Oct 272010
 

Continued from: Electronic Smokeless Cigarettes Studies – Helpful or Harmful?

Dr. Nitzkin took issue with the results of the FDA smokeless cigarettes studies which were revealed in a press conference held on July 22nd, 2009 because they failed to…

1) State the ‘levels’ of nitrosamines in the smokeless cigarette;
2) Test the ‘control’ inhaler for carcinogens; and
3) Report ‘tobacco-cigarette’ levels of these items.

Without this kind of information, it is almost impossible for smokers to put the results of such studies into their proper perspective; but, when they do have this information, they can quickly and easily work out the truth for themselves concerning the perceived dangers of electronic cigarettes (electronic smokes).

Product………………………Total Nitrosamines1

(ng/g, except for nicotine gum and patch which are ng/patch or ng/gum per piece)

a) Electronic Cigarettes……………….…..8
b) Nicotine Gum……………….……….…….2
c) Nicotine Patch…………………..………..8
d) Swedish snus……………..…..…….2,400
e) Winston………………………………..3,365
f) Newport………………………………..3,885
g) Camel…………………………..………7,450
h) Skoal………………………………..….9,290
i) Marlboro………………………..……11,190

The FDA is saying, in effect, “Oh, my God, there are 8 ng/g of nitrosamines in electronic cigarettes!”

Dr. Nitzkin, on the other hand, is not particularly concerned about the 8 ng/g of nitrosamines in electronic smokes, but he is ‘very’ concerned about the 11,190 ng/g in tobacco cigarettes. He’s also concerned about the 95% failure rate of nicotine gums and patches. His focus is on preventing loss of life, which is where the FDA’s focus should be, too, but somehow it seems to be on preventing loss of cash, instead. The FDA should not be misleading the American public as to the health hazards of any product; but, with respect to electronic smokeless cigarettes, that’s what it seems to be doing.

Would Further Studies Be Ethical?

As for the FDA conducting any further studies, let’s stop and think about that for a minute. What sort of study would it take to find out how safe electronic cigarettes are in comparison to tobacco cigarettes? Would it even be ethical to do it? To round up thousands of young adult non-smokers and randomly divide them into two groups, one of which is assigned to smoke two packs of tobacco cigarettes a day, and the other of which is assigned to “vape” an equivalent dose of nicotine?

Who could bear to follow them for 15 or 20 years to see which ones died of which diseases and how many of their family members succumbed to second hand tobacco smoke versus how many to second hand e-cig vapor? It would be so harmful to so many people that it’s almost unthinkable.

Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics

As Mark Twain used to say, “There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies and statistics.” When it comes to studies on smokeless cigarettes, there is so much at stake by so many special-interest groups, that smokers looking for either a smoking alternative or a smoking-cessation device will need to carefully determine for themselves whether the results of such studies are helpful or harmful.

1http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2009/07/comparison.html

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • Add to favorites
  • RSS
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Propeller
  • del.icio.us
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Digg

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)