I sent the following to my congressman and both my senators. Oddly enough, I haven't heard from any of them not a form letter...nothing. Don't know what that means. Regardless, I would encourage all of you to do something similar. Of course I've redacted my name and address which was included in the actual letter.
Dear Senator xxx,
I'm writing this to ask for your help with an issue that concerns me very much. This should not be a partisan issue. It's a health issue and it's one that can save lives. I'm talking about less harmful alternatives to smoking that are gaining in popularity. The ones I've heard about are electronic cigarettes and snus. I use electronic cigarettes
Unlike nicotine patches or gum, these are not nicotine sessation products. They are specifically for replacing cigarettes and intended for long term use. I cannot argue that using these products is as healthy as quitting altogether. However, with all the advertizing, expense, and social stigma associated with smoking, smokers that consider that a reasonable option have already quit. Putting more pressure on them is at best futile and at worst cruel.
It's far more reasonable and humane to encourage an alternative that is less harmful. Electronic cigarettes provide small doses of nicotine and using them is a similar experience to smoking. What they don't have is tar or any of the 4000 other known harmful chemicals in cigarettes. The ones you might be familiar with resemble cigarettes but, the best ones actually don't. They don't produce noxious odors, burn things, leave butts everywhere or any of the other things people find offensive about cigarettes.
To date, the FDA has done everything in it's power to block this life saving product with the most biased of studies and sowing misinformation. The courts have ruled that they are a tobacco product (the nicotine is extracted from tobacco) not a drug delivery device. So, the ban failed. Now the FDA is moving to regulate it. My fear is that the regulations will have the same effect as a ban.
With the exception of nicotine, all of the ingredients in the liquid that is vaporized by these devices (juice) are regarded as safe. One of them is used in vaporizers and hospital air conditioners. There have not been many studies on nicotine separate from tobacco but, the ones that have been done indicate that it's not a carcinogen and likely no more harmful than caffiene.
My doctor regards me as a former smoker. Unfortunately, my wife didn't quit till she got COPD. When she told her pulmonologist she had switched to an electronic cigarette he said, "Great! That won't hurt your lungs!"
The only rationale for a ban is the fact that they cannot be proven to be 100% safe over time. That ignores the fact that they replace a product that is known to be dangerous over time.
The only other negative thing is that because they aren't limited to tobacco flavors, some of the flavors are marketing to children. A stroll down the vodka aisle at the nearest liquor store will demonstrate the fallacy of this argument. Flavor alone does not constitute marketing to children.
Frankly, I expect to receive an answer that mimics the FDA line on this. If you don't find out for yourself, you are condemning thousands of people to an early grave. I can point you to studies that will show the truth of what I have said. Please ask your doctor about them. See what he/she says. If you wish, I'll be happy to come to your office and show you how they work and answer any questions you have.
Please help see to it that the FDA regulations on these products are in line with their known harm to health.
Thank You,
Dear Senator xxx,
I'm writing this to ask for your help with an issue that concerns me very much. This should not be a partisan issue. It's a health issue and it's one that can save lives. I'm talking about less harmful alternatives to smoking that are gaining in popularity. The ones I've heard about are electronic cigarettes and snus. I use electronic cigarettes
Unlike nicotine patches or gum, these are not nicotine sessation products. They are specifically for replacing cigarettes and intended for long term use. I cannot argue that using these products is as healthy as quitting altogether. However, with all the advertizing, expense, and social stigma associated with smoking, smokers that consider that a reasonable option have already quit. Putting more pressure on them is at best futile and at worst cruel.
It's far more reasonable and humane to encourage an alternative that is less harmful. Electronic cigarettes provide small doses of nicotine and using them is a similar experience to smoking. What they don't have is tar or any of the 4000 other known harmful chemicals in cigarettes. The ones you might be familiar with resemble cigarettes but, the best ones actually don't. They don't produce noxious odors, burn things, leave butts everywhere or any of the other things people find offensive about cigarettes.
To date, the FDA has done everything in it's power to block this life saving product with the most biased of studies and sowing misinformation. The courts have ruled that they are a tobacco product (the nicotine is extracted from tobacco) not a drug delivery device. So, the ban failed. Now the FDA is moving to regulate it. My fear is that the regulations will have the same effect as a ban.
With the exception of nicotine, all of the ingredients in the liquid that is vaporized by these devices (juice) are regarded as safe. One of them is used in vaporizers and hospital air conditioners. There have not been many studies on nicotine separate from tobacco but, the ones that have been done indicate that it's not a carcinogen and likely no more harmful than caffiene.
My doctor regards me as a former smoker. Unfortunately, my wife didn't quit till she got COPD. When she told her pulmonologist she had switched to an electronic cigarette he said, "Great! That won't hurt your lungs!"
The only rationale for a ban is the fact that they cannot be proven to be 100% safe over time. That ignores the fact that they replace a product that is known to be dangerous over time.
The only other negative thing is that because they aren't limited to tobacco flavors, some of the flavors are marketing to children. A stroll down the vodka aisle at the nearest liquor store will demonstrate the fallacy of this argument. Flavor alone does not constitute marketing to children.
Frankly, I expect to receive an answer that mimics the FDA line on this. If you don't find out for yourself, you are condemning thousands of people to an early grave. I can point you to studies that will show the truth of what I have said. Please ask your doctor about them. See what he/she says. If you wish, I'll be happy to come to your office and show you how they work and answer any questions you have.
Please help see to it that the FDA regulations on these products are in line with their known harm to health.
Thank You,
