Five Reasons Why the Anti Electronic Cigarette Campaign is Wrong

The electronic cigarette is a new device which allows smokers to enjoy nicotine without the 4000 chemicals, 40 odd carcinogens and tar that are contained in cigarettes. Despite this, and perhaps motivated by the huge loss of revenue which the success of the device would mean for powerful interests in the political arena, there is a well financed campaign against the electronic cigarette.

Simply put, the campaign is wrong. The evidence against the electronic cigarette suggests that it is far safer.

1. The campaign say they are toxic: A recent FDA press release stated there were nitrosamines in electronic cigarette. What it didn't say is that the FDA had tested the electronic cigarettes at 40 parts per trillion. Regular cigarettes contain 300 to 1400 times the amount ofnitrosamines contained in electronic cigarettes.

2. The campaign says they contain carcinogens: The FDA media report stated that the electr onic cigarettes contained other carcinogens. However, the actual scientific report states that the FDA testing of 18 cartridges found that one cartridge contained one carcinogen - compared to over 40 found in regular cigarettes. (Source: A comparison by Professor Michael Siegel.)
3. The campaign says we don't know what is contained within electronic cigarettes: On the contrary, there have been several studies. In addition to the FDA report on electronic cigarettes, there is also a report by Murray Laugesson , who was awarded a medal for the promotion of a tobacco free society, which found that the principal ingredient was propylene glycol: "Two small well-known molecules with excellent safety profiles." (Source: Electronic Cigarette Safety.)

4. The campaign states that there is 40 times as much nicotine in e-cigarettes as regular cigarettes: A recent report in the Peninsula stated that there was 40 times as much nicotine in electronic cigarettes as in regular cigarettes. In contrast, the FDA report found that while e-cigarettes contain more nicotine than regular inhalers, even high nicotinecartridges contained less nicotine than regular cigarettes.

5. The campaign lacks a scientifi c backing: David Sweanor, who has worked with numerous companies and organisations, including the International Union Against Cancer, World Health Organization, World Bank and the Pan American Health Organization, on the issue of tobacco harm reduction, states:

"If there is anyone who believes cigarettes are no more hazardous than e-cigarettes I'd recommend a remedial course in basic sciences." (Source: An Interview with David Sweanor) 400,000 Americans and millions of people worldwide die from cigarette related diseases each year. It is time to put money and special interests aside and to examine the real issue - is the electronic cigarette safer than regular cigarettes?

???????