Vote for e-cigarettes over cigarettes in online doctors' poll

[kristin]

Thanks Bill. If nothing else, we stopped the antis from running this poll without our knowledge and then issuing a press release stating that "9 out of 10 doctors oppose e-cigarette use."

We pretty much just took away that opportunity from them, thanks to you!

The only reason I posted this poll here today was because it was already posted yesterday on an anti-tobacco website where dozens of its members are e-cigarette prohibitionists, and where Banzhaf posts all of his inaccurate and misleading press releases opposing e-cigarettes.

The only reason the online poll favored the e-cigarette prohibitionists this morning was because e-cigarette prohibitionists already cast their votes, and because the organization sponsoring the poll had just declared war on e-cigarettes and then asked its members of their views.

 

[CES]

It's still on the front page of Annals of Internal Medicine on the left side, but you might need to scroll down a little.

From the abstract, I thought this quote was particularly interesting:

thanks! voted.

the full article is annoying....some truth mixed with spin

We contend that the e-cigarette boom presents important public health concerns on at least 3 fronts. First, e-cigarettes may pose a risk as starter products for nonusers of tobacco....

Second, potential e-cigarette toxicities exist that are not well quantified. A recent study documented more than 13 700 poisonings from tobacco ingestion among children younger than 6 years between 2006 and 2008 (19). Similarly, a child playing with an e-cigarette could be exposed to nicotine from the device or from nicotine refill bottles, which contain a concentrated liquid to fill e-cigarettes and can easily be ordered online (20). The nicotine dose that could be ingested or absorbed transdermally could induce fatal overdose in children. Finally, e-cigarettes may have other toxins, even in their exhaled secondhand vapor.

Third, little empirical research exists to determine whether e-cigarettes have potential as smoking cessation products. Aggressive affiliate marketing tactics are equally likely to dissuade smokers attempting to quit and could promote relapse to smoking. E-cigarettes may be less toxic than their paper analogues and may be developed as smoking cessation products, but evidence supporting these theories is currently lacking.

 

[Vocalek]

I couldn't find the poll, so I suspect that it's gone. Does anyone else have access to the full text article? the reference list is interesting. especially reference #20...

Yes, #20 is interesting. So is #11 and #13. The text that refers to them is

In less than 5 minutes, someone can become a salesperson on commission, armed with an advertisement library of posters and pamphlets (11), customized business cards, and a Web forum to share strategies to maximize online presence.

And

Before becoming an affiliate, a person agrees to not sell e-cigarettes to persons younger than 18 years or market e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation product, although e-cigarettes are advertised as a “smoking sensation” product and can be purchased from Web sites that do not verify age (13).

And

Although candy-flavored tobacco products and e-cigarettes were recently banned by the FDA in efforts to hinder marketing toward children, the posturing of e-cigarettes as “green” and “healthy” could deceptively lure adolescents (13).

References
1. NOVA Online. Search for a safe cigarette. “Safer” cigarettes: a history. Updated October 2001. Accessed at www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/cigarette/history2.htm on 17 September 2010.
2. Laugesen M. Safety report on the Ruyan® e-cigarette cartridge and inhaled aerosol. Health New Zealand Ltd. 30 October 2008. Accessed at www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf on 17 September 2010.
3. Westenberger BJ. Evaluation of e-cigarettes. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 4 May 2009. Accessed at www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ScienceResearch/UCM173250.pdf on 17 September 2010.
4. Trtchounian A, Williams M, Talbot P. Conventional and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have different smoking characteristics. Nicotine Tob Res. 2010;12:905-12. [PMID: 20644205]
5. Bullen C, McRobbie H, Thornley S, Glover M, Lin R, Laugesen M. Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e cigarette) on desire to smoke and withdrawal, user preferences and nicotine delivery: randomised cross-over trial. Tob Control. 2010;19:98-103. [PMID: 20378585]
6. Vansickel AR, Cobb CO, Weaver MF, Eissenberg TE. A clinical laboratory model for evaluating the acute effects of electronic “cigarettes”: nicotine delivery profile and cardiovascular and subjective effects. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19:1945-53. [PMID: 20647410]
7. Etter JF. Electronic cigarettes: a survey of users. BMC Public Health. 2010; 10:231. [PMID: 20441579]
8. Google. Web search interest: electronic cigarettes. Google Insights for Search. January 2007 to January 2010. Accessed at Google Insights for Search on 17 September 2010.
9. Compete. Site comparison of smokingeverywhere.com vs. smokefree.gov: September 2009 to July 2010. Accessed at Site Profile Error | Compete on 17 September 2010.
10. Fox S, Jones S. The social life of health information. Pew Internet and American Life Project. 11 June 2009. Accessed at The Social Life of Health Information | Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project on 17 September2010.
11. Green Smoke. Affiliate banners & ads. Accessed at ::: Green Smoke - Affiliate Banners & Ads ::: on 17 September 2010.
12. Google search: e-cigarettes. Accessed at Google on 17 September 2010.
13. Green Smoke. Electronic cigarette & e-cigarette kits. Accessed at Green Smoke ™ | Electronic Cigarette on 17 September 2010.
14. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA’s media briefing on electronic cigarettes [transcript]. 22 July 2009. Accessed at www.fda.gov/downloads/NewsEvents/Newsroom/MediaTranscripts/UCM173405.pdf on 17 September 2010.
15. Smoking Everywhere, Inc. v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 09-771 (RJL), 2010 WL 129667, *1 (DDC 2010).
16. Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, HR 1256, 111th Cong, 1st Sess (2009).
17. World Health Organization. WHO Study Group on Tobacco Product Regulation: Report on the Scientific Basis of Tobacco Product Regulation. 2009. Accessed at http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2009/9789241209557_eng.pdf on 17 September 2010.
18. Henningfield JE, Zaatari GS. Electronic nicotine delivery systems: emerging science foundation for policy [Editorial]. Tob Control. 2010;19:89-90. [PMID:20378582]
19. Connolly GN, Richter P, Aleguas A Jr, Pechacek TF, Stanfill SB, Alpert HR. Unintentional child poisonings through ingestion of conventional and novel tobacco products. Pediatrics. 2010;125:896-9. [PMID: 20403932]
20. E-Cigarette Forum. E-liquid reviews. Accessed at E-Liquid Reviews on 17 September 2010.

 

[pm2006]

voted. It's on the front page on the left side of the link. Annals of Internal Medicine. We are way in the lead now.

 

[Vocalek]

Second, potential e-cigarette toxicities exist that are not well quantified. A recent study documented more than 13 700 poisonings from tobacco ingestion among children younger than 6 years between 2006 and 2008 (19). Similarly, a child playing with an e-cigarette could be exposed to nicotine from the device or from nicotine refill bottles, which contain a concentrated liquid to fill e-cigarettes and can easily be ordered online (20). The nicotine dose that could be ingested or absorbed transdermally could induce fatal overdose in children. Finally, e-cigarettes may have other toxins, even in their exhaled secondhand vapor.

Extremely clever and subtle use of propaganda. First, pretend that research on children being poisoned by traditional cigarettes supports the contention that e-cigarettes may have some mysterious, unquantified toxicities. Next, pretend that a child young and dumb enough to be playing with liquid is old and smart enough to have ordered it online. Ignore the fact that the same type of fatal overdose could occur from a child getting his/her little hands on a box of the new, candy-like Nicorette mini lozenges. Pretend this danger only exists with e-liquid. Finally, throw in an off-the wall, totally unsupported comment about second-hand vapor.

 

[Crumpet]

It honestly doesn't matter WHAT we call them, because it's not really about health issues or smoking anymore. It's about controlling behavior and money. We could call them "personal vaporizers," "electronic nicotine systems" or "XYZ devices" and the reaction would have been the same.

I agree to an extent, but I don't think hearing the term 'cigarette' is going to evoke a favorable response when an uninformed person who isn't familiar with the technology and concept of vaping
is asked for their (uninformed) opinion about whether e-cigarettes are okay in any way. People have been conditioned to have a knee jerk response to certain words and 'cigarettes' is one of them. I think it automatically closes the minds of people even before you have a chance to explain what it is.

I strongly agree with you that there is a very disturbing Puritan revival of sorts going on on both the Left and the Right and it's amusing that neither of them sees how much they have in common with the other. The Right is obsessed with controlling peoples' sexuality and anything related to religion and the Left is preoccupied with saving us all from our inferior and stupid selves by dictating what we can or cannot eat/drink/smoke because they know what's best for us.

 

[CES]

Extremely clever and subtle use of propaganda. First, pretend that research on children being poisoned by traditional cigarettes supports the contention that e-cigarettes may have some mysterious, unquantified toxicities. Next, pretend that a child young and dumb enough to be playing with liquid is old and smart enough to have ordered it online. Ignore the fact that the same type of fatal overdose could occur from a child getting his/her little hands on a box of the new, candy-like Nicorette mini lozenges. Pretend this danger only exists with e-liquid. Finally, throw in an off-the wall, totally unsupported comment about second-hand vapor.

exactly. ironic how those calling for empirical research seem to be unable to look at the issue without throwing in unsupported analysis.

 

[Thulium]

I agree to an extent, but I don't think hearing the term 'cigarette' is going to evoke a favorable response when an uninformed person who isn't familiar with the technology and concept of vaping
is asked for their (uninformed) opinion about whether e-cigarettes are okay in any way. People have been conditioned to have a knee jerk response to certain words and 'cigarettes' is one of them. I think it automatically closes the minds of people even before you have a chance to explain what it is.

If we assume that uninformed people will have a negative reaction to the name 'e-cigarettes' there are TWO options: Use a different name, OR work to educate the general public about the available smoke-free alternatives. The word might be a turn-off to non-smokers, but adults smokers are generally pretty comfortable with the word "cigarette".

Regardless of what you or I call it, lately people who see me vaping approach me and ask, "Is that one of those smokeless cigarette things?" A quick explanation and demonstration is usually enough to relieve most people's fears, though there are of course people who have been so frightened by the anti-tobacco denormalization campaign of Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt (FUD) that they just won't listen...but most people are able to see for themself that there is nothing to fear. Katheryn Heigl's apparance on Letterman is a perfect example: Having been forced to quit smoking after experiDave was pretty uncertain about the thing until he tried it and the next thing he says is, "This is remarkable! ... This ought to get it done, my friend."

I strongly agree with you that there is a very disturbing Puritan revival of sorts going on on both the Left and the Right and it's amusing that neither of them sees how much they have in common with the other. The Right is obsessed with controlling peoples' sexuality and anything related to religion and the Left is preoccupied with saving us all from our inferior and stupid selves by dictating what we can or cannot eat/drink/smoke because they know what's best for us.

Well, it would be amusing if it weren't so tragic. At this point "The Antis" are completely losing touch with what they set out to accomplish. They cite all the dangers of SMOKING, strategically slip in the words "and tobacco", and then deceive the public into thinking that the problem with smoking is tobacco when nearly all research points specifically to the smoke and other products of combustion.

The abolitionist mentality of the anti-tobacco movement (falsely disguised as "anti-smoking" or even "public health") in Tobacco Control has FAILED to reduce the number of smoking-fatalities, isn't it time to consider an alternative? Sweden has the highest rate of smokeless tobacco use, and because they frequently reduced nitrosamine Snus, Sweden has the lowest rate of lung cancer of men in the world. According to the CDC's data, one out of every 104 smokers dies every year from various diseases attributed to smoking, while only one out of 7667 smokeless tobacco users dies from mouth cancer (compared to 1:3538 smokers).

Its interesting to note that the numbers from the CDC were drawn from studies on traditional smokeless tobacco products that were performed before products like Swedish-style snus or e-cigarettes were widely available in the U.S. Therefore it is not unreasonable to expect that the oral cancer rate would be closer to the rate in non-smokers....which according to CDC reports, is only 25-50% lower than chewing tobacco in the first place!

 

[Our House]

Extremely clever and subtle use of propaganda. First, pretend that research on children being poisoned by traditional cigarettes supports the contention that e-cigarettes may have some mysterious, unquantified toxicities. Next, pretend that a child young and dumb enough to be playing with liquid is old and smart enough to have ordered it online. Ignore the fact that the same type of fatal overdose could occur from a child getting his/her little hands on a box of the new, candy-like Nicorette mini lozenges. Pretend this danger only exists with e-liquid. Finally, throw in an off-the wall, totally unsupported comment about second-hand vapor.

Very very well said.

 

[jtcaseyjr]

I went to the page and voted

 

[vappoem]

Is anyone else concerned that vaping while using a nicotine replacement therapy is an option? Talk about a REALLY bad idea...

Also, throwing in my two cents, I agree with the notion to not call "them (those devices we love)" e-cigarettes. People hear the word cigarette and think of an industry built on manipulating truths, health hazards and cancer.

 

[Vocalek]

Is anyone else concerned that vaping while using a nicotine replacement therapy is an option? Talk about a REALLY bad idea...

Also, throwing in my two cents, I agree with the notion to not call "them (those devices we love)" e-cigarettes. People hear the word cigarette and think of an industry built on manipulating truths, health hazards and cancer.

Why would you believe that vaping while using a nicotine replacement therapy is a bad idea?

Let me share my little story with you. Twenty years ago I used the (then) prescription patches to wean down and off nicotine over the course of 8 weeks. All hell broke loose. I became one very sick and very dysfunctional sister. The excruciating headaches (caused by jaw clenching) went away on their own after about 2 weeks, but none of the rest of it did. Prozac relieved the depression to the extent that I was no longer curled up on the couch, crying my eyes out, and contemplating different methods of suicide. Six months after becoming nicotine abstinent, I was still confused, inattentive, forgetful, and about to lose my job. I went back to the doc who had prescribed the Prozac and asked for something to get my head straight again. She told me that there was nothing she could do, and I told her that I couldn't live this way and had no other option but to go back to smoking.

The good news is that I didn't go back to 2-1/2 packs. I only smoked 1-1/2 packs for several years after that. I tried to substitute gum, but it tasted terrible in those days. Patches were still prescription only, but when they came OTC I found that I could only wear one for a couple of days before skin reactions set in (yes, I was moving to different spots -- didn't matter).

Then one day I'm reading about how the Light types of cigarettes were actually worse than the Full types because smokers compensate for the lower nicotine levels by smoking more. True, before Lights came on the market, I was at a single pack a day of Winstons (red) for a good 20 years. When I switched to Lights, I was up to 50 cigarettes a day before I knew what was happening. So then I got to thinking, "What if I switched from Lights to a high-nicotine cigarette?" I switched to American Spirit (Red) and reduced my smoking to 1 pack a day.

Then they came out with better flavors for nicotine gum. I tried to quit smoking by substituting the gum, but was only able to get down to 1/2 a pack. I can only handle 5 or 6 pieces of gum a day. If I try to chew more, I get really bad heartburn.

So there I was a 1/2 a pack a day and 5 or 6 pieces of gum for a couple of years. Along came e-cigarettes, and I was able to get down to zero tobacco cigarettes. I have been on zero tobacco cigarettes, vaping, and 5 or 6 pieces of nicotine gum now for nearly 18 months. BTW, about 15 years ago, it seemd as if the Prozac had stopped working, so I switched to bupropion (Wellbutrin)

You use whatever works. Don't fall for the story, "You might overdose on nicotine if you smoke (or vape) and use other nicotine products." It's a myth. The truth is that smokers unconsciously regulate their nicotine intake. That's why Lights made me smoke more, and Fulls made me smoke less. And vaping + gum + Wellbutrin allowed me to smoke not at all!

 

[NCC]

I voted. Thanks for the thread Bill.

RE: posts #31 & #32. I work in a pocket T-Shirt. Maybe I don't have the entire dripping thing down to an art. But, frequently, my PVs leak and soak my pocket area, which is in direct contact with my skin. I've wondered if, when my Tee has a juice drenched area like that, I'm in effect wearing a patch. My guess is, yes.

 

[xg4bx]

OF COURSE doctors are going to support handing out prescriptions. the makers of chantix probably give them a fat kickback.

as much as i love capitalism, it honestly is a true evil sometimes.

 

[Bill Godshall]

NCC wrote
"I've wondered if, when my Tee has a juice drenched area like that, I'm in effect wearing a patch."
Probably, and it would vary based on nicotine concentration, volume of liquid, and duration of time.

In 2002 FDA banned several nicotine hand creams (that people wiped on their hands to absorb nicotine transdermally), and several years ago banned a similar product called Nicogel (that looked like a tiny ketchup packs for single use applications). I told the owner of the company that made Nicogel to market it as a tobacco product and call it Tobacco Gel, but he insisted that the FDA wouldn't ban the product before the FDA banned it. And of course, unlike SE and NJOY, he didn't respond by suing the FDA.

 

[Bill Godshall]

Current tally
Increase e-cigarettes to stop smoking altogether 72.52% (161 votes)
Continue e-cigarettes but add pharmacologic smoking cessation treatment 13.06% (29 votes)
Stop e-cigarettes and start a pharmacologic smoking cessation treatment 14.41% (32 votes)
Total Votes: 222

 

[Vocalek]

I voted. Thanks for the thread Bill.

RE: posts #31 & #32. I work in a pocket T-Shirt. Maybe I don't have the entire dripping thing down to an art. But, frequently, my PVs leak and soak my pocket area, which is in direct contact with my skin. I've wondered if, when my Tee has a juice drenched area like that, I'm in effect wearing a patch. My guess is, yes.

So what are the results when this happens? Do you experience symptoms of nicotine overdose--nausea, dizziness, rapid pulse? If not, do you find you have fewer urges to take in nicotine via vaping?

If neither of these occurs, that shows us that in this particular medium (PG or VG), the nicotine isn't absorbed very effectively through the skin.

 

[NCC]

So what are the results when this happens? Do you experience symptoms of nicotine overdose--nausea, dizziness, rapid pulse? If not, do you find you have fewer urges to take in nicotine via vaping?

I have occasionally had the symptoms you mention. However, since I occasionally have had those symptoms for years, it would be hard for me to attribute them to nicotine OD. Can't they all also be the result of elevated blood pressure? Mine is borderline hypertension ... and I'll be 57 next month.

Possibly less frequent hits to my PV, but I'm far from sure of that either. For what it's worth, I vape 30-36mg juice. I know that's pretty high. And, maybe any transdermal absorption is fairly insignificant at my tolerance level?

If neither of these occurs, that shows us that in this particular medium (PG or VG), the nicotine isn't absorbed very effectively through the skin.

 

[rothenbj]

Why would you believe that vaping while using a nicotine replacement therapy is a bad idea?

................. Along came e-cigarettes, and I was able to get down to zero tobacco cigarettes. I have been on zero tobacco cigarettes, vaping, and 5 or 6 pieces of nicotine gum now for nearly 18 months. BTW, about 15 years ago, it seemd as if the Prozac had stopped working, so I switched to bupropion (Wellbutrin)

You use whatever works. Don't fall for the story, "You might overdose on nicotine if you smoke (or vape) and use other nicotine products." It's a myth. The truth is that smokers unconsciously regulate their nicotine intake. That's why Lights made me smoke more, and Fulls made me smoke less. And vaping + gum + Wellbutrin allowed me to smoke not at all!

Darn Elaine, I didn't realize you were a dual user. You really should come over to the dark side, you may even find you like it. There are some mighty nice snus flavors and you wouldn't need to be chewing that stuff.

By the way, I added a comment on their facebook page.

Yes, it sure appears to be responsible to suggest that using any product other than NRT products that have a success rate after two years of something like 2% to quit smoking. When is the medical community going to get honest about the relative risks of various products rather than expecting that somehow they'll persuade everyone just to quit nicotine/tobacco use. We never seem to learn that prohibition, of any sort, never really works.

 

[judybr]

I just found this and went and voted for us also. I tried to leave a comment on facebook but didn't see a way to do that.
I did find where another article has spawned from that one at:

Electronic Cigarettes? A Shocking New Fad! - Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine

And so, on and on it goes. The do allow comments on that page so those who are wise with their words may want to explain why PV's will never be interesting to kids!

Judy