphp.pdf

The Truth About Nicotine

The more I wrote and then re-read his article for reference, the more irritated I got... Even that verbose thing was a small amount of what I wanted to say..

I did realize a couple things while writing and looking items up though, and a tip for some who haven't been saving their posts on other sites.
Save 'em as text files or word or whatever you use. Makes it much easier looking up an item for use later. I'm such a packrat I'm surprised it took me this long.

And, my math was off previously when I equated the volume of 600,000 carts (Vocalek) to reach a toxic level of nitrosimes. I did the conversions again using conversion calcs I found online. A bit of FYI for anyone who needs to slap down the FDA's junk science.

100,000 ML(carts) = 3381 oz = 211 pts = 26.38gal - diethylene glycol (DEG) Toxicity level

600,000 ML(carts) = 20288 oz = 1268 pts = 158.50 gal - Nitrosime toxicity levels

I now return you to your regularly scheduled vapor.

 

[Vocalek]

This was my first impression reading the article. He's slamming PV's and crowing about his own book at the same time. He certainly has an adgenda here.

Vocalek,
I didn't use gum or other items while I smoked, but only because: (1) it didn't occur to me, and (2) the warnings on the box of patches about smoking while using them and possible overdose. Else I'm sure I would've.

I'm also a bit dubious of the paper in general, that they need to approve (and filter?) responses.

Yah, those warnings were based on "OMG, what if..." conjecture. There were no cases of serious adverse events during clinical trials. Nicotine tends to be self-regulating as far as dosage goes. If you smoke low-nicotine cigarettes, you smoke more of them or inhale more deeply. If you switch to high nicotine cigarettes, you smoke fewer, take fewer puffs, or don't inhale as deeply. If you add some form of NRT, you may still smoke some, but nowhere near your usual amount (unless you are under extreme stress).

So far, all of my comments have been approved, even though he didn't agree with me.

 

[Vocalek]

Turnkeys: I was calculating the fatal dosage of DEG, which is 1 gram (milliliter) per kilogram of body weight. Assuming that the cartridge holds one gram, and given that the FDA found 1% DEG in a cartridge, it would take 100 cartridges to accumulate a full gram of DEG (accompanied by 99 g of the remainder of the liquid.) You then need to multiply 100 by the user's weight in kg. So a 68 kg adult would need 6800 cartridges to be poisoned by DEG. If the liquid contained any nicotine odds are good that unlucky sap would start regurgitating the liquid long before s/he swallowed to 6800 g (about 6.8 liters).

So not only is nicotine dosage self-regulating (automatically by our bodies), nicotine poisoning when done orally tends to be self-correcting. All bets are off if the nicotine enters in other ways -- say through the skin. All you can do is start drinking gallons and gallons of water and pray.