|
|||
FDA First Says E-Cigs Contain Toxins and Now the FDA Says E-Cigs Contain “Just Nicotine”TruthAboutEcigs.com
was developed in
response to the FDA’s
sensationalistic July
22, 2009 press release
stating that the FDA’s
testing of electronic
cigarettes (e-cigs)
“found that they
contain carcinogens and
toxic chemicals such as
diethylene glycol, an
ingredient used in
antifreeze.” The
FDAs release set off a
firestorm of activism
and disinformation that
has falsely demonized
the first technology
that 300,000+ smokers
are actually
consistently using to
stay off of tobacco. The
7/22 press release is
now leading to state
bans (in deference to
the FDAs lack of a
national ban) based on
their tests which in
fact did not find any
toxins or carcinogens at
any levels harmful to
humans. This
prelude is addressing
the most recent comments
the FDA has made in an
interview on September
30, 2009* that state
that in regard to e-cigs
the FDA “wants
to regulate electronic
cigarette(s) so it can
be sure that the people
who use them are getting
a reliable dose of
nicotine” and "There
are no long-term studies
on the health effects of
just nicotine, minus the
tobacco component.” In
the same article that
quotes FDA spokeswoman
DeLancey also states” A federal Food and Drug Administration spokeswoman said the FDA has not
moved to ban
e-cigarettes, which heat
a liquid and nicotine to
a vapor so people can
puff them.” The
FDA has the forum to
alert the public about
their findings of toxins
and carcinogens they
found in e-cigs and to
have already banned the
product if there were
actual and immediate
dangers to the public.
Months ago a very public
claim was made that
e-cigs were dangerous
and now the FDA is only
worried that they
contain “just
nicotine”. They were
at one time so concerned
about the dangers of
e-cigs as to mount a
very public press
campaign and now their
only concern is of the
e-cig’s long-term
delivery of “just
nicotine”? By stating
“just nicotine” it
seems the FDA is
capitulating to all the
completed and mounting
scientific testing and
public admissions that
there are no toxins or
carcinogens in e-cigs at
any levels that are of
danger to the public and
that an electronic
cigarette (as has been
tested in five separate
tests this year included
in this report) is only
providing to an e-cig
user their desired
nicotine. It
is very disconcerting
that the FDA who has
providence to regulate
consumer products makes
the very misleading
statement that there are
“no
long-term studies on the
health effects of just
nicotine” when
in fact
long-term
tests have been done on
nicotine only ingestion
as the FDA has approved Nicotine
polacrilex lozenges
(sold as Glaxo’s
Commit Lozenges) in 2002**
and
Pfizer’s Nicotrol
inhalers. From Dr.
Murray Laugesen
who has actually done
testing on the e-cig: “The FDA
does not seem to
have heard about the
famous 5 year Lung Study
wherein thousands with chronic
obstructive pulmonary
disease(COPD)
used Nicotine gum, with
no increase in
hospitalization or
mortality. Since then
7.5 additional years of
follow up for lung
cancer show no added
risk for gum users but
plenty for smokers. If
The FDA needs references
for longer term nicotine
only effects, Nicotine
gum has been used widely
in many countries since
1984.”
) Below
is the summation of the
results of the 1996
study referenced above
by The American College
of Physicians of
Nicotine polacrilex
titled “Safety
of Nicotine Polacrilex
Gum Used by 3,094
Participants in the Lung
Health Study”: Results:
The rates of
hospitalization for
cardiovascular
conditions and
cardiovascular deaths
during the 5 years of
the study were not
related to use of NP, to
dose of NP, or to
concomitant use of NP
and cigarettes. About
25% of NP users reported
at least one side
effect, but most were
very minor and
transient. Side effects
associated with
discontinuance of NP in
5% or more of users
included headache,
indigestion, mouth
irritation, mouth
ulcers, and nausea.
There was no evidence
that concomitant use of
NP and cigarettes was
associated with elevated
rates of reported side
effects. Participants in
the smoking cessation
intervention who
received intensive
levels of instruction
and monitoring of NP use
(initially at 12
meetings during 3
months) appeared to
report significantly
lower rates of side
effects (dizziness,
headache, and throat
irritation) than control
participants, presumed
to have less instruction
and monitoring. Conclusions:
NP, as used in the Lung
Health Study,appears to
be safe and unrelated to
any cardiovascular
illnesses or other
serious side effects. (CHEST
1996; 109:438-45) Ingredients
of
Nicotine
Polacrilex
(http://www.gsk.com/press_archive/press_10312002.htm) Below
are all the ingredients
in the inLife Regal
Electronic Cigarette:Active
Ingredients:
Nicotine 1.3%,
Propylene
Glycol >50%, Glycerol
<30% Ingredients
at less than 10%: Water,
Alcohol
(ethanol), Coriandor, Solanone,
Citric Acid, Benzel
Alcohol, Orient Tobacco
Absolute (flavor),
Pepper Oil, Guaiacol,
Menthol,
Fragrant Orchid Element In Summation To the FDA’s Revised CommentsOn
July 22nd
2009 the FDA first
reported to the world
that “These
tests indicate that
these products contained
detectable levels of
known carcinogens and
toxic chemicals”
and
“In
one sample, the FDA’s
analyses detected
diethylene glycol, a
chemical used in
antifreeze that is toxic
to humans” scaring
thousands of e-cig users
and leading to Oregon,
Connecticut, and
potentially California
in taking legal action
and now their only
concern is of the safety
of nicotine, the one
component it approves
for use in nicotine
inhalers, gums, lozenges
and patches? So in
summation, this current
confused attitude
of The FDA seems to be
driven by a combination
of pharmacological
puritanism and
bureaucratic
stubbornness that does
not bode well for the
FDA's ability to
rationally regulate
tobacco products and
subsequently the e-cig
especially now given the
fact that over 300,000+
users are reliant on. To
ban the electronic
cigarettes based not on
scientific fact, but
conclusions in search of
facts would commit
300,000+ e-cig users to
return to smoking
tobacco, the one product
we know will kill them. *
http://suburbanjournals.stltoday.com/articles/2009/10/01/south/news//0930sc-ecig0.txt
) |
