urgent: Rochester local news want to interview someone today.

[Boston George]

Rachel Barnhart of 13WHAM News emailed me this morning asking for an interview.

She already has someone lined up from the American Cancer Society.

I am not able to do an interview today, anyone in the Rochester area want to step up?

her email
RACHELBARNHART@13wham.com

 

[lvlninety9]

Man wish I could help out BG but I'm not in Roch. Hopefully someone can step up to the plate and give a good interview for our point of view.

 

[MonkeyMonk]

Hey, Boston George, does the ECA have a 24hr number? They might have someone close. How much time do they have between now and the interview. I'll try to track down Lacey's phone number.

Left a message on Lacey's machine.

What about Spikey? Is Long Island near Rodchester?

Or can this lady do a remote with a Satellite link to a station near one of the ECA members?

 

[MonkeyMonk]

Deleted... added it to the edit of the above post

 

[eplanet]

Hey BG, I would be glad to do a phone interview....or skype video...do they have any affiliates on Long Island? you got to get someone there or the story may go all wrong, all wrong i tell ya....I have seen it happen...rise up!!!

 

[eplanet]

Hey BG,

you started the thread at 12:12 ... I responded at 1:11

there is a code in there!!! that is a whole other story though.....

 

[Spikey]

We don't have anyone up north... George find SOMEONE who is reasonably knowledgable and educate them FAST... have a customer do it... who cares... but SOMEONE must represent us or we are screwed! Offer to do a phone interview. Or soneone can come on by webcam and join virtually.... don't let them badmouth us with no defense!!!

 

[Smokin'Sandy]

Hey BG,

you started the thread at 12:12 ... I responded at 1:11

there is a code in there!!! that is a whole other story though.....

And...this post of yours here is 12:12 central time.

I wish I knew someone to help. I'm pretty isolated in Oklahoma City and I know I couldn't do the e-cig any justice even if I were there. I'm too new at it. I hope you found someone.

 

[eplanet]

And...this post of yours here is 12:12 central time.

its a paradox....

 

[Badanswer]

I just watched the story, it wasn't so bad.

I'll try to upload it shortly

 

[eplanet]

I just watched the story, it wasn't so bad.

I'll try to upload it shortly

looking forward to seeing it...They never called me!!! lol....

 

[yvilla]

Darn BG, I would have acted on this, but was presenting at a training in Lyons all day today, so didn't see this until now!

Much too short notice.

 

[Badanswer]

Ok...sorry for quality

I spoke to Boston George on the phone a week or so ago, so he can back this statement up....I work for local TV, doing commercials and corporate videos, so i couldn't do this interview....believe me I wish I could have.

YouTube - 13wham e cig story

 

[Brooks]

Here is the print version...

Need to Regulate E-Cigarettes Debated - 13WHAM.com
...couldn't find any video.

 

[yvilla]

The news video ends with an erroneous statement about the "unknown" safety of inhaled PG. Here is an email I sent the reporter:

Dear Ms. Barnhart,

I was dismayed to hear that you were given erroneous information on the supposed “lack” of knowledge regarding inhalation of propylene glycol and its safety. Contrary to the impression you gave the public, propylene glycol has been extensively studied for inhalation safety. In fact, it has been used extensively in the US since the 1950’s, in medical devices such as asthma inhalers, as an air disinfectant in places like hospitals and restaurants, and even in hundreds of thousands of entertainment venues such as bars and theaters, since it is the substance used for fog and artificial smoke machines.

Here are a few quotes from the 2007 EPA re-registration decision approving the use of propylene glycol in places like hospitals and food establishments:

"Propylene glycol is used in air sanitization and hard surface disinfection and dipropylene glycol is used in air sanitization."

"Propylene glycol and dipropylene glycol were first registered in 1950 and 1959, respectively, by the FDA for use in hospitals as air disinfectants."

"Indoor Non-Food: Propylene glycol is used on the following use sites: air treatment (eating establishments, hospital, commercial, institutional, household, bathroom, transportational facilities); medical premises and equipment, commercial, institutional and industrial premises and equipment; laundry equipment; hard non-porous surface treatments (bathroom facilities); automobiles; air conditioning filters; pet treatment, including cats, dogs, and caged birds; environmental inanimate hard surfaces; garbage containers/storage."

"Target Pests: Odor-causing bacteria, Fleas, Mites, Red lice, Animal pathogenic bacteria (G- and G+ vegetative), Shigella bacteria, Pasteurella bacteria, Listeria bacteria, Herpes Simplex I and II, Animal viruses, Influenza Virus A2, Aspergillus Niger Fungus, Mold/Mildew, Pseudomonas SPP., Shigella Flexneri, Shigella Sonnei."

"General Toxicity Observations
Upon reviewing the available toxicity information, the Agency has concluded that there are no endpoints of concern for oral, dermal, or inhalation exposure to propylene glycol and dipropylene glycol. This conclusion is based on the results of toxicity testing of propylene glycol and dipropylene glycol in which dose levels near or above testing limits (as established in the OPPTS 870 series harmonized test guidelines) were employed in experimental animal studies and no significant toxicity observed."

"Carcinogenicity Classification
A review of the available data has shown propylene glycol and dipropylene glycol to be negative for carcinogenicity in studies conducted up to the testing limit doses established by the Agency; therefore, no further carcinogenic analysis is required."

And much more to be seen in the entire document:

http://www.epa.gov/oppsrrd1/reregistration/REDs/propylene_glycol_red.pdf

Here is a link to a Time article about propylene glycol’s air germicidal properties, published in 1942!

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,932876-2,00.html

Fast forward to 2007, and here is a link to a study showing the safety of propylene glycol as the carrier for inhaled Cyclosporine, for lung transplant patients!

http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/jam.2007.0626

Here is an incredibly long list of air sanitizing products in current commerce based on propylene glycol, many used in hospitals as approved by the EPA in the above PDF:

http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/pesticides.tcl?edf_substance_id=57-55-6

The bottom line is this: Propylene glycol as the base carrier liquid for the small percentage of liquid nicotine found in e-cigarettes is a safe and well-studied substance. It truly amazes me to hear such misinformation spread, even by doctors and health groups, about propylene glycol and e-cigarettes, which are in fact considered by many reputable doctors and others in the field of tobacco harm reduction to be as much as one-tenth to one-hundredth as harmful as the so freely available tobacco cigarettes they were designed to be an alternative to. I believe the misinformation is deliberate, and wish you would consider correcting your story about it, in the public interest.

For your ease of use, I’ll leave you with the links to some of those doctors’ statements and interviews that I put in my comment to the article on your station’s web site, as they are not clickable links in the comment.

Dr. Joel Nitzkin: http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/interviews/joel-nitzkin-electronic-cigarette.html

Dr. Michael Siegel: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/03/senator-and-anti-smoking-groups-want-to.html

Dr. Carl Phillips: http://www.tobaccoharmreduction.org/faq/ecigs.htm

And I’ll add an interview with David Sweanor: http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/interviews/david-sweanor.html

Thank you for your time,

Yolanda Villa

 

[Brian1976]

I wish i would have known about it earlier im in rochester well about 15 mins from rochester and i could have been interviewed.

 

[Badanswer]

Awesome response Yvilla,

That's the kind of info that people need to see before making such claims. 13Wham probably had her try to hurry the story out today because of the NY Times and Wall Street Journals stories that also came out today.

I hope the station will let her do a follow up story soon.

Bad

 

[TropicalBob]

Very nice letter, Yvilla. I think the on-air reporter got caught with the tossed question from the anchor woman, and just blurted out an inaccuracy. If they're worth their salt as journalists, they'll make a small correction tomorrow.

Of everything involved in e-smoking, propylene glycol probably has the most study. And best results. Geez.

 

[Boston George]

I am sorry that I could not get something ready, I was on the road all day.

 

[katink]

Good response Yvilla - I too hope they will make a correction (and that this correction reaches all that looked...)

One small remark: I think you are off with the safety-remark: 2 to 3 magnitude safer is not 1/10th to 1/100th (10 to 1% of the tobacco-harm), but it's 1/100th to 1/1000th (1 to 0.1% of the harm). (But if you have allready sent it: oh well, allready better then they said at least )