Shot out my email just now. Here it is in its entirety. Sorry for the length. Please let me know how I did
Good morning Maureen,
Having just read the article about your organizations stance on e-cigarettes, I find it appalling. Isnt the name of your organization, "SMOKE FREE Wisconsin"? I am beside myself trying to comprehend why you, the FDA, The American Lung Assoc., The American Heart Assoc., and numerous other anti-smoking outfits are not acknowledging the e-cig as a potential life saver.
Do we (and I say "we" because I am one among the thousands of e-cig users who have completely stopped smoking FDA approved cigarettes which are known for their uncanny ability to kill people) need further testing of this device? Yes. Has there been studies already done on the device? Yes. Does that mean that a device needs to be outright banned and removed from the marketplace? I think not. Its my belief, and the belief of those who use personal vaporizers, that you as a public service organization are doing smokers who want to quit, smokers who want an alternative, and the free thinking adults in your state a grave disservice by taking a negative position in regards to this little piece of electronics.
The "quit or die" mentality has got to stop Maureen. And it can stop with the likes of the company who you work for. Bill Godshall, Executive Director of Smokefree Pennsylvania recognizes the potential to save lives with this device, despite its rather ambiguous enterance into the marketplace. It exists, and its working for those who give try it.
Your article is no different, in my view, than any other media outlet in its unfair reporting of facts. You will cite the half hearted testing of the FDA, and report its findings to be toxic, and containing ingredients that are used in anti-freeze. That will turn some heads wont it? Absolutley biased journalism. Why did you not mention that the same ingredient that you refernce as being in anti-freeze is also in some of the food we eat? Why did you fail to mention that the other "toxic" ingredient is the very same thing already found in those FDA approved
tobacco cigarettes, but a much SMALLER amount? I know why, because that kind of reporting is fair and unbiased, clearly a practice your organization is unwilling to do for the sake of the community you claim to care about.
Why did you not, along side of your negative stance, report that thousands of people have been using this device for a varying degree of time and have completely stopped smoking, and that this information is readily available to anyone by simply logging onto the ECF (electronic cigarette forum)and asking those members? Most of these adults quit
tobacco by accident and were only looking for a smoking alternative. Why did you not report the horrid succsess rates of FDA approved NRT's? Why did you mention nicotine as so dangerous, yet fail to report that its basically no worse than caffeine? (I can only assume that you and no one in smokefree Wisconsin eats tomatoes... nicotine is in them too.) Why did you fail to report that almost all vendors and suppliers of e-cigarettes are actually complying with advertising regulations regarding health claims, as well as placing restrictions on underage sales? Instead, you focus on the few that are not. I can assure you, as time goes on, the integrity of the electronic cigarette, and its manufacturers, suppliers, vandors and users will surpass that of its adversaries, as evidenced by your stance on the issue.
From your organizations website banner:
"Preserving the right to live and breathe tobacco free". I am doing just that since I've sarted using the e-cigarette, I can thank you and those like you, for trying to take that right away.
My best,
-Pete xxxxxxxxx, e-cig user and FORMER SMOKER.
