FWIW, I sent them a reply:
"Wow.
It's been a while since I've read a more misinformed and misleading statement on this topic.
I cling to the hope that you simply lack knowledge, although with all the information available today it's hard to keep this hope.
A well known medical journal banned the phrase "more research is needed" from the articles they publish. Every single topic, in every single field of knowledge requires and will ever require more research. It's a redundant and at times misleading statement.
Of course more research is needed.
But currently existing knowledge does not suggest in the least that vaporized nicotine might be harmful, or that its harmful effects would be anything but orders of magnitude lower than cigarette smoking. There are no reports of significant side effects of use or of significant harmful substances in the vapor produced. More of the available research can be found here:
Learn About Electronic Cigarettes
Not even FDAs infamous micro-study could find anything but traces of DEG, of uncertain significance in one cartridge out of a hilarious 'sample'. It also found certainly clinically insignificant traces of nitrosamines, at the same homeopatic dilution level as they are found in ANY nicotine containing product, including your beloved patches and gums. You misquoted these facts in a manner that raises concern of ill intention.
You also threw in a factoid (1000 mg of nicotine in an e-cigarette) that makes no sense and is more at home in a tabloid than in a Public Health statement. Noting that your little elementary school essay has no references, I wonder where you got that factoid from?... Given that an average gas station e-cigarette contains 1-2 ml of 12-24 mg/ml liquid, your factoid is a plain lie.
Other than that, you have purposefully avoided existing and easily available knowledge about e-cigarette contents by claiming that the substances accompanying nicotine in e-cigarettes are 'unknown'. That's not true. The bulk of the e-liquid used in these is made of glycerin and propylene glycol, two essentially harmless substances that are ubiquitary in consumer products. They also contain a varying amount of nicotine - which is one of the strengths of these products as one can tailor their nicotine intake based on their needs, and even taper their concentration if they see fit, sometimes to 0 - and, if the user so chooses, food grade flavoring.
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with this class of products. Your job would be to regulate and ensure quality control, rather than trying to push their existence and usefulness under the rug. Switching to a reduced harm alternative is one of the best outcomes for the smokers who either do not want or cannot cease nicotine consumption. The 'quit or die' strategy, along with the 'social outcast' effort have failed. History will decide whether they will be remembered as stupid or criminal, or a little of both.
Wake up and smell the cinnamon vanilla swirl nicotine vapor! There is something you could do today to help reduce the health risks a large swath of the population is facing if they continue smoking cigarettes, if only you could see beyond your sponsors' pockets!"
