2006RUS

Most people have read each side of the debate on the subject of ecigs. On one side, you’ll find the proponents that believe they’re safe to use and an efficient gadget for quitting smoking. On the other end of this debate are the opponents who say the electronic cigarette can be hazardous for the end user and they are worthless as a smoking cessation aid. However, as we all know, when there are two sides of a story the truth is usually someplace in the middle.

The e-cigarette debate became viral around August of 09 when the Food and Drug Administration printed a report claiming they had analyzed e cigarettes, together with their associated product e-liquid (nicotine product used in electric cigarettes), and identified them to be hazardous since they included materials deemed to be harmful to humans. The e cig camp fired back by hiring the well known technical analysis firm Exponent Engineering to examine the FDA report and the procedures they utilized to attain their findings. Exponent Engineering identified the findings reached by the FDA analysis appeared to be invalid because the assessment procedures they applied were far from those required to come up with these kinds of scientific determinations.

So now, at least a year later, exactly what have we discovered about the safety involving electric cigarettes? Well, effectively nothing has changed. Each side of the controversy still declares victory yet in the long run, the e cigarette user is still in the dark regarding whether or not the e-cig is actually harmless to use and beneficial as a smoking cessation product. Why don’t we take a closer look at what we know.

In the interest of brevity, I will not go into detail about how the smokeless cigarette works or how it is used. It’s fundamentally a nicotine delivery system not unlike the medically prescribed Nicotrol inhaler. It functions by heating and atomizing a mixture of propylene glycol and pure nicotine, known as e-liquid, as the smoker breathes in through the device. The Food and Drug Administration’s primary point of contention, confirmed mistaken by Exponent Engineering, is that the nicotine containing solution (e-liquid) they analyzed contained harmful contaminants. The controversy concerning this point itself is not my issue. What is important to note here would be the fact the Food and Drug Administration may have, whether intentional or not, come across an extremely important fact. Let’s look at this point a little bit deeper.

In America, most anything we eat or drink is required to conform to criteria regulated by government organizations which assure our safety and health. We frequently come across products that were recalled by the producer because of the slightest noncompliance with the proper production steps. So let us check out e-liquid (nicotine mixture used in electric cigarettes) for a moment. Right now, you’ll find basically no guidelines or polices in place regulating its production, who may manufacture it, how it is stored or even its shelf life. Generally speaking, you or I can go on the web, shop for e liquid components and start mixing it inside our garages with zero regulation whatsoever. For personal use, this will possibly appear acceptable. Although I don’t know of any similar product designed for human inhalation that you may make for yourself let alone for mass consumption and advertise it for sale on the net. But still, this is precisely what a great many eliquid marketers are actually doing.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I am far from implying that e liquid is in fact dangerous. I am stating there is a distinct probability that as a result of insufficient regulation, a contaminated eliquid may in theory end up in the hands of an e cig smoker. Now you may be wondering about the e liquid which is produced by the e cig manufacturers themselves? Here once more, we basically have a similar issue. Manufactured primarily in China, there’s absolutely no regulation of any sort concerning how this eliquid is manufactured. In the end, it appears to be people purchasing e liquid should be thinking about that old adage caveat emptor or “Let the buyer beware”.

Want to learn more about the electronic cigarette and the current controversy? Just visit Harrison Merril’s site for information on electronic cigarette and other smoking aids.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering if they should bar the selling of the new form of electronic cigarette advertised as having the capability to administer pot to people on the job and even in planes and other public places. These marketing campaigns are usually very suggestive to the buyer insinuating the new kind of e cig may be used to get high in public without being noticed. With its focus on providing doses of psychoactive THC, this type of smokeless cigarette is plainly designed to get people high and should be considered against the law.

Marketing campaigns for the new smokeless cigarette product apparently invite customers not simply to break laws regarding smoking cigarettes in public places but also laws and regulations against using cannabis itself. The advertising campaigns suggest the completely new device lets you now smoke marijuana in public without getting any unwanted attention. They’ve already turned into the latest buzz in the marijuana community as the most recent way to smoke weed. Vendors promise by purchasing the newest marijuana electronic cigarette, you’ll be able to smoke the unlawful material virtually any place with out a lighter, smell or smoke. Potential purchasers are persuaded by the marketers guarantee that you’ll get a pot high from any of the three varieties to choose from. All three kinds are apparently taken from potent sativa and indica strains of cannabis.

There can also be hidden dangers as users of the device breathe out the by products in public areas. So what ought to be considered will be the issue of subjecting bystanders to the residue given off by the product. Some of those most vulnerable from this exposure include young kids, the elderly and people having health issues which might be exacerbated by the residue given off. This is the real problem and may be used by the FDA to win its argument that smokeless cigarettes are drug delivery products.

Even the e-commerce sites and vendors which sell and tend to be supportive of e-cigarettes which administer nicotine say that the marketing and advertising of this product is sure to take the controversy over e cigarettes to a whole new level. The Food and drug administration has ruled that e-cigarettes designed to administer nicotine are drug-delivery devices and therefore are criminal as they never have been approved by the agency for distribution. Although it is clear that the FDA has jurisdiction over these kinds of products, there is discussion if the legal statute providing the Food and drug administration jurisdiction over tobacco relates to nicotine e-cigarettes.

E-cigarettes which administer cannabis, or materials rather than nicotine, ordinarily are not impacted by the government statute dealing with tobacco cigarettes and nicotine administration items. The FDA’s inability to instantly prohibit this new item and initiate appropriate enforcement proceedings is undoubtedly an issue. Ongoing inability to adopt any sort of productive actions against this kind of e-cig will most definitely further undermine the agencies reputation and authority.

Want to learn more about the e cigarette and the current controversy? Just visit Thomas Brainard’s site for information on the e-cigarette and other smoking aids.