NYT article on quitting smoking - e-cig "gizmo" bad

[Elric13]

Was going to post this in news, but I still don't have rights to post elsewhere. And it looks like I can't even post the link either. But please go the the New York Times website and look for the article, it's in the "Health" section under "Patient Money." Article name, "For the New Year, Cost-Effective Options to Stop Smoking"

This is the part of the article that I found interesting:

"Electronic cigarettes, which dispense nicotine and mimic the act of smoking, are not approved by the F.D.A. Worse, some have been found to emit harmful toxins. Mr. Glynn advises staying away from these gizmos."

Naturally, my primary question is, does anyone know what he's talking about regarding these "harmful toxins"? (I'll let the whole "gizmo" thing alone)

 

[Elendil]

Moved to news

 

[blondeambition3]

Was going to post this in news, but I still don't have rights to post elsewhere. And it looks like I can't even post the link either. But please go the the New York Times website and look for the article, it's in the "Health" section under "Patient Money." Article name, "For the New Year, Cost-Effective Options to Stop Smoking"

This is the part of the article that I found interesting:

"Electronic cigarettes, which dispense nicotine and mimic the act of smoking, are not approved by the F.D.A. Worse, some have been found to emit harmful toxins. Mr. Glynn advises staying away from these gizmos."

Naturally, my primary question is, does anyone know what he's talking about regarding these "harmful toxins"? (I'll let the whole "gizmo" thing alone)

anyone know about this?

 

[olderthandirt]

Link to the article:
Patient Money - Cost-Effective Ways to Stop Smoking - NYTimes.com

 

[dee5]

Somewhere on this huge forum are posts about the testing done on e-liquid and vapor. If I remember right the FDA has never considered the testing done on vapor. If they had (and I believe it was in the New Zealand study) they would have found that the trace amounts of chemicals that remain in exhaled vapor are so minute they can hardly be measured. Quite the contrary to what is exhaled when smoking a cigarette.

 

[tarkus]

Well nicotine is a toxin and I don't see vaping as a way to eliminate the nicotine addiction. I simply see it as a better and cheaper alternative to smoking.

 

[LittleLuLu]

I think most of us are really interested in what, if anything, we might be exposing ourselves to in exchange for the known carcinogens in smoked tobacco.

I am hopeful that what I have read so far is accurate and the risk to other is so negligible as to be non-existant.

I am equally hopeful that PG vapor poses no serious long term affects on my airways and lungs.

I am concerned about products produced in China. These are the folks that put melanine into baby formula, right? Am I wrong to hope for some kind of manufacturing oversight on the units and quality and labeling standards for the juice?

I am pretty convinced that I am doing my health a favor by using a PV rather than analogs, but it would be nice to be more certain that such is the case - and if not - if there are risk factors to be considered, it would be nice to be able to make an informed choice.

However, I wonder if this Thomas Glenn is just talking out his - yeah - or if he is basing his statement on some knowledge that he has about PV's. I would ask him if I thought I could speak to the issue with any kind of authority but I am too new to this whole e-cig thing.

I found an email
tom.glynn@cancer.org
that seems likely to be his -

Would one of our well informed activists care to write Mr. Glynn and find out what he is talking about?

LLL

 

[Madame Psychosis]

Listening to the New York Times on health issues is listening to the English major in your college who slept through biology class, but now publishes answers from whichever handful of doctors reply to a reporter's voicemail most quickly.*

For more thorough information on toxins in e-cigarettes I recommend this link:
List of Identified, Known Carcinogens in Electronic Cigarettes vs. Conventional Cigarettes, and Which Anti-Smoking Groups are Telling Smokers to Smoke

*Sorry, I'm still mad at them for the lousy summary they just published of the JAMA antidepressant meta-analysis. Not to mention they don't understand the hazards of medical meta-analyses, which is Latin for "reinforcing the authors' own beliefs".

 

[yvilla]

LLL, no need to contact anyone. We know what he is talking about - and his presentation is at best disingenuous.

The FDA did a lab study, of only 18 ecig cartridges from Njoy and SE. They found one of SE's carts to have a tiny level (around 1%) of a contaminate: diethylene glycol, or DEG. They also found tiny amounts of tobacco specific nitrosamines (carcinogens found in hugely higher concentrations in cigarettes) in some of the carts from both companies. Here is the lab report: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ScienceResearch/UCM173250.pdf

The problem that arises is with the interpretation of that report, with the conclusions to be drawn from it. The FDA sounded off with all sorts of alarm about the presence of that one contaminate and the tiny levels of TSNAs in ecigs, failing completely to mention the vastly higher amounts of those same things in cigarettes, plus hundreds of other toxic substances, and even failing to mention the presence of similar amounts of TSNAs in FDA approved NRT products, such as nicotine gum and patches!

Here's a critical review and analysis of the FDA lab report: http://www.njoythefreedom.com/contactcommerce/images/press_releases/Response to the FDA Summary.pdf

And here is a great article from Dr. Siegel on this very issue: The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary: Comparison of Carcinogen Levels Shows that Electronic Cigarettes are Much Safer Than Conventional Ones

Edited to add: Health New Zealand's lab report on Ruyan cartridges, of well over a year ago, that reached much the same results as the FDA study (but more in depth and breadth), but vastly differing conclusions: http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf

 

[searcher]

I am concerned about products produced in China. These are the folks that put melanine into baby formula, right? Am I wrong to hope for some kind of manufacturing oversight on the units and quality and labeling standards for the juice?

LLL

Melamine is not only found in Chinese formula, but in almost if not all commercially produced formula. It is created as part of the manufacturing process. The one instance of it being present in deadly proportions resulted in an execution in China I believe. Some of our retailers have visited the manufacturing facilities in China and were very impressed. I will always be thankful to the Chinese for development and marketing of ecigs.
I totally agree with you on the need for more testing of prolonged vaping and in doing my part for the process I hope to be able to report in 40 years that it was safe...

 

[sherid]

Since Chantix was developed and manufactured in the US and has led to a number of suicides and psychotic breakdowns, I feel somewhat hypocritical pointing the finger at China.

 

[Territoo]

I'm getting so tired of "reporters" regurgitating that FDA piece of ..... press release of theirs. They must believe that if the government said it, it must be true. Newspeople don't bother thinking for themselves these days.

 

[Janetda]

OK, so I actually wrote the guy. He seems like a nice fellow and answed me right away. While I don't feel comfortable reprinting our email, he basically said that they are worried about the quite rate not being established. Which is IMO BS. He did go on to congratulate me for using e-cigs if they work for me and that I've made great progress in reducing my health problems in the future...go figure?

Now don't go crazy and everyone start writing him. Like all of you, I don't agree with ACS's stand either. But, I'm really hoping to establish a dialog with this gentleman.

 

[sleuthsnoopy]

Was going to post this in news, but I still don't have rights to post elsewhere. And it looks like I can't even post the link either. But please go the the New York Times website and look for the article, it's in the "Health" section under "Patient Money." Article name, "For the New Year, Cost-Effective Options to Stop Smoking"

This is the part of the article that I found interesting:

"Electronic cigarettes, which dispense nicotine and mimic the act of smoking, are not approved by the F.D.A. Worse, some have been found to emit harmful toxins. Mr. Glynn advises staying away from these gizmos."

Naturally, my primary question is, does anyone know what he's talking about regarding these "harmful toxins"? (I'll let the whole "gizmo" thing alone)

They are referring to the propylene glycol which is a "less" toxic anti freeze. It is used in food colorings, food additives. We eat it everyday. There is no way, even if exposed to as much as one would be in a normal year, to become toxic and die from the chemical. It is toxic to animals. Every kind of antifreeze is toxic to animals. Hence the effect of Human food on dogs. If they eat too much they throw up.

If I were you. And I am because I use E-cigs, I wouldn't worry about it. LOL
If you measure the health risk of tobacco smoke versus e-cig smoking. You will fair better with e-cigs. I can almost guarantee that the cigarette lobbyists are behind this farce in e-cigs. They can't win the war on smoking so they do not want anyone to benefit.

If you have noticed, Tobacco companies are making money off of people quitting smoking as much as they did to start. LOL
Now this is my opinion with only some fact inputted into it but in the future you will find out that this post is 99% accurate!!

Have a nice day! And thank you for not smoking!

 

[Wojtek]

I'm getting so tired of "reporters" regurgitating that FDA piece of ..... press release of theirs.

While I was at my mother's place today I heard on the radio this info bulletin warning about e-cigz. "it's not FDA approved".
Hey, Canadian radio quoting some foreign country's organization??? They could of quote that NZ one instead...

 

[Territoo]

OK, so I actually wrote the guy. He seems like a nice fellow and answed me right away. While I don't feel comfortable reprinting our email, he basically said that they are worried about the quite rate not being established. Which is IMO BS. He did go on to congratulate me for using e-cigs if they work for me and that I've made great progress in reducing my health problems in the future...go figure?

Now don't go crazy and everyone start writing him. Like all of you, I don't agree with ACS's stand either. But, I'm really hoping to establish a dialog with this gentleman.

It's true that the quit rate hasn't yet been established, which is why e-cigs should be promoted as a smoking alternative rather than smoking cessation. However, it can't be any worse than that of the FDA approved NRT products' long term success rate of 3-7%.

 

[sleuthsnoopy]

govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1256]Read The Bill: H.R. 1256 - GovTrack.us

The new law does not define Tobacco as nicotine and from what I have read in this law, e-cigs should be safe from prosecution. It is not defined as a stop smoking cessation product.

I am not a lawyer but I have done extensive research on the law and this law is not that "broad" as to include our past time into it or give the FDA the authority to regulate it. If there are any lawyers out there I would appreciate it if you could interpret this law for us and see if it would at any way affect our E-Cigs.
Thanks

 

[Janetda]

There's a pending case right now that we're all waiting on to see what's what. Problem is, that some e-cig company's advertised it as a smoking cession product and the FDA considers nicotine and e-cigs as drug and drug devices.

 

[notsoogood]

Listening to the New York Times on health issues is listening to the English major in your college who slept through biology class, but now publishes answers from whichever handful of doctors reply to a reporter's voicemail most quickly.*

For more thorough information on toxins in e-cigarettes I recommend this link:
List of Identified, Known Carcinogens in Electronic Cigarettes vs. Conventional Cigarettes, and Which Anti-Smoking Groups are Telling Smokers to Smoke

*Sorry, I'm still mad at them for the lousy summary they just published of the JAMA antidepressant meta-analysis. Not to mention they don't understand the hazards of medical meta-analyses, which is Latin for "reinforcing the authors' own beliefs".

Great find!!!!

 

[kristin]

govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-1256]Read The Bill: H.R. 1256 - GovTrack.us

The new law does not define Tobacco as nicotine and from what I have read in this law, e-cigs should be safe from prosecution. It is not defined as a stop smoking cessation product.

I am not a lawyer but I have done extensive research on the law and this law is not that "broad" as to include our past time into it or give the FDA the authority to regulate it. If there are any lawyers out there I would appreciate it if you could interpret this law for us and see if it would at any way affect our E-Cigs.
Thanks

You should do a little more reading of the forum:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/casaa/56715-history-electronic-cigarettes.html

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...erywhere-v-fda-daily-docket-sheet-update.html

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/casaa/56715-history-electronic-cigarettes.html