About E-cigs. It's on her NPR show today and can be heard here: Smoking In America Today | The Diane Rehm Show from WAMU and NPR
Smoking in America Today on the Diane Rehm Show
- Thread starter four2109
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
From her website:
Nearly 90 million Americans are smokers or former smokers. But the number of adults smoking traditional cigarettes is on the decline. Causes include tax hikes, smoking bans, health concerns and social stigma. tobacco companies and others have taken notice: electronic cigarettes have become a booming business, and new research is being done to drastically lower nicotine levels in regular cigarettes. Many think these new developments could save thousands of lives, while others worry they provide a false sense of security and want the Food and Drug Administration to step in soon with new regulations on nicotine. Diane and her guests discuss the latest trends in smoking in America today.
Guests
Dr. Tim McAfee
director of Office of Smoking and Health with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Mitch Zeller
director of Center for Tobacco Products at the Food and Drug Administration.
Dr. Thomas Glynn
director of Cancer Science and Trends for the American Cancer Society.
Michael Felberbaum
reporter for Associated Press.
Craig Weiss
president and CEO of njoy, makers of electronic cigarettes.
Nearly 90 million Americans are smokers or former smokers. But the number of adults smoking traditional cigarettes is on the decline. Causes include tax hikes, smoking bans, health concerns and social stigma. tobacco companies and others have taken notice: electronic cigarettes have become a booming business, and new research is being done to drastically lower nicotine levels in regular cigarettes. Many think these new developments could save thousands of lives, while others worry they provide a false sense of security and want the Food and Drug Administration to step in soon with new regulations on nicotine. Diane and her guests discuss the latest trends in smoking in America today.
Guests
Dr. Tim McAfee
director of Office of Smoking and Health with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Mitch Zeller
director of Center for Tobacco Products at the Food and Drug Administration.
Dr. Thomas Glynn
director of Cancer Science and Trends for the American Cancer Society.
Michael Felberbaum
reporter for Associated Press.
Craig Weiss
president and CEO of njoy, makers of electronic cigarettes.
And the E-mails read out seemed to have been filtered and heavily biased in favour of approved NRT 
I listened for a while and then skipped through the recording also.
Nothing really more than heavily biased broadcast against smoking and e-cigarettes.
The good news is .... ecig sales are going through the roof
and few smokers pay any attention to stuff like this, negative articles, etc etc
On the other hand ... Jenny McCarthy's blu ecig commercial
is a big hit !!
Nothing really more than heavily biased broadcast against smoking and e-cigarettes.
The good news is .... ecig sales are going through the roof
and few smokers pay any attention to stuff like this, negative articles, etc etc
On the other hand ... Jenny McCarthy's blu ecig commercial
is a big hit !!
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
While it was outrageous that Diane Rehm's producers invited 5 advocates of FDA e-cigarette ban/regulation for her panel discussion about e-cigarettes and smoking, the statements about e-cigarettes by FDA's Mitch Zeller, CDC's Tim McAfee and ACS' Tom Glynn were more objective and supportive of e-cigarettes than in the past.
It would have been helpful had Rehm (or her guests) acknowledged their enormous conflicts of interest, as Zeller used to be a lobbyist for GlaxoSmithKline via Pinney Associates, McAfee used to promote drug industry cessation products at Free and Clear, and ACS urged FDA to ban e-cig in 2009, is now urging FDA to ban (er regulate) e-cigs and has received tens of millions of dollars from drug companies.
It would have been helpful had Rehm (or her guests) acknowledged their enormous conflicts of interest, as Zeller used to be a lobbyist for GlaxoSmithKline via Pinney Associates, McAfee used to promote drug industry cessation products at Free and Clear, and ACS urged FDA to ban e-cig in 2009, is now urging FDA to ban (er regulate) e-cigs and has received tens of millions of dollars from drug companies.
Reminds me a lot of "so-called balanced discussions"
on all those "Reality-TV 24/7 Cable "Propaganda" News stations ... ALL OF THEM
1. Establish a position ... AKA Agenda
2. Present overwhelming discussion promoting the Agenda
3. Allow a very limited time to a guest to present the other side
4. Play-down what the opposition says.
"Fair and Balanced" ... don't ya know
on all those "Reality-TV 24/7 Cable "Propaganda" News stations ... ALL OF THEM
1. Establish a position ... AKA Agenda
2. Present overwhelming discussion promoting the Agenda
3. Allow a very limited time to a guest to present the other side
4. Play-down what the opposition says.
"Fair and Balanced" ... don't ya know
I agree. All of them were clearly working from the assumption that ecigs are better than burning cigarettes. They had nothing but hatred for cigarettes. Ecigs weren't just any old alternative but a pretty good alternative.
Zeller was really hung up on how ecigs are used. I think it is difficult to argue that smoking is horrible, but a mere reduction in smoking is unacceptable. There was no middle ground for him: quit smoking, or quit smoking and vape, but never smoke and vape. He really wants them to be labeled a medication... almost so he can take credit for them as being an effective cessation tool.
The most important thing I heard all of them say was that testimonials and public support for ecigs have had a strong influence on them. I think that is a definite vote in favor of CASAA's testimonial db.
Glynn said over 40k people die a year from 2nd hand smoke. Really!? That's a big number. I am calling that out as BS. Someone wanna work google for me?
Hanzo.
I agree that they were all pretty objective on e-cigs, were careful not to bash them. I would guess the commenting that CASAA has been promoting is having an effect.
Some comments I pulled out:
If smokers are using them to quit it can be a great public health advance.
If they are using them as a replacement only for smoking-banned areas then it's just a bridge to get from one cigarette to the next.
70% of smokers want to quit -50% try every year - maybe e-cigs can help
Nicotine is not the problem - tar and other chemicals are (in response to a question about regulating nicotine)
There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that show promise in ecigs as a cessation aid
Some comments I pulled out:
If smokers are using them to quit it can be a great public health advance.
If they are using them as a replacement only for smoking-banned areas then it's just a bridge to get from one cigarette to the next.
70% of smokers want to quit -50% try every year - maybe e-cigs can help
Nicotine is not the problem - tar and other chemicals are (in response to a question about regulating nicotine)
There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that show promise in ecigs as a cessation aid
I'm delighted that some people are paying attention to this....Good job!
Every time a smoker uses an e-cigarette or pops a piece of Nicorette gum, he or she is quitting smoking, "one cigarette at a time." Hey!
Wouldn't that make a great slogan for Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR)? Oh, what's that you say? They're already using it for Nicorette? Never mind!
Anyhow, my point is that each of those occasions is one or more cigarettes that didn't get smoked. One of our survey questions needs to ask those who now only vape if they ever were a "dual user", and if so, for how long?
I was a dirty, double-crossing, dual user for over a year, until I switched completely. Well, except for those 4 pieces a day of gum that I began chewing to go from 20 CPD down to 10 CPD and never stopped chewing. So I guess that means I was a triple user for a while and have worked my way down to being a dual user again. But that doesn't mean I was using three times the amount of nicotine. That means that my nicotine was spread across three products, only one of which is known to be a killer.
Yeah, that was my thought too, when I heard them keeping repeating the dual use problem. Aren't most gum users dual-users? I know I was. Kind of hypocritical harping on that point as a drawback for e-cigs and not mention it is the same for other products. Do patch users still smoke? Do inhaler users?
Anyway, I did think that for a radio show reaching a broad audience, most of whom are uninformed about e-cigs, it was a good show. From the standpoint of the uninformed, I thought it came across overall as "E-cigs may help you quit smoking, but we can't say that because there's no scientific evidence." Jane Doe listening may think, "Hey, I'm gonna check these e-cigs out"
Anyway, I did think that for a radio show reaching a broad audience, most of whom are uninformed about e-cigs, it was a good show. From the standpoint of the uninformed, I thought it came across overall as "E-cigs may help you quit smoking, but we can't say that because there's no scientific evidence." Jane Doe listening may think, "Hey, I'm gonna check these e-cigs out"
A few things that I noted,
FDA is REALLY close to regulating ALL tobacco products.. How can they say or do this? Zeller conceded, that they STILL have more questions than answers, in regard to e-cigs? Makes me wonder how a product can be regulated without gathering ALL of the data?
The "dual user" issue was bothersome, being that's how ALL of the NRT's get most their sales! Use concurrently with smoking or used every time a smoker relapses then tries to quit again!
E-cigs are expected to surpass NRT's in sales, I believe they claim this year.>>>Conflict of interest IMO, though Zeller did mention that the consumers have spoken. They seem to have noted, there is a place in the market for e-cigs. That doesn't mean they wont hand the market over to BT
There were definitely concerns expressed about youth taking to e-cigs>>>>possible online and flavors ban??? who knows at this point.
Overall, the discussion was more positive then I expected. My opinion still has not changed. I believe the FDA will still kill the industry, maybe even inadvertently, with over regulation, limiting flavors and nic content, online sales restrictions or ban, advertising limitations, and banning refillable liquids.
I am sure the FDA pretty much knows what an FDA acceptable e-cig should look, taste and feel like.
Last edited:
If the FDA tries to come down on the ecig industry with a heavy hand ...
They will get their ... sued off ... Again !!
Zeller's comments are enlightening and frightening. Prepare for an FDA overreach similar what we're seeing in the EU- where the regulators will attempt to significantly limit the nicotine content of e-cigs available OTC and allow pharmaceutical companies to manufacture and market much higher nicotine density products for use under the care of a physician.
Dual use is a huge issue for them and they will not let the blu cigs and Vuse's of the world, i.e. Lorillard, RAI, promote and profit from a product that appears to entrench their far more deadly products. These concerns were always out there, but they've taken on greater urgency since Big Tobacco has entered the fray. Yes, there will be litigation, but if the FDA's position is "we're not banning these products, we're simply helping consumers make better and informed life and lifestyle decisions." So, any litigation will not be about whether or not these products will continue to be available, but who will sell which products through which supply chains. The FDA will argue that this is what they're mandated to do and the courts will be much more sympathetic to that argument than to any attempt to impose an outright ban.
Dual use is a huge issue for them and they will not let the blu cigs and Vuse's of the world, i.e. Lorillard, RAI, promote and profit from a product that appears to entrench their far more deadly products. These concerns were always out there, but they've taken on greater urgency since Big Tobacco has entered the fray. Yes, there will be litigation, but if the FDA's position is "we're not banning these products, we're simply helping consumers make better and informed life and lifestyle decisions." So, any litigation will not be about whether or not these products will continue to be available, but who will sell which products through which supply chains. The FDA will argue that this is what they're mandated to do and the courts will be much more sympathetic to that argument than to any attempt to impose an outright ban.
Refreshing to read some 'realistic' musings-I see things developing the same way as you see it, dreams and hopes are for church.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 66
The biggest change in the positions/talking points by FDA's Mitch Zeller, CDC's Tim McAfee and CDC's Tom Glynn is that all of them have finally acknowledged that e-cigarettes are beneficial, but only for smokers who totally quit smoking. Back in 2009, all three of them (who were all funded by drug companies to promote NRT and oppose e-cigs) were advocating and defending FDA's unlawful e-cigarette ban.
Unfortunately, the FDA, CDC and ACS (as well as CTFK, ALA, AHA, Legacy, and many others) have adopted policies opposing dual use of different tobacco products (but they all strongly support dual usage involving NRT products), even for pack a day smokers who reduce consumption to just one or several cigarettes per week.
McAfee has been especially critical of dual e-cigarette use (and dual smokeless tobacco use) that sharply reduces cigarette consumption, but doesn't result in total smoking cessation, as McAfee has repeatedly cited some cherry picked junk science data when proclaiming that reducing cigarette consumption doesn't reduce disease or death risks. Amazingly, CDC's relatively new policy (under the Obama administration) actively OPPOSES smokers reducing cigarette consumption (i.e. CDC is deceitfully claiming that total cigarette cessation is the only way smokers can reduce their disease risk).
CDC's McAfee also misrepresented the CDC's survey findings of e-cigarette usage, which was poorly designed because it only asked participants if they were a "nonsmoker", "smoker" or "exsmoker" and if they had ever used an "e-cigarette".
Not surprisingly, many/most/all of CDC's survey participants who indicated they were an "exsmoker" (and had previously used an e-cig) were actually smokers who quit smoking by completely switching to e-cigs. But McAfee deceptively referred to these "exsmokers" as "former smokers" who had previously quit smoking and then began to use e-cigs (presumably because the e-cig industry's marketing took advantage of these poor and defenseless victims).
Unfortunately, the FDA, CDC and ACS (as well as CTFK, ALA, AHA, Legacy, and many others) have adopted policies opposing dual use of different tobacco products (but they all strongly support dual usage involving NRT products), even for pack a day smokers who reduce consumption to just one or several cigarettes per week.
McAfee has been especially critical of dual e-cigarette use (and dual smokeless tobacco use) that sharply reduces cigarette consumption, but doesn't result in total smoking cessation, as McAfee has repeatedly cited some cherry picked junk science data when proclaiming that reducing cigarette consumption doesn't reduce disease or death risks. Amazingly, CDC's relatively new policy (under the Obama administration) actively OPPOSES smokers reducing cigarette consumption (i.e. CDC is deceitfully claiming that total cigarette cessation is the only way smokers can reduce their disease risk).
CDC's McAfee also misrepresented the CDC's survey findings of e-cigarette usage, which was poorly designed because it only asked participants if they were a "nonsmoker", "smoker" or "exsmoker" and if they had ever used an "e-cigarette".
Not surprisingly, many/most/all of CDC's survey participants who indicated they were an "exsmoker" (and had previously used an e-cig) were actually smokers who quit smoking by completely switching to e-cigs. But McAfee deceptively referred to these "exsmokers" as "former smokers" who had previously quit smoking and then began to use e-cigs (presumably because the e-cig industry's marketing took advantage of these poor and defenseless victims).
- Status
Similar threads
