Can Electronic Cigarettes Help Quit Smoking?

There isn’t an definitive answer to the question of whether e-cigs can help people quit smoking traditional cigarettes because there haven’t been any official studies. Browsing the Internet on e-cig information sites, you’ll find plenty of testimonials. You’ll find little counters displaying how much money people have saved and how many traditional cigarettes they’ve avoided with electric cigarettes.

But they’re still smoking, right? Well, not really.

Electric cigarettes contain no tobacco, tar, carcinogens, carbon monoxide or secondhand smoke. When puffed, e-cigs emit a vapor mist that resembles smoke. They do contain nicotine (the whole purpose) and propylene glycol, the substance used in fog machines.

Earlier this year, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, American Lung Association, American Heart Association, and Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids joined together for a press release demanding a New Jersey senator to call on the FDA to remove electric cigarettes from the market.

They argue that no studies have been done on electric cigarettes to determine if they are harmful or if they aid in quitting smoking. The FDA has said that both nicotine and propylene gylcol are safe for general use, though.

Because they don’t have tobacco in them, electric cigarettes would not fall under new anti-tobacco legislation signed by President Barack Obama on June 23.

Electric cigarettes can be used anywhere and are sold legally at kiosks and on web sites around the country, where smokers, nonsmokers and those wanting to quit are taking notice. Smokers who want to quit are finding smoking e-cigs helpful in reducing or eliminating traditional cigarettes all together, and non-smokers are happy that electronic cigarettes don’t smell. Seems to be a win-win, don’t you think?

Again, no official studies have been performed to say that electronic cigarettes can help quit smoking, but they are certainly an alternative to smoking. E-cig smokers, or vapers as they say, can generally choose their level of nicotine, or even opt for non-nicotine cartridges in a myriad of flavors. In most cases, e-cigs are about 50% to 75% cheaper than traditional cigarettes as well.

What is An E-Cig?
An E-cig is an electronic device that combines technology with nicotine to create a simulated smoking experience for the e-cig user, also known as a vaper.

The E-cig device uses a battery (in the shape of a cigarette) that connects with a heating element, atomizer and nicotine and propylene glycol cartridge (in the shape of a cigarette filter.)

When you drag on the E-cig, it fires up the microprocessor that controls heat and light, which generates the vaporization of the nicotine. The nicotine, combined with the propylene glycol, emits a smoke-like vapor for the user to inhale, thus delivering the nicotine.

When you take a drag off of an E-cig, the experience of smoking a regular cigarette is very similar. Speaking from experience, I inhale my E-cig and immediately feel the hit of nicotine hit, and exhale the vapor. I won’t say it is exactly like a real cigarette, but when I consider that I’m not sucking up all of that tar and carcinogenic material, its close enough for me.

The FDA VS. E-Cigs
The FDA has fresh jurisdiction over tobacco products and they are trying to parlay that control over the relatively new e-cigs, though they’re clearly not tobacco products.
E-cigarettes use a combination of an atomizer, battery and nicotine cartridge to create tobacco, tar and smoke free cigarette. The vapor (simulated smoke) that comes from an e-cig is generated by vaporizing a combination of nicotine and propylene glycol (usually found in fog machines.) The e-cig smoke inhales the vapor rather than carcinogenic tobacco smoke.
Though there’s no tobacco in e-cigs, that’s not stalling the FDA. They’ve recently stopped overseas shipments of e-cigarettes, components and accessories from coming into the United States. The FDA says they need to be regulated before they can be sold in the U.S.
U.S. companies manufacturing and selling E-Cigs, such as Blu Cigs,  seem to be safe so far. You can get e-cigs online, over the phone and in kiosks in just about every mall in America.
What’s confusing is that the FDA has already approved nicotine in various quit smoking aids like patches, gums and inhalers. As for the propylene glycol, the FDA has stated:
“Propylene glycol is metabolized by animals and can be used as a carbohydrate source. Propylene glycol can be ingested over long periods of time and in substantial quantities (up to 5 percent of the total food intake) without causing frank toxic effects.”
Those using e-cigs whether it be to help quit smoking traditional cigarettes, to avoid tobacco taxes, or get around enormous indoor (and sometimes outdoor) smoking bans, will have to band together to let the administration know how they feel.

“It’s a much cleaner, safer way to inhale nicotine,” said Hon, blowing curlicues of e-smoke as he showed off the cigarette in his Beijing office. (He says he doesn’t smoke anymore, except for such demonstrations.)

Hon got his first patent on the e-cigarette in 2003 and introduced it to the Chinese market the next year. The company he worked for, Golden Dragon Holdings, was so inspired that it changed its name to Ruyan (meaning “like smoke”) and started selling abroad.

Get the Full E-Cig Article http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fg-china-cigarettes25-2009apr25,0,7059574.story

The picture below is for the Mini Electric Cigarette, but as E-cigs are mostly constructed the same, I thought it would be helpful. When I first got my blu cigs, I was in such a rush to get them together I couldn’t figure out what went where. Below you’ll see the battery (long white tube), the atomizer (center piece) and the cartridge.

From Slate:

First there was smoked tobacco. Then there was smokeless tobacco. Now there’s something in between.

It’s vaporized nicotine, aka “vaping.” It isn’t quite tobacco, and it isn’t quite smoking. Should we ban it, since it’s sort of like smoking? Or should we tolerate it, since it’s different in important respects? Does the war on smoking require total victory, or can we accept a peace deal that lets the industry, in some form, escape?

Let’s start with a bit of background. Vaporized nicotine has been around in various forms for at least two decades. Lately, it’s been spreading across the world in the form of “electronic cigarettes.” Two months ago, Slate‘s Emily Yoffe tried them out and reported:

The e-cigarette contains no tobacco and produces no smoke. Instead, it is an ingenious electronic device. … The “filter” is a receptacle for nicotine suspended in propylene glycol—the main ingredient in deodorant sticks and artificial smoke machines. … When the user sucks on the filter, a nicotine-laced vapor is produced, satisfying a smoker’s cravings. … [One product] allows you to choose filter cartridges with different levels of nicotine. I selected “none,” which meant my e-cig was the buzz-free equivalent of nonalcoholic beer. The cigarette came in flavors such as tobacco, vanilla, mint, and apple. … Fortunately, as bad as the mist tasted, there was no noticeable odor, and it dissipated almost immediately, and thus didn’t create a secondhand vapor problem.

Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal and New York Times followed up with similar reports. “The vapor can be inhaled and then exhaled, creating a cloud that resembles cigarette smoke but dissipates more quickly and doesn’t have the lingering odor,” says the Journal. The Times described an e-cigarette that “delivered an odorless dose of nicotine and flavoring without cigarette tar or additives, and produced a vapor mist nearly identical in appearance to tobacco smoke.”

So is vaping smoking? Let’s run the checklist. Cigarette? Yes. Smoke? No. Cloud? Yes. Odor? No. Tar? No. Nicotine? Optional.

Good luck sorting this one out.

The first practical question is whether you can vape in places where smoking is now forbidden. Yoffe tried this and got a mixture of technical tolerance and social disapproval. The Journal adds:

Users have had varied experiences vaping in public, ranging from indifference to odd glances. On a recent day, Shai Shloush, 25, from Knoxville, Tenn., huddled in the back of a movie theater to watch the new Star Trek movie. He powered up his e-cigarette and puffed away. “I was covering the LED part so people wouldn’t notice,” said Mr. Shloush, a former smoker. “Every once in a while I’d be really sneaky about letting out the smoke.”

The Times claims that “because they produce no smoke, they can be used in workplaces, restaurants and airports.” One user, for example, reports that “when everyone was smoking outside in the cold, I just stood in the warm bar, smoking.”

The next question is whether we should officially regulate them like cigarettes. According to the Journal,

The American Lung Association, along with the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Heart Association and the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, recently called for e-cigarettes to be removed from the market. The groups say e-cigarettes have yet to be proven safe and that kids may be attracted to the products, some of which come in flavors like chocolate and strawberry. “Nobody knows what the consumers are actually inhaling,” says Erika Sward, director of national advocacy at the American Lung Association.

Governments seem to be buying this view. The FDA has officially barred importation of e-cigarettes. “These appear to be unapproved drug device products,” a spokeswoman tells the Times, “and as unapproved products they can’t enter the United States.” Australia and Hong Kong have also prohibited the devices.

That’s a pretty awkward position. We restricted smoking, tobacco sales, and advertising based on decades of evidence that smoking was harmful to smokers and bystanders. Now we’re treating electronic cigarettes the same way based on … what? That “nobody knows” how bad they might be? The elements of smoking that justified our war on tobacco—carcinogens, combustion, secondhand smoke, even nicotine—have been removed or made optional. Is it really logical to ignore these differences?

And why should we presume that vaping is as dangerous as smoking, when research on vaporized marijuana suggests the opposite? Here are two such reports quoted last week in the Human Nature blog. First, a 2007 paper in Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics:

Whereas smoking marijuana increased CO [carbon monoxide] levels as expected for inhalation of a combustion product, there was little if any increase in CO after inhalation of THC from the vaporizer. This indicates little or no exposure to gaseous combustion toxins. Combustion products are harmful to health and reflect a major concern about the use of marijuana cigarettes for medical therapy as expressed by the Institute of Medicine.

And second, a 2007 study in the Harm Reduction Journal, which found

that respiratory symptoms like cough, phlegm, and tightness in the chest increase with cigarette use and cannabis use, but are less severe among users of a vaporizer. … The odds ratio suggests that vaporizer users are only 40% as likely to report respiratory symptoms as users who do not vaporize, even when age, sex, cigarette use, and amount of cannabis consumed are controlled.

Let’s be blunt about what’s going on here. We tolerated smoking until science proved it was harmful to nonsmokers. As momentum grew, the war on smoking became cultural, with disapproval and ostracism of anyone who lit up. Electronic cigarettes have removed the war’s scientific basis, but our cultural revulsion persists. Therefore, so does our prohibition and condemnation.

Maybe what we need is a convergence of the tobacco debate with the marijuana debate. In each case, vaporization is dissolving the categories and grounds that warranted prohibition. Liberals can see this, but only in the case of pot. Conservatives can see it, but only in the case of tobacco. Go talk to one another. The engineering and re-engineering of drugs will only get more complicated as technology improves. We’d better start thinking rationally about it.

see the full article here: http://www.slate.com/id/2219690/pagenum/all/#p2

RALEIGH — As the government tightens regulations on tobacco and smoking, some people have found a new way to get their nicotine fix without smoke and ash: electronic cigarettes.

E-cigarettes, which deliver nicotine that users inhale along with a nearly odorless vapor-mist that mimics smoke, are practically unregulated and have not been rigorously tested in the United States. That doesn’t faze users such as David Moss.

Moss, 55, smoked traditional cigarettes for 40 years, but quit about six months ago after discovering a battery-operated version that provides the nicotine his body craves without the tar-filled smoke.

Moss, who lives in Durham and once smoked three packs a day, wasn’t bothered by the lack of studies on the e-cigarette.

“It’s unproven,” he said, “but I have no fear because I’m not smoking cigarettes.”

E-cigarettes are available online as well as in a number of gas stations and at least one mall in the Triangle.

Earlier this year the U.S. Food and Drug Administration began cracking down on the import of the devices, stopping shipments at the border. Most e-cigarettes are manufactured in China.

“Basically, we don’t have any data on these products,” said Karen Riley, an FDA spokeswoman.

E-cigarette starter kits can cost $100 or more. The cigarette, which is legal to possess, is often made of three pieces: a replaceable nicotine cartridge, an atomizer and a rechargeable battery. The cartridges come in a variety of flavors, including strawberry cheesecake, chocolate and tobacco, and nicotine-free versions are available. The atomizer, or heating element, warms when the user inhales and uses propylene glycol, a liquid used in theatrical smoke machines, to create the smokelike vapors.

The odor, nearly undetectable, is not immediately offensive to those nearby, the way cigarette smoke can be to nonsmokers.

Does FDA have a say?

President Barack Obama has said that he will soon sign legislation to give the FDA power to regulate tobacco. But that new law includes no guidance specific to electronic cigarettes.

North Carolina lawmakers recently passed their own smoking law — a ban on smoking in most bars and restaurants, starting next year.

N.C. Sen. William R. Purcell, who sponsored the legislation, said that he had not heard of e-cigarettes until last week. The law defines smoking in part as “any lighted tobacco product,” so Purcell thinks the new law, which takes effect Jan. 2, would not apply to e-cigarettes.

Former smokers such as Moss and his friend Wes Clark of Morrisville like the way e-cigarettes provide an experience akin to smoking a regular, or what they call an analog, cigarette. Nicotine gums and patches deliver the nicotine, but without the routine that comes with traditional smoking, said Clark, 37. After years of smoking, the behaviors that go with it, including stepping outside for a cigarette or watching the exhaled smoke, become a big part of the habit.

Unlike nicotine gums or patches, e-cigarettes have not undergone the clinical testing required for FDA approval. The agency thinks that e-cigarettes are a “drug-device combination product” and fall under its regulation, said Riley, the FDA spokeswoman.

One of the biggest American e-cigarette importers recently sued the FDA in an attempt to loosen the import restrictions.

For smokers only

Matt Salmon, a former Arizona congressman and current lobbyist who serves as president of the Electronic Cigarette Association, emphasized that his group specifically markets its product to committed smokers and only as an alternative to traditional smoking. Although some smokers say e-cigarettes have helped them quit smoking, the ECA does not claim its products can help people kick tobacco.

But “it’s clearly a product that doesn’t carry the known carcinogens that are in combustible tobacco,” Salmon said.

Jed Rose, director of the Duke Center for Nicotine and Smoking Cessation Research, said his lab has done some testing of e-cigarettes that focused on the way they deliver nicotine. E-cigarettes don’t deliver all the cancer-causing agents that tobacco cigarettes do, but it’s not clear exactly what they put in the user’s body.

When asked whether e-cigarettes were safer than tobacco-filled ones, Rose said the required studies have yet to be done: “That’s a tough question to answer without safety data.”

Moss and Clark met at a coffee shop last week with a couple of other e-cigarette fans to swap flavored nicotines and discuss their hobbies. Both men are concerned that e-cigs might eventually be taken off the market.

Moss said he used to spend more than $600 a month for cigarettes for himself and his wife. The e-cigarette habit costs only about $150. And because the vapor has almost no smell, he has smoked his e-cigarette in a movie theater as well as on an airplane.

If e-cigarettes are declared illegal, he said, “we’ll go underground like anything else.”

Article found at: http://www.thetimesnews.com/news/cigarettes-25890-smoke-nicotine.html

My Blu  Cigs arrived today, and I couldn’t be happier! I’m sitting here at my desk smoking, instead of huddled outside in the rain. No smell, tastes like a cigarette and the vapor smoke gives the feeling of really smoking! I’m pretty stoked, if you couldn’t tell. Ecigs are definitely the way to go.

I’ll update more about my usage of the blu cigs in the coming days. There are so many places I’ve wanted to smoke but couldn’t… and now i can!

I came across this article today:

The Rise and Rise of Electric Cigarettes

One of the most controversial topics currently rumbling on and on is the future of electronic cigarettes. I don´t think it´s unreasonable to suggest that these ´smoking´ devices are polarising the population, or at least the part of the population that is aware of their existence.

The jostling arises because the electronic cigarette companies claim their product is much ´safer´ and ´healthier´ than a traditional cigarette, which if you take a moment to look through an e cigarette´s ingredients does appear to be the case. For a starter, there is no tobacco present, so immediately this sets itself apart from tobacco smoking.

Apparently during the burning of tobacco there are known to be 40 substances that are potentially cancerous and the distributers of electronic cigarettes claim that none of these are present in their product.

The passionate opposition to electronic cigarettes, at least to me, seems a little odd. I read recently that in the United Kingdom alone, one in five deaths during 2005 was smoking related!

Even if this statistic isn´t accurate, the major dangers of smoking tobacco cigarettes is commonly known, so when a product is launched that claims to be much safer and when common sense would say that if all these dangerous toxins have been removed, even if the electronic cigarette cannot be proved officially ´safe´, surely it does actually have to be ´safer´?

Of course these electronic cigarettes need to be tested and proved and of course it is only fair that they have to go through the same channels and procedures as any other new product but why it would receive such a hard ride when its potential (if proved) could change the face of the planet as we know it, is simply a mystery!

Try as I may, my cynical mind cannot help but think this mystery is a matter of money. Not just any old money either, but millions upon millions of it! The moment the headlines might read ´Electronic Cigarettes Declared Safe´, a mighty tornado is likely to rip through the offices of Mr Tobacco and friends, leaving a giant hole in their pockets!

Yes, it´s that BIG a deal! If electronic cigarettes are not safe or at least safer then let´s put them behind us quickly and start looking for the next thing that might be. Equally though, if e cigs do possess this world changing potential, then whoever is in charge, get your act together, get them tested, get them approved and market them vigorously like you once did with traditional cigarettes. Surely they deserve a chance?

Although I originally began writing about electronic cigarettes for professional reasons, I soon discovered that my personal interest would be great also. My father was a non smoker and died from passive smoking related, lung cancer. I became interested in the debate and its many complexities.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/105550

I came across this article on electric cigarettes from a news station in Palm Springs. They actually took the e-cigs into a restaurant to see how patrons reacted to the smoke-like vapor coming out of the e-cig:

It looks like a fancy pen but it’s a smoker’s craving. It’s a battery-powered cigarette. No matches or lighter, instead just plug it in, charge and puff.

A small cartridge inside gives the smoker a hit of flavored nicotine. With each drag, the end lights up but doesn’t burn. Instead of smoke, an odorless water vapor is released.

“I feel a lot of nicotine,” says smoker Tony Leong upon trying out the device.

The high-tech device is designed to get around smoking bans. It’s tobacco-free and doesn’t cause secondhand smoke.

News Channel 3 put the battery-powered cigarette to the test, taking it inside a restaurant where smoking isn’t allowed. Most customers didn’t seem to mind.

“It didn’t affect me because I couldn’t smell anything,” says non-smoker Joe Appolito.

“It bothers me,” says restaurant customer Leslie Grenfell. “When I saw him, I thought ‘oh, my heavens! There is smoke coming in people’s faces.’”

See the rest of the article at http://www.kesq.com/Global/story.asp?S=9389654&nav=menu191_2