FDA May Ban Life-Saving Cigarettes

[The Straight Story]

Not a cigarette

You may be aware of the latest trend in nicotine acquisition products – electronic cigarettes. E-cigarettes deliver nicotine through water vapor that is heated by a small battery in a cigarette-shaped device like the one shown above. They contain none of the harmful chemicals found in tobacco smoke, they don't create an offensive odor, and they can be used indoors. Because they mimic the oral-fixation-satisfying behavior of a real cigarette – complete with "smoke" that is inhaled and exhaled – many smokers who want to cut down or quit might find e-cigarettes a useful option. E-cigarette maker NJOY markets their product as "all the pleasures of smoking without all the problems." E-cigarettes also can be a relatively cheaper alternative to tobacco products, especially following last month's 160% federal cigarette tax hike.

So naturally, the government wants to ban them. But at least one e-cigarette manufacturer isn't backing down:

A Florida company that imports and distributes so-called electronic cigarettes filed suit yesterday against the Food and Drug Administration, claiming the agency is illegally blocking imports of its product into the United States.

The suit, filed by Smoking Everywhere in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, argues that the FDA has overstepped its regulatory authority by banning shipments of the devices and insisting they need to go through the drug approval process. <…>

Congress is currently considering the Family Smoking Prevention and Control Act, which would give the FDA explicit power to regulate cigarettes. Linscott notes that the law would probably give it the right to oversee e-cigarettes as well.

A federal agency abusing its authority in the name of regulating personal behavior? Can you imagine? Of course, e-cigarettes may not be completely risk-free, but they certainly can't be more dangerous than traditional tobacco-burning cigarettes. Nicotine acquisition products such as gum and patches have been on the market for bloody ages, so there can't be any serious concern about the safety of adults choosing to ingest nicotine. So why target e-cigarettes?

Perhaps the well-meaning public servants at the FDA are disdainful of any behavior that represents tobacco smoking because the negative health effects of traditional cigarettes are widely known. But if that's the case, why ban a safer alternative to tobacco? If the FDA is successful in its ban, it will deprive smokers of the choice to use a product that could add years to their lives, forcing them to continue using traditional cigarettes and paying obnoxiously high taxes. (Ah, I think I may have answered my own question there.)

http://www.411mania.com/politics/columns/103662

[annabanana]

1. My DH found these electronic cigs about 4 months ago...

His 2 pack a day habit is down to less than 1/2 a pack. The house doesn't stink. The kids aren't exposed to second hand smoke. There are no new little burn marks in the linoleum. He's breathing better, he can walk farther...

I they ban this life saving option I will be majorly pissed.

[KGodel]

2. But his dollars aren't going to RJR

Traitor!!!

[virgogal]

4. I tried the Njoy brand and they were defective. Do you mind

sharing his brand? I wish him well.

[Occam Bandage]

7. "I tried the Njoy brand and they were defective."

This would be a good reason for the FDA to regulate them, no?

[Starbucks Anarchist]

9. Mine works fine.

[Occam Bandage]

11. Glad to hear it. nt

[Starbucks Anarchist]

8. What was wrong with it?

I just bought one and have troubleshot my way out of the problems I thought I had with it.

[virgogal]

12. The vaporizer didn't work. I got no "smoke" effect. I was so

discouraged I didn't even return it. (I've had it about 3 weeks)

I almost feel like as fool catering to my addiction but I'm sick of the cigs and have to pay $7.00 a pack for a non-premium brand. I am also living in an apartment w/o cross ventilation for the first time in my life and would love the E-cigs for indoor smoking.

Thanks for your response.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

14. Could be a few different things:

It helps if you have the "lit" end pointed downwards -- more nicotine and more smoke that way. I'm assuming the e-cig already "lit," correct?

Also, one thing I noticed was that if you separate the cartridge from the vaporizer, look for a small plastic piece stuck to the top of the vaporizer (inside the vaporizer). Use a pen or knife to pry it out of the vaporizer. Then put the cartridge and vaporizer back together. You will definitely get smoke now (stronger puff = more nicotine and less smoke, weak puff = less nicotine and more smoke).

I guess the plastic is from the cartridge after you open it, but just do this trick. I'm betting that's what the problem is. Let me know what happens.

:hi:

[virgogal]

19. My gosh,that did the trick . I had decided tonight was my last

night trying them so I was all battery charged and ready to go when along came this thread.

Amazing.

Thanks so much for your help and I'll need the smokes tonight watching the Sox/Yankees game.

Go Sox !!! :-)

[Starbucks Anarchist]

21. Excellent!

Enjoy. (no pun intended) :toast:

[blaze]

16. Here

http://www.puresmoker.com/ is one I've heard good things about.

They were sold out when I went shopping, but I've been happy with my purchase from: http://www.e-smokeytreats.com/

[annabanana]

17. Yeah.. That's the one we have.. . .n/t

[NightWatcher]

5. if they ban those, just get a marijuana vaporizer from your local head shop

they appear to be one in the same.

[DoctorMyEyes]

23. They're not

There's no tobacco - whacky or otherwise in an e-cig and no lighters are required. It's more like a nebulizer.

[MADem]

3. They'll be after the scotch and vodka next! After all, it's bad for ya!

Then, they'll come for the red meat eaters...oops, there are senior administration officials who are known to like a Hell Burger every now and again....

[Occam Bandage]

6. It doesn't sound like the FDA is "banning" them, but rather

that the FDA believes that they are a drug-delivery system and as such must be approved (like any other drug) before they may be sold to the public. That isn't really offensive to me. That's what I would hope to see; I'm generally a fan of any time the FDA decides to get off its lumbering ass and actually bother testing and regulating food and drugs.

[Sgent]

13. But nicotine is not considered a drug

unless its sold for the purpose of treating/preventing disease. Even if the FDA regulation bill, it will be treated more like a food product than a drug.

If it was a drug, all cigarettes would be illegal.

[Occam Bandage]

15. Both Nicorette and NicoDerm are tested and regulated by the FDA.

I don't see why this should be any different.

[DoctorMyEyes]

22. They are seizing shipments so in effect it is a "ban"

That's why so many of the US suppliers are "out of stock" and the NJoys just got pulled from Walgreens, Pilot, Costco and Amazon.

Someone here pointed me to a forum and a couple of suppliers last month and I managed to pick up a few of two different models. I smoked the e-cigarette and my regular cigarettes for about 10 days or so and haven't had a regular tobacco cigarette in over a week. I feel like I've finally quit - and not one of those "barely holding on, toughing it out" kind of quitting that I've failed at so many times over the last 36 years.

I can understand testing them, but to seize shipments and to shut e-cigarettes down for the years that it's going to take before "approval" is utterly ridiculous. You don't have to be a doctor or a scientist to see that even if they're not "good" for you they're a hell of a lot less bad for you than tobacco cigarettes.

Isn't the FDA woefully understaffed? Don't they have enough on their plate with trying to keep melamine out of baby forumla and salmonella out of peanut butter? Personally I'd like to see them increase their inspections of FOOD PROCESSING plants.

And, I can tell you right now, without a doubt in my mind - the day my last atomizer dies and I can't get a replacement I'll pick up a pack of Marlboros. And I guess I'll owe the FDA a big fat "thank you" for working so hard to keep me freakin' "safe".

[Occam Bandage]

25. Yes, I suppose it would be more convenient if the FDA didn't bother regulating food and drugs.

:shrug:

[seabeyond]

10. i tried them. it really effect my cardioid artery. cant use them. n/t

[BalancedGoat]

18. I'm not sure "ban" is the right word.

It implies that this product was denied approval by the FDA. That's not the case at all. The manufacturers and users of these feel the because the FDA doesn't have the jurisdiction to regulate cigarettes that they don't have the jusidiction to regulate these. It's an interesting arguement that could very well have some merit. Though, the FDA's position is that they do have the jurisdiction and that nobody has bothered to seek approval. It's like someone trying to bypass the line to get into a club and the bouncer responding "where do you think you're going?"

As a side note, my electronic cigarette just arrived today and I'm waiting for the battery to charge. Can't wait to put it to use.

[phusion]

20. One of these days...

I'd like to stop dipping (chewing tobacco). Does anyone know of anything, besides gum or patches or whatever, that would help with this? I'd love to find some sort of non-tobacco "dip" with various levels of nicotine.

[DavidDvorkin]

24. "Life saving"?

Bullshit.

Of course they shouldn't be banned, but it's absurd self-delusion to think that they're life saving. The only way to avoid the damage done by smoking is to stop doing it completely and to avoid secondhand smoke.

[ohheckyeah]

26. It sounds like

it has helped some people do just that....stop smoking.

[TorchTheWitch]

27. e-cigs don't make any smoke

so the only "bad" thing about it would be the nicotine. It's no more bad for you than nicotine gum or a nicotine patch.