The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] is considering whether to ban the sale of e-cigarettes advertised to administer “potent” marijuana to users “at the office, or even on the plane,” and with ads suggesting use of the product to get high in public without being detected: “now I can get high . . . anywhere without a lighter, smell, shake, smoke and unwanted attention.” This latest escalation follows earlier product advertisements for e-cigarettes used to administer Cialis.

“Yes, now smokers can get an erection, and lose some of their inhibitions, all from a simple product which they advise can be used in the workplace, shopping malls, and even on airplanes, all without any testing or inspection, much less approval, from the only agency authorized to approve any device for the administration of any drug — even relatively benign ones like aspirin, over-the-counter sleeping pills, etc.” — says Action on Smoking and Health (ASH), the organization which promoted the FDA to crack down on nicotine e-cigarettes, and to warn the public about dangers of cancer from using them.

Ads for the new product seemingly invite users not only to violate laws against smoking generally in public places, but also laws against the use of marijuana itself, suggesting that you can now smoke weed in public without attracting attention: “the latest buzz in the pot world: Vapor Rush . . . Vapor Rush is a new way to smoke bud that allows you to smoke anywhere without a lighter, smell, shake, smoke and unwanted attention.” Users are invited to get high from “three different varieties [of marijuana]: haze, bliss and rush . . .taken from potent sativa and indica strains of cannabis.”

Even websites which are generally supportive of e-cigarettes administering nicotine admit “the unveiling of [this] product [is] sure to take the debate over e-cigarettes to a new level. . . .With its emphasis on delivering doses of psychoactive THC, Vapor Rush is clearly designed to get users high, even though the manufacturer instructs customers to ‘visit your local dispensary’ to get e-cigarette cartridges.”

Another warns: “I can’t joke about this part. Now, on top of these dangers, there may be additional ones as users are able to ‘smoke’ marijuana in their workplaces, and in other public places including airplanes surreptitiously (without any smell or smoke as the sellers brag), and where bystanders – including young children, the elderly, those with a variety of medical problems, and those who do not wish to get even a little bit high – can be exposed. This is a real problem. And this is how the FDA might win its argument that e-cigs are drug delivery devices.”

The FDA has ruled the e-cigarettes designed to administer nicotine are drug-delivery devices, and are “illegal” because they haven’t been approved by the agency for distribution. Although it is now clear that the FDA has jurisdiction over these devices, there is a question whether the new federal statute giving the FDA jurisdiction over ordinary tobacco cigarettes limits the FDA’s power to regulate nicotine e-cigarettes.

“But e-cigarettes which administer marijuana, Cialis, Viagra, etc. are obviously not affected by a new federal statute dealing with tobacco cigarettes and nicotine administration products, so the FDA’s ability to immediately ban this new product, and to initiate appropriate enforcement proceedings, is obvious unfettered,” says Banzhaf, suggesting that continued failure to take any effective action will only further undermine the agency’s reputation and credibility.

“If manufacturers — or even users, since some fill the e-cigarette cartridges themselves — are already adding not only nicotine but also Cialis and marijuana, will the FDA stand up or wait until they literally begin marketing them to administer heroin, crack, and even more potent drugs,” asks public interest law professor John Banzhaf, Executive Director of ASH.

ASH notes that if these new marijuana e-cigarettes are used to help users get high in the workplace and on airplanes as advertised, those around them will likewise be subjected to some of the marijuana which they claim is very “potent.” This potentially includes infants and toddlers on airplanes, fellow workers in the workplace, the elderly, and those with a variety of medical conditions and special sensitivities which make them even more susceptible, warns ASH.

“Manufacturers should not be able to foist off on the public, and use both customers and those around them as human guinea pigs, for products containing dangerous and even intoxicating drugs which haven’t been tested — much less approved — by any agency,” argues ASH.

PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III
Professor of Public Interest Law at GWU,
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor,
FELLOW, World Technology Network, and
Executive Director and Chief Counsel
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
America’s First Antismoking Organization
2013 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006, USA
(202) 659-4310 // (703) 527-8418

http://ash.org/

In advance of the state’s smoking ban on July 5, the Brown County Tavern League is selling electronic cigarettes, battery-powered devices that use liquid nicotine to imitate a cigarette’s taste and effects.

The league began selling the devices in March, and the demand from bars and taverns around the state has been “crazy,” said Brown County Tavern League President Sue Robinson.

Made to look like cigarettes, electronic cigarettes do not use tobacco. The battery heats the nicotine when the user inhales, creating a vapor that gives the appearance of smoke.

“We’re hoping that it’ll keep our smoking customers comfortable and coming to our business,” said Robinson, who sells the devices through her tavern, Bourbon Street, at 821 S. Broadway.

When the ban takes effect, smoking in public indoor spaces will be prohibited, making it illegal to smoke any tobacco product, such as a cigar, cigarette or pipe. The electronic cigarettes would allow bar patrons to have a sense of smoking in a tavern without breaking the law, Robinson said.

Units can cost more than $100, but the league charges $60 each because Robinson said the organization buys directly from a distributor called AirE8. The league also sells 10 refills of nicotine for $15. One refill of nicotine can equal one-and-a-half packs of normal cigarettes, which is less expensive than a pack of cigarettes, the cheapest being $5.59, without tax.

Robinson said she does not think the devices will replace cigarettes. In her experience, smokers have used the devices to help quit smoking.

Electronic cigarettes are advertised as being healthier than regular cigarettes because they allow the user to add the amount of nicotine, possibly choosing not to have any at all.

However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has said it does not have scientific proof that e-cigarettes are safe or effective as a smoking cessation tool. The agency has tried to stop the devices from being imported into the country. The devices have been banned in Canada and Australia.

While not worse than regular cigarettes, the inconsistent amount of nicotine and lack of quality control make e-cigarettes dangerous, said Connie Olson, executive director of Community Action for Healthy Living, which promotes smoke-free lifestyles.

“They pose different risks,” she said. “But … they haven’t been studied.”

Someone who smokes a pack a day, for example, may take four to five doses a day, she said. Without a way of monitoring how much they add, it is possible to overdose, which can kill a user.

The group also is concerned that making nicotine available in different flavors has a higher potential of attracting younger people, Olson said. Robinson, however, said the league is not concerned about health effects because the e-cigarettes have fewer carcinogens.

By Ilissa Gilmore
Greenbaypressgazette, June 27, 2010

Johnson Creek — Christian Berkey was a nearly two-pack-a-day smoker when he heard about electronic cigarettes, a device that vaporizes a solution of water, nicotine and flavoring without the smoke and the combustion.

Berkey went on the Internet and ordered the device.

“I was stunned. I took a puff, and it gave me the same experience as cigarettes,” Berkey said. “It looked like smoke coming out, but you can’t smell it. It addressed the tactile sensation of smoking.”

There was one problem.

“I was not thrilled by the taste,” he said. “Chinese smoke juice had a chemical aspect to it.”

Berkey decided he could do better. He wasn’t worried about perfecting the pen-like device, which carries a battery and usually has an LED light on the end. He believed the solution to a successful smoking experience was to make the smoke juice taste better.

Berkey went to work, testing various formulas and trying to improve the taste. That was in November 2007. By February 2008, he started to see some results. Two months and countless variations later, he found the formula he liked.

Unlike the Chinese version, which contains countless ingredients, Berkey’s formula was simple, using only seven ingredients.

In July 2008, Berkey quit his job as a manager of an Apple retail store and took the plunge.

He started to talk about his product on online forums devoted to e-cigarettes. He offered consumers free samples. The feedback he was getting was good.

“They loved it,” he said. “No one wanted to touch the Chinese stuff.”

Ramping up

That was Berkey’s “aha moment.” He cashed in his 401(k) and started his business, called Johnson Creek Enterprises.

“It was not an easy decision, but I did it,” Berkey said.

Berkey convinced Heidi Braun, another Apple employee, to join him. A non-smoker and an asthmatic, Braun wasn’t exactly the ideal business partner for an e-cigarette smoke juice business.

“But I trusted Christian’s ability to come up with a business plan,” she said.

From that humble start, Johnson Creek Enterprises has grown to 14 full-time employees, has a thriving business that expects to generate $2 million in sales this year, and is looking to move into bars, restaurants, bowling alleys and taverns with sales of e-cigarettes and the company’s Johnson Creek Original Smoke Juice.

And the two did it with no advertising.

At their cramped headquarters in a Johnson Creek industrial park, Berkey, the CEO, and Braun, the chief operating officer, are proud of the quality controls they have in their business. The smoke juice is prepared and put in small bottles in a “clean room,” a controlled environment where products are manufactured, where lab technicians wear head-to-toe lab coveralls and goggles.

The company claims to be the first company to produce smoke juice in the United States. It lists its ingredients on every bottle, uses child-resistant caps on the bottles, and shrink wraps the bottles for extra safety.

Berkey and Braun say business is so good, they plan to add as many as 12 to 14 more employees in the months to come. And they are looking for a bigger building to handle their needs.

Johnson Creek Enterprises produces 10 different flavors in four nicotine strengths for the firm’s Johnson Creek Original Smoke Juice line. And it offers six flavors in three nicotine strengths for the Red Oak, propylene glycol-free smoke juice line.

A 1-ounce bottle of smoke juice costs $19.95. A half-ounce bottle costs $9.95.
Regulators take notice

The business is not for everyone. The Food and Drug Administration conducted a lab test of electronic cigarette samples it said contained carcinogens and toxic chemicals, such as diethylene glycol (DEG), an ingredient used in antifreeze.

Moreover, the FDA warned that smoke juice and e-cigarettes are being marketed and sold to young people, and contain no health warnings. The flavors, the FDA said, “may appeal to young people.”

The FDA study, Berkey said, did find DEG but in trace amounts. Asked whether the FDA had tested Johnson Creek smoke juice, Berkey said he could not comment.

“I know regulation is coming, and it’s fine,” Berkey said. “We definitely look forward to working with the FDA.”

Berkey and Braun also are anticipating July 5, when state businesses must go smoke-free. The company has an exclusive agreement with Blu electronic cigarettes, and hopes to convince the owners of bars, restaurants and other public places to sell the e-cigarettes and their smoke juice in their establishments.

“We have a lot of folks who are interested in this,” Braun said.

The new law does not forbid the use and consumption of e-cigarettes, but both Berkey and Braun agree their venture will only succeed if they educate the public about the device and their smoke juice.

Maureen Busalacchi, executive director of Smoke Free Wisconsin, isn’t buying it. Johnson Creek’s efforts to get into the restaurant and bar business by selling the e-cigarettes and the smoke juice may confuse people.

“And it’s appalling they are trying to get kids addicted to nicotine,” she said.

Berkey understands that. Puffing on an e-cigarette, he and Braun argue that people should educate themselves on the product.

“This is an alternative. It’s better than smoking,” Berkey said.

CHICAGO, – New policy adopted today by the American Medical Association (AMA) recommends that electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) be classified as drug delivery devices, subject to the same FDA regulations as all other drug delivery devices. Additional policy adopted supports prohibiting the sale of e-cigarettes that are not FDA approved.

“Very little data exists on the safety of e-cigarettes, and the FDA has warned that they are potentially addicting and contain harmful toxins,” said AMA Board Member Edward L. Langston, M.D. “Our new policies can help ensure that e-cigarettes are properly classified and regulated.”

E-cigarettes are smokeless devices that deliver nicotine to the user. They consist of three integrated parts: the nicotine cartridge, the vaporizer and a lithium ion battery. The battery powers the cartridge and releases the nicotine by heating, rather than burning like a conventional cigarettes. They are available in fruit and candy flavors. Little independent research has been conducted into their ingredients and health impacts, but they are commercially promoted by vendors as a safe alternative to cigarettes.

“Because e-cigarettes have not been thoroughly tested, one cannot conclude that they are less harmful or less dangerous than conventional cigarettes,” said Dr. Langston. “The fact that they come in fruit and candy flavors gives them the potential to entice new nicotine users, especially teens.”

The AMA’s new policy is a result of a report looking at the current regulations and potential health impacts of e-cigarettes discussed this week at the AMA Annual Meeting in Chicago.

SOURCE American Medical Association

GENESEE TOWNSHIP – Michigan’s new smoking ban appears to be creating a boost in the e-cigarette industry.

At least one local restaurant says it’s looking at these electronic cigarettes as a way to keep their staff and customers smoking legally indoors.

Many who run bars and restaurants in Mid-Michigan say they’ve been struggling with ways to maintain their smoking customer base since the smoking ban went into effect May 1. For one local restaurant, it wasn’t just the customers they were worried about, but nearly their entire staff smokes.

The new e-cigarettes appear to have answered some of their problems already.

“It’s just steam. It’s water vapor, but gives the nicotine of each of these cartridges is about a pack of cigarettes,” said Cindy Guillie who owns Guillie’s Coney Island.

The tobacco-free cigarettes that just emit vapor turned out to be the answer to a troubling problem for management at Guillie’s Coney Island in Genesee Township, where all by two of their employees smoke.

“With them not being able to smoke here-it because very difficult for them to work a whole shift.

As the smoking ban was approaching in Michigan, Guillie says she and her husband began investigating the concept of e-cigarettes.

So there’s no smell, and there’s very little taste. “They’re exempt from all smoking bans because there’s no tobacco in them, and you don’t light them,” Guillie explained.

Now Guillie and all her employees are using them and finding them cost effective. She considers e-cigarettes more environmentally friendly and even offer benefits to employees who are no longer inhaling tobacco smoke.

“Nicotine does not cause cancer. The tar in the cigarettes causes cancer,” Guillie said.

Since she recommended them for the employees, Guillie said the e-cigarette concept has been catching on. “We’ve been selling these things like hotcakes. In fact, some bars rent them because they’re completely harmless.”

While some of her smoking customers still are choosing to take their food to go and smoke and eat at picnic tables outside, the e-cigarettes are turning into a solution for many customers who are looking to sit inside as a break from their outdoor work.

“Sit down have coffee, have some pop and go back to work because it’s their break time. So this is a solution to it,” said Guillie.

Guillie said the smoking units cost about $100 each with rechargeable batteries, and it’s about $2 a nicotine cartridge that lasts a bit more than a normal pack.

Cathy Shafran
May 11, 2010

DAVAO CITY, May 6 — If looks can kill, then the thousands of smoke-belching humans out there would have been dead by now. And if you can no longer bear the taunts and the insults hurled by non-smokers, then the electronic cigarettes might be a better option. Or are they?

Electronic cigarettes, also known as e-cigarettes, look and work just like real cigarettes except that they do not emit the same odor and smoke produced by real cigarettes.

“But we still discourage smokers, in this case vapers (since e-cigarettes emit vapors and not smoke) from smoking in non-smoking areas as they will still be apprehended,” Davao City Anti-Smoking Task Force Dr. Domilyn Villareiz said.

She warns vapers “not to try us by smoking in non-smoking areas because they are still included in the prohibition.”

The eight-year old anti-smoking ordinance of Davao City (which celebrates its 8th year anniversary on May 31) may have discouraged some smokers from puffing their cigarettes in public places with the implementation of the ordinance, but this is set to change with the popularity of the e-cigarettes in the world market.

“This is plainly a circumvention of the Anti-Smoking law because it still promotes the habit of smoking — with the same arm and hand movement and the use of nicotine,” she said.

The e-cigarette is a battery-operated device with a cartridge that contains a nicotine solution and other chemicals that is then converted into vapour when the cigarette is used. Some e-cigarettes even come in different flavors to satisfy the craving of the regular smoker.

“We call these e-cigarettes guinea pigs because there is no clinical study that concludes it is safer to use than the ordinary cigarette,” Villareiz said.

She added the regular cigarette contains more than 600 additives, aside from nicotine leaves, but, the moment it is inhaled, the cigarette can release up to 4,000 chemicals.

Villareiz said if the e-cigarettes still contain nicotine, then they can still affect the cardiovascular system and can constrict the blood vessels once the nicotine is inhaled.

“Until there is medical evidence that these e-cigarettes are totally safe, then, we do not recommend it,” she added.

Nicotine solution

The e-cigarette comes with a nicotine solution, often called e-juice or e-liquid, which consist of glycerine and propylene glycol which are known food additives. The solutions are offered in different concentrations of nicotine, thus allowing the vaper to regulate his nicotine intake and gradually reduce it. There are also solutions that do not come with nicotine, but with flavors like regular or menthol tobacco, coffee, caramel, vanilla or fruits.

Research shows that e-cigarette solutions can contain the following ingredients: nicotine, gkycerol, propylene glycol, tobacco essence, organic acid, butyl valerate, benzyl benzoate, hexyl hexanoate, and anti-oxidation agent among others.

Global popularity

The e-cigarette is becoming a popular commodity among those looking for an alternative to the real cigarettes but without the foul smoke odor it emits. Manufacturers of e-cigarettes even market it as a smart choice for those who want to stop smoking.

The e-cigarette is apparently a Chinese innovation, with the first e-cigar patented by a company based in Beijing sometime in 2003. It was first sold in China a year after being patented, and has enjoyed a steady increase in sales from 1.7 million dollars in 2004 to 37 million dollars in 2006.

E-cigarettes were brought to Europe in 2006 and then known as the “Electro fag”. As of October 2009, the Electronic Cigarette Association pinned e-cigarette users to over 300,000. There are however fears that the e-cigarettes might become a fad among young people and that it might promote the habit of smoking all the more.

Villareiz admitted the e-cigarette can be more cost effective than the real deal since you can buy the device at one time and then just replace the cartridge when consumed. Most e-cigarettes have parts that are refillable and replaceable.

The e-cigarette provides almost the same physical sensation and flavor provided by the regular cigarette but it does not involve combustion so no smoke is produced, giving other people the perception that this can be more acceptable to countries that ban smoking in public places.

E-cigarettes are available worldwide in manual and automatic models. The manual model comes with a button which must be pressed by the user to activate the vapor-producing heating element of the cigarette. The automatic models come with sensors that automatically activate the heating element that produces the vapor once the cigarette is inhaled upon.

The other end of the e-cigarette comes with an optional light-emitting diode (LED) which looks like the burning red color of the real cigarette when lighted. While the e-cigarette comes in various forms, it generally consists of a heating element to produce the vapor, a mouthpiece and a rechargeable battery.

Health effects

While companies selling e-cigarettes claim that the e-cigars do not contain harmful materials since they do not undergo the process of combustion, it does contain nicotine which is a proven cause of mouth cancer.

Villareiz said nicotine is also known as highly carcinogenic, pointing out that e-cigarettes also contain nicotine which is then inhaled by the user. As a vasoconstrictor, nicotine can make the heart work harder. Nicotine in e-cigarette is thus still considered dangerous.

She said the United States Food and Drugs Authority has already banned the importation of e-cigarettes. It has also been banned in Australia and Canada since it poses risks arising from addiction and nicotine poisoning. Other countries that have banned e-cigarettes are Brazil, Panama and Singapore. It has been highly restricted in Denmark and New Zealand, but is unrestricted in the United Kingdom.

As of now, there is no clear-cut legislative policy banning or restricting the sale of e-cigarettes in the Philippines. (PNA)

A-list Hollywood superstar Leonardo Di Caprio has recently been spotted using electronic cigarettes. The actor, whose most successful movie to date is Titanic, has been a smoker of regular tobacco-based cigarettes for most of his adult life. It looks like he has now decided to take the pragmatic approach to leading a healthier life by switching to electronic cigarettes, which deliver just nicotine and not the thousands of other poisonous compounds traditional cigarettes do. He certainly lends the electronic cigarettes, a new product, a certain cool!

E- cigarettes look like real cigarettes, but they don’t burn tobacco. Instead, they produce a warm mist that contains nicotine and when exhaled, a vapour is released, but it’s not tobacco smoke. The cartridges are often flavoured as various brands of tobacco, chocolate, coffee, mint or fruit. They are marketed to smokers either for enjoyment or for use in smoke-free places.

The researchers note there’s no published data about the safety of e-cigarettes and while they’re likely less harmful than smoking, they’re also more dangerous than medicinal nicotine inhalers.

But almost all of the respondents in the researchers’ online survey said they had found ecigarettes at least somewhat helpful when trying to quit smoking.

The survey had 81 respondents, all people who had used e-cigarettes. They were from France, Canada, Belgium and Switzerland and were asked open-ended questions about their use of e-cigarettes. The survey was conducted in French between September and October 2009 and included 72 daily users of e-cigarettes, one non-daily user and eight former users.

As to why they used the ecigarettes, 65% said it was to quit smoking, 26% said they used them in smoke-free places, 25% said it was so they didn’t disturb other people with smoke, and 17% said it was to reduce their cigarette consumption. Respondents could choose more than one reason.

The study, which appears in the journal BMC Public Health, says the survey participants used e-cigarettes for an average of 100 days and averaged 175 puffs each day.

Positive effects reported with e-cigarettes included their usefulness to quit smoking, and the benefits of abstinence from smoking (less coughing, im-proved breathing, better physical fitness). Respondents also enjoyed the flavour of e-cigarettes and the sensation of inhalation.

But side-effects included dryness of the mouth and throat. Respondents also complained about the frequent technical failures of e-cigarettes, some had concerns about the possible toxicity of the devices, and they were also worried about their future legal status.

Etter said this study is just a start and more needs to be done.

“Currently, there is a difficult balance between the need to protect consumers and the possibility now being offered to smokers to use a new, acceptable and potentially effective device to stop smoking. Given the enormous burden of disease and death caused by tobacco smoking, there is an urgent need for research into the toxicity, efficacy and public health impact of ecigarettes,” Etter said.

MICHIGAN – The clock is ticking for smoking establishments in Michigan. On May 1st the state will go smoke free, which means lighting up in your favorite bar or restaurant will be illegal.

But what about electronic cigarettes, will they be banned as well, and are there any harmful side effects?

Electronic cigarettes have been around for years, but are gaining exposure as more communities go smoke-free. The advantage for smokers is that they can still get a hit of nicotine, but without creating second-hand smoke.

Brandi Crawford has launched a business smell Greensmoke online from her Dowagiac home. The cigarette filters contain nicotine and water and are rechargeable. Instead of putting out smoke, they produce water vapor.

Crawford says she’s expecting an increase of customers as Michigan’s smoking ban takes effect.

“Really popular in Florida, California, Chicago, where smoking ban has been in effect for years,” said Crawford.

While users of electronic cigarettes aren’t inhaling smoke, it’s the nicotine that still concerns doctors.

Vicksburg family practitioner, Dr. Ken Franklin, warns that electronic cigarettes still aren’t good for you.

“Most of the damage from cigarette smoke comes from cardiovascular disease, heart attack, stroke, high-blood pressure, birth defects, caused by nicotine itself,” said Dr. Franklin.

Eddie Schmitt no longer has to wait for smoke breaks at work or brave chilling winds outside airports and bars to sate his nicotine cravings.

The 28-year-old North Side advertising analyst’s newfound freedom comes in the form of electronic cigarettes. They’re made of a metal tube, a battery and a cartridge filled with flavored nicotine. Schmitt inhales and gets what he says is a warm, vaporous hit without producing a smelly cloud of smoke like a regular cigarette.

It might soon be slightly tougher to get that type of nicotine fix in Illinois. Lawmakers and anti-smoking groups are trying to ban the sale of e-cigarettes, citing the federal Food and Drug Administration’s lack of approval.

The ban recently sailed through the Illinois Senate on a 49-4 vote and is now under consideration in the House. While the measure would prevent convenience stores, tobacco shops and mall kiosks from selling e-cigarettes, a big loophole remains — there’s no way to stop smokers from buying them online.

“If there are things that are (FDA-)approved to help people curb the habit of smoking, I’m all for it,” said sponsoring Sen. Terry Link, D-Waukegan. “Whatever the FDA approves, we will approve.”

Sen. Dave Syverson, R-Rockford, who voted against the measure, said the FDA is not a standard the state must use to decide which products can be sold.

“What right do we have to say a person can’t market or have a product that has not been proven to be a problem?” Syverson asked.

Last summer, the FDA said it found a chemical used in antifreeze and other toxic chemicals in a small sample of e-cigarettes the agency analyzed. The FDA tried to block imported e-cigarettes, but a Washington, D.C., court ruled that FDA can’t regulate the products. In its appeal, the FDA argues e-cigarettes should be considered the same as gum and patches that help smokers try to quit. The agency can regulate those products. The lower court’s decision was put on hold, the FDA said, as parties continue to fight over the issue.

In Springfield, lobbyists on both sides of the issue have been lighting up the Capitol.

Even though e-cigarettes lack the federal sign-off, that hasn’t snuffed out efforts to market them as a way to help people quit smoking or as a healthier, tobacco-free alternative for chain smokers.

James Watt, vice chairman of the Electronic Cigarette Association, acknowledged that some of the more than 100 U.S. suppliers embellish the product’s potential health benefits.

“Like in any industry, there are suppliers who are making marketing claims that maybe they shouldn’t be making,” Watt said.

But Watt, who estimated at least 100,000 people use e-cigarettes, also said the FDA’s research was not thorough.

Kathy Drea, a lobbyist for the American Lung Association in Illinois, said false advertising along with conflicting studies on the product’s safety are reasons to ban the battery-charged smoking devices.

“We don’t know what is in that vapor,” Drea said. “We do know it’s not just water.”

While efforts to regulate or ban e-cigarettes play out at statehouses across the country, those who smoke them are keeping tabs.

“If they move to outlaw the e-cigs, I will stock up on enough supplies to last me years,” said Schmitt, who credits his $55 e-cigarette with helping him stop his five-cigarettes-a-day habit. “This has been a miracle for many smokers, including myself.”

They look like regular cigarettes. Users say they feel like regular cigarettes.

Mark Gandhi likes his because he can smoke it as needed without bothering those around him.

“It’s worth trying, even for $14,” he said. “This is the closest thing a guy can get to an alternative cigarette.”

They’re called electronic cigarettes. Manufacturers market them as less harmful alternatives to smoking. But the verdict on their safety is still out, with physicians and health care providers skeptical and concerned about the product.

Sometimes called “e-cigarettes,” they are battery-operated devices that use cartridges filled with nicotine, other chemicals and often a flavor, such as mint. The user inhales the nicotine after the electronic cigarette turns it from a liquid into a vapor.

Gandhi, owner of Discount Smokes and Liquor on Main Street in Webb City, said there are several positive characteristics of electronic cigarettes.

They generally do not contain tar and other cancer-causing agents, and they do not emit secondhand smoke, he said.

“There’s no such thing as a healthy cigarette,” he said. “But if you look at the adverse side of it, it’s much better than the regular cigarette.”

Health risks

Annie Nawab, a pulmonologist with St. John’s Regional Medical Center in Joplin, said health care professionals don’t know enough about electronic cigarettes to render a verdict on them.

The primary cause for concern, she said, are the unknown risks of vaporized nicotine in one’s body. She also said that effects of chemicals and “fine-print ingredients” in the electronic cigarette are also unknown.

“We don’t have enough medical data to know what vaporized nicotine can do,” she said. “If you don’t know enough about it, then that’s something that should not be publicized as a safe therapy.”

Electronic cigarettes are an example of when technology has surpassed the rules and regulations, said Sgt. John Laws of University Police Department.

With electronic cigarettes becoming more familiar to people, Martin Lau, a graduate student in graphic design, said he was thinking about buying one.

“A pack of cigarettes is about $6 to $7,” he said. With those e-cigs, a carton is $20.”

Lau said the state may take action on the issue.

“If e-cigs prove to become a problem, (the state) will deal with it,” he said.

According to Section A of California Government Code Section 19994.35, “No tobacco product advertising shall be allowed in any state-owned and state-occupied building excepting advertising contained in a program, newspaper, magazine, or other written material lawfully sold, brought, or distributed within a state building.”

This means any advertisements for products containing tobacco or that are prepared with the leaves of plants of the nicotiana family are illegal within state buildings, according to section C of the same government code.

“I think in the long run you will not be able to smoke e-cigs indoors, because at one time people were able to smoke regular cigarettes indoors,” said senior business major Jansher Ashraf. “I think it’s just because e-cigs have not caught up with the law.”

In the state of California, each college and university is responsible for making its own rules and regulations, including the distance a cigarette can be smoked from a campus building, according to California Education Code, Section 89031.

Section 89031 states, “The trustees may establish rules and regulations for the government and maintenance of the buildings and grounds of the California State University. Every person who violates or attempts to violate the rules and regulations is guilty of a misdemeanor.”

At SJSU, Laws said the rule is a lit cigarette must be a minimum of 25 feet away from all campus buildings.

“We have not encountered any issues with students smoking too close to a building,” he said.

The penalty for smoking closer than 25 feet from a campus building is a citation of $ 1,000, and it is charged as a misdemeanor, Laws said.

“This is usually not our first response when dealing with this rare situation,” he said. “Usually we just give a warning.”

Lau said he is aware how it may bother some people to smoke too close to a building.

“I wouldn’t go next to a door and do it,” he said. “It’s rude.”

If e-cigs become popular and people use them often and become a problem, something will be done, Ashraf said.

“At some point, you will find somebody who has a problem with them and sure enough, a group of legislators will decide (a law) on e-cigs,” he said.
Thespartandaily

Illinois Senator Terry Link has introduced a bill (SB3174 ) that reads “Amends the Tobacco Accessories and Smoking Herbs Control Act. Provides that a product containing or delivering nicotine intended or expected for human consumption, or any part of such a product, that is not a tobacco product shall not be distributed or sold in the State or to consumers in the State unless it has been approved or otherwise certified for legal sale by the United States Food and Drug Administration as a tobacco use cessation, harm reduction, or modified-risk product, or for other medical purposes, and is being marketed and sold solely for that approved purpose. Establishes penalties for violations.”

But the bill goes even further to attempt to give smokers no other options outside of big pharmaceutical products as alternatives, therefore creating a monopoly for them with products that only help less than 5% of smokers quit and leaving no other options for smokers. Senate Committee Amendment No. 1 Provides that “tobacco product” is defined under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act rather than Illinois law. Deletes reference to “modified-risk product”.

Illinois Senator Terry Link has received thousands and thousands of dollars from almost all of the major pharmaceutical companies, many of which produce smoking cessation products and are scared to death of the electronic cigarette according to an industry report titled “E-Cigarettes Will Revolutionize The Face Of Tobacco Smoking And Could Pose A Threat To the Smoking Cessation Market”.

The FDA is completely run by the Pharmaceutical companies also, so it is criminals supporting criminals, supporting criminals.

A list of the known contributors in the pharmaceutical industry to the campaign of Senator Terry Link are as follows.

ABBOTT LABORATORIES
JOHNSON & JOHNSON SERVICES
NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS
PFIZER
PHRMA
SCHERING-PLOUGH
ASTRAZENECA
AVENTIS PHARMACEUTICALS
BAXTER HEALTHCARE
ELI LILLY & CO
MERCK & CO
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS NORTH AMERICA
GLAXOSMITHKLINE

There was a money trail last year that the special interest groups like ASH were directly funded in their campaigns to ban the electronic cigarette by these some of these same pharmaceutical companies. The route of demonizing the electronic cigarette with scares, misleading and lies failed after the public was educated on the electronic cigarette and the propaganda was stopped once their folly, bias and special interest in banning the product for corporate profit was exposed to the public.

Now it appears that the way that they are choosing to stop the popular electronic cigarette is through writing new laws that would effectively ban their sale on a state by state basis.

Again, we will step up and expose the corruption, and with elections soon coming, there may be a chance for smokers to put a stop to the carnage and put these senators that are sold out to private interest over the interest of the public.

We will make the actions of these politicians made known to the public on a regular basis concerning this bill and any other bills that they are involved with that they have direct funding from that may or will have a direct positive impact on the donors and the opposite effect on the people and smokers.

Illinois Senator Terry Link is not the only one in Illinois on the bandwagon. There were many other senators( see Mattie Hunter’s take below, she is really rolling in drug money) and state legislators that jumped aboard that also have direct funding from one or more of the above list of pharmaceutical companies.

Their names are as follows:

Sen. Terry Link – Jacqueline Y. Collins – Mattie Hunter<( over 800,000.00 from the same pharmaceutical companies as listed above), Edward D. Maloney, Kwame Raoul, Ira I. Silverstein, William Delgado, Martin A. Sandoval and Louis S. Viverito
March 18th, 2010 Ecigarettesnationwide

The American Association of Public Health Physicians submitted a petition to the US Food and Drug Administration on February 23rd in response to their official stance concerning electronic cigarettes. They cite many concerns, including legal, ethical, epidemiological, medical, and the impact on public health the products could have in the future.

The AAPHP’s recent petition dealt with their request that the FDA reclassify the products from a “drug-device combination” to a “tobacco product.” They are currently urging all supporters of electronic cigarettes to leave the FDA comments on the docket for their petition so the will of the people may be made known . The AAPHP believes in and promotes harm reduction, unlike other mainstream health organizations who reject the concept.

According to the AAPHP, all tobacco products are “nicotine delivery devices” and that the largest portion of illness and death from conventional cigarettes is due to the products of the combusted tobacco, not the chemicals and other substances found in tobacco cigarettes. The carcinogens are not what cause the majority of the health problems; the smoke causes it when it is inhaled deeply into the lungs and held there.

“E-cigarettes, more than any other tobacco or tobacco-related product, satisfies both the habituation and nicotine addiction,” says the organization in their petition. They state that they believe that many smokers struggle with a second addiction to smoking, which is the habit of carrying a pack of cigarettes and lighter, holding the cigarette when it is lit, and the act of smoking it. It is said in their report that there is a significant number of electronic cigarette users who have been successful in switching over to e-cigarette liquid which contains no nicotine while they continue to perform the ritual of “smoking.”

Continuing on through the petition, they state that electronic cigarettes, unlike conventional cigarettes, produce no sidestream smoke; that is, smoke that is emitted from a cigarette when it is not being puffed on. The fact that electronic cigarettes also have no combustion is mentioned again, this time in reference to the amount of property damage done every year due to fires caused by lit cigarettes.

The AAPHP states that classifying electronic cigarettes as tobacco products would enable the FDA to impose manufacturing quality regulations, much in the same way pharmaceutical companies are expected to produce their products.

“Objections to FDA approval of e-cigarettes as tobacco products are speculative and largely based on misinformation,” states the petition.

CONCORD, NH – New Hampshire teens involved in anti-drug programs have helped persuade the New Hampshire House to pass a bill banning e-cigarette use by minors and are pressing the Senate to do the same, the Associated Press reports.

The ubiquitous electronic smokes are readily available throughout the state, and the concern is that their usage, which includes a dose of nicotine steam, will lead to regular cigarette usage.

The AP writes that proponents of the proposed ban want New Hampshire to apply the same standards that it has in place for tobacco products, which are barred in workplaces and other public places and banned for use by minors.

The FDA does not currently regulate electronic cigarettes, though the issue has been contentious and battled out in the court system.

The Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA) supports restricting the product’s use to adults and supports New Hampshire’s effort to keep the product out of the hands of minors, according to the AP.

“Usage of electronic cigarettes is a lot like smoking. That is an adult activity,” said James Watt, an ECA board member.

New Hampshire state Rep. Rich DiPentima said that the legislation is intended to put state regulations in place since the FDA has ruled that it will not take action.

Electronic cigarettes are readily available at mall kiosks and the Internet, come in flavors like tobacco, strawberry, chocolate and vanilla, and replace smoking with “vaping.”

And though they deliver a dose of nicotine steam, they can still be legally sold to and used by minors.

Mara Zrzavy, a 16-year-old ConVal Regional High School student from Peterborough, thinks that’s just wrong, and worries kids her age will view e-cigarettes as cool and become addicted to the nicotine. After they’re hooked, some will switch to regular cigarettes, which are cheaper, she said.

“It’s like having a new cell phone. It’s cool. It’s electronic,” she said.

Zrzavy and other New Hampshire youth involved in anti-drug programs helped persuade the House to pass a bill barring e-cigarette use by minors and hope the Senate will do the same.

Supporters want lawmakers to apply New Hampshire’s law on tobacco products to e-cigarettes. New Jersey has barred use by minors, in workplaces and other indoor public places. Several other states are considering laws restricting use by minors.

Under New Hampshire law, it is illegal to sell tobacco to minors and for minors to buy, possess or use tobacco products. Minors who violate the law face fines of up to $100, up to 20 hours of community service or both.

The federal Food and Drug Administration does not regulate electronic cigarettes. A federal judge ruled in January that the agency lacked jurisdiction over them as drugs.

Electronic cigarettes look like the real thing but don’t contain tobacco. They use a metal tube with a battery to heat a liquid nicotine solution in a replaceable cartridge. Users inhale and exhale the resulting water vapor. The tip of the tube lights like a regular cigarette. The process is called “vaping” instead of smoking.

“You look like a tea kettle essentially,” said Marie Mulroy, tobacco program manager at Breathe New Hampshire which is helping the youth in their fight.

Electronic cigarettes are marketed as an alternative to regular cigarettes and were first marketed worldwide in 2002, but did not become widespread in the United States until late in 2006, said James Watt, a board member of the Electronic Cigarette Association.

The association supports restricting the product’s use to adults and supports the move in New Hampshire to restrict access.

“Usage of electronic cigarettes is a lot like smoking. That is an adult activity,” he said.

Watt says the industry does not market to youth.

“I have yet to see any evidence that kids are buying these,” he said.

Dover High School freshman Paige Niler doesn’t believe that.

“The ads for e-cigarettes have shown up as advertisements on the sides of my Facebook wall,” says Niler, 15. “I believe e-cigarettes are being advertised directly at me and my peers.”

Watt said reputable dealers don’t sell to minors — something Niler found out when she decided to test the policy at a kiosk in a New Hampshire mall. But when she told the salesman her age, he suggested she find someone over age 18 to buy it for her, she said.

State Rep. Rich DiPentima, the bill’s prime sponsor, and Mulroy believe electronic cigarettes are just starting to catch on in New Hampshire. DiPentima said the legislation is intended to put state regulations in place since the FDA is not regulating the nicotine as a medical product and restricting access as it does to other smoking cessation products.

Niler hopes a ban is in place in time to keep her friends from getting hooked.

“I am afraid these e-cigarettes will just be like a gateway drug. They will get teens addicted to nicotine and then they may transition into smoking regular cigarettes,” she said.

As the debate over the electronic cigarette continues , the device has found at least three true believers in Jackson County.
Mildred “Mikay” Barrentine, 30, along with Pat Manning, 37, and 45-year-old Linda Lockwood, the latter two of Altha, are enthusiastic about the e-cigarette. All three are long-time heavy smokers who have given up traditional cigarettes in favor of “vaping,” users’ common term for this alternative to smoking.
Although e-cigarettes are not marketed or proven in studies as a smoke cessation device, all three say it has worked for them.
They breathe better and cough less. They also food tastes better, and they can smell it better, too, because they are no longer using tobacco with tar and the hundreds of chemicals contained in regular cigarettes.
Their clothes no longer get the tiny holes that flying sparks from cigarettes can ignite, and they no longer have to worry about burning holes in the carpet or their cars, since there’s no ash and fire waiting to fall onto the floorboard while they’re driving.
They spend relatively less on vaping than they spent on cigarettes, they say.
They also no longer have to leave the comfort of indoors at public places to enjoy a drag — at least for now.
That could change as the nation grapples with how to regulate the devices. Whether they should be considered permissible in “smoke free” environments is part of that discussion.
The Food and Drug Administration says not enough is known about the health effects of the devices, and the FDA has in the past seized some shipments coming from China in an attempt to regulate them as drug-delivery devices. The FDA also wants to regulate their marketing techniques, and wants to know more about quality controls.
But the agency suffered a setback in January, when a judge ruled the FDA hasn’t got the authority to do so under present regulations. The judge ruled the devices should be treated like cigarettes, which are sold over the counter at almost every convenience store and in many other venues throughout the country. They are not considered a drug-delivery device, the judge reasoned.
“There is no basis for FDA to treat electronic cigarettes … as a drug-device combination when all they purport to do is offer consumers the same recreational effects as a regular cigarette,” U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon wrote in his decision.
“FDA cites no evidence that (e-cigarettes) … are any more an immediate threat to public health and safety than traditional cigarettes, which are readily available,” he continued.
Regular cigarettes carry a Surgeon General’s warning, something e-cigarettes are not subject to at present.
At least some self-governing providers, however, do place warnings on their devices advising that they’re not for children, pregnant women or non-smokers, but rather for those who already smoke and want an alternative.
The FDA did gain traction on another point, however, which will likely put e-cigarettes back under its regulatory wing soon.
The agency was recently given authority to demand that cigarette makers disclose what is in their tobacco products, and the authority to study them determine exactly what’s in them. Based on some cigarette manufacturers’ disclosures in the 1990s, it has been widely reported that cigarettes can contain almost 600 chemicals.
The FDA had done some preliminary tests of a few e-cigarettes back when they were being seized, and has issued a statement.
In a July 2009 agency news release, the FDA warned the public about the devices.
“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced that a laboratory analysis of electronic cigarette samples has found that they contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze,” the FDA wrote.
“These products are marketed and sold to young people and are readily available online and in shopping malls,” the release continued. “In addition, these products do not contain any health warnings comparable to FDA-approved nicotine replacement products or conventional cigarettes. They are also available in different flavors, such as chocolate and mint, which may appeal to young people.”
FDA also pointed out that, while the food-flavoring ingredient has been found safe for that use, the effect when inhaled as a vapor hasn’t been studied.
Those who oppose the devices say they fear smokers will not give up traditional cigarettes but will simply augment or replace their old habit with a new one, increasing the amount of nicotine they use and therefore their health risks.
Barrentine, Manning and Lockwood reacted to those statements, saying that the manufacturers market to adults, not children, and in fact have statements on their cartridges which say e-cigarettes are not meant for kids.
As for the chemicals found in the FDA’s limited testing, the women say traditional cigarettes have those chemicals and a host more. E-cigarettes, they say, are infinitely safer than regular cigarettes, and should be left available for those who want a less dangerous puff.
All three said they’d most likely go back to regular cigarettes if e-cigarettes are pulled from the market.
They say they’re not tempted in the least to use regular cigarettes while this is available, and are even repulsed by the smell and taste of their old habit.
Barrentine, who closely follows online forums, said she has yet to find comments about any side effects. She thinks her chances of coming to harm with e-cigarettes is far less than if she were still smoking.
There are many variations, and Barrentine prefers the “silver bullet” version that delivers more vapor per puff than the more traditional-looking type. She makes her own flavored nicotine juice, instead of buying cartridges, and “tailpipes” it by squeezing drops straight into the atomizer.
Manning and Lockwood also use similar, less traditional devices, but Manning also uses the more traditional e-cigarette as well.
In the ones that look most like a cigarette, the main body of the device is actually a 3.5-volt rechargeable battery encased in a cylinder about the size of a cigarette. A short metal atomizer, about the size of a filter, is screwed into it. A mostly hollow cartridge, of the same shape but slighter bigger than the atomizer, contains an amount of liquid nicotine, propylene glycol (a substance used in food coloring), and flavoring.
The cartridge, which has a small opening, slips over the vaporizer like a glove. It resembles the filter-end of a cigarette. The user sucks air through the opening, an action which sends voltage to the battery and activates the atomizer. An element in the atomizer get hot, and brings the warmed air to the cartridge, which turns the liquid nicotine into a vapor.
The user expels the vapor, which resembles smoke but doesn’t smell or behave like it. The vapor quickly dissipates, and does not create as much volume compared to the amount of smoke generated by a burning cigarette.
The smell of the vapor depends on the type of flavoring used — and there are many, ranging from chocolate to coffee. The smell is detectible only briefly and at close range. The end of the battery, like the end of a cigarette, lights up while the user is inhaling, but no combustion is used in the process.
Several different views of the e-cigarette can be found by searching the term online.
The local health department has weighed in, as well. Adrian Abner, Tobacco Prevention Specialist with the Jackson County Health Department, said his agency takes the position that no nicotine is safe and advocates total cessation.
The health department provides FDA-approved cessation aids free of charge, he said, along with full support to help people quit.
He cited the FDA report as one reason for the health department’s concerns about the devices, beyond the fact that they deliver nicotine.
“There is help out there for quitting completely,” Abner said. “That includes free nicotine replacement therapy for those who wish to quit. We can order these and provide cessastion services.”
Abner said county residents wanting to quit can call or e-mail the health department to participate. They can also call 1-877-UCAN-NOW, or visit http://www.floridaquitline.com.
Abner’s number is 526-2412, ext. 188.

Now that smoking is banned in most Tennessee restaurants, smokers like Carolyn Hampton are adapting to the world around them. If you see the Tri-City Wholesale Tobacco owner inside a restaurant puffing on something that looks like a cigarette, don’t be alarmed. In all likelihood, it is not a real cigarette. Instead, it is probably an electronic cigarette.

“If you’re in a place that you cannot smoke and you’re wanting to light up, it does take the edge off of not having nicotine,” Hampton said.

At her Johnson City business, e-cigarettes are flying off the shelves.

“We got our first order, sold-out and had to re-order, plus I had to get some from another store,” Hampton said.

The battery-powered cigarette alternatives are advertised as being tobacco and smoke-free.

E-cigarettes contain liquid nicotine rather than tobacco and instead of smoke, people exhale an odorless vapor, which makes them legal in places that ban smoking.

“It does not meet the Smoker Protection Act’s definition of smoking,” Tennessee Department of Health Division of General Environmental Health Director Hugh Atkins said.

Although the e-cigs do not appear to break any laws, their health effects are up for debate.

“They’re smoke-free,” Hampton said. “No second-hand smoke, no tar, so they’re actually healthier.“

The Tennessee Department of Health is not ready to go that far.

“Some of the items that have been detected (by the Food and Drug Administration) in preliminary tests do have some carcinogens,” Department of Health Communications Director Andrea Turner said. “The question is, ‘Are those carcinogens being emitted through that vapor?’“

The FDA began investigating electronic cigarettes last year and is expected to continue its research into the latest fad.

“It would probably be preliminary or premature to indicate whether or not the product is a health concern,” Turner said. “There’s still some research that needs to be done to determine that.”

With that in mind, Carolyn Hampton expects to see more government regulation in the near future, but for now she has no complaints.

“I love it,” Hampton said. “I still smoke regular cigarettes, but it is a good alternative to smoking where you can’t smoke.“

Electronic cigarettes have hit the market with a fury of consumer confidence that has big tobacco shaking in its boots. One would assume, that rather than just running away with their tail between their legs, that big tobacco would begin manufacturing and selling electronic cigarettes themselves but so far none of the big tobacco companies have any electronic cigarettes on the market.

For the past decade public opinion on smoking has deteriorated at a rate that only certain US presidents could contend with. Tobacco companies’ lack of popularity, and the impending doom that they offer their users, have left an enormous void in the marketplace. Over 15 billion dollars a day is spent in the US on cigarettes. If every smoker decided to stop smoking traditional cigarettes and began smoking everywhere with the electronic cigarette that number would be cut in half – at the least.

The reason for this huge decline would be because electronic cigarettes are significantly cheaper than traditional cigarettes. This comes as a huge shocker because most of the time anything with the words “new” and “electronic” in the same sentence usually means expensive. In this case, however, it is just the opposite.

There is also promising evidence that smoking everywhere with the electronic cigarette has the potential to help prevent the spread of respiratory disease. To go from associating the word cigarette with tar, stench, death, and disease – and changing it to something that helps prevent the spread of respiratory illness – is a bit too much to comprehend for many people. The FDA seems absolutely baffled.

The FDA has been doing everything they can to find some reason that electronic cigarettes are bad for people. So far all they can come with is that they “don’t know”. The Federal Court in Washington D.C. even ruled in favor of keeping the flow of the electronic cigarette to the US going. The ports are open and people have already begun smoking everywhere. You have probably already been around someone who has been enjoying smoking everywhere – guilt free. You may not have noticed because the electronic cigarette produces no smell. You are probably thinking to yourself by now “this all sounds too good to be true” right? Well, that is an understandable reaction, but fortunately for smokers all over the world that is not the case. Available only in reality – the electronic cigarette has made smoking everywhere a guilt free phenomenon. So put a smile on your face and keep smoking without digging your own grave.
www.electronic-cigarettes-now.com is the us based electronic wholesaler with the safest product and lowest prices.

MIAMI – Despite the ongoing battle between the Food and Drug Administration and electronic cigarette makers, one manufacturer welcomes the challenge as a chance to present its product as a healthier alternative to traditional tobacco.

Green Smoke said it has created an electronic cigarette designed to simulate the smoking experience without carcinogenics. Instead, it emits an odorless vapor of mostly steam, with ingredients like nicotine, water, propylene glycol (an additive used in cake mixes) and others. The nicotine also is available in different strengths.

The company also added that the price for the electronic cigarettes are more cost-efficient than regular tobacco products, with cigarette starter kits ranging from $109 to $270. The starter kits include nicotine cartridges, rechargeable cigarette batteries, home charger and more.

SALT LAKE CITY — A bill that restricts the sale of electronic cigarettes as well as toughens penalties for people caught using or trying to obtain a false driver’s license or other fake identification was approved unanimously in the House unanimously Friday

HB88 sponsored by Ronda Rudd Menlove, R-Garland, is among four bills targeting new tobacco products generally and is one of two that focus specifically on electronic cigarettes, most of which are available only via the Internet. The Senate approved the bill Thursday.

The plastic device is about the same size as the real thing, but instead of producing smoke after being lit, a battery warms a vial of liquid nicotine in the mouthpiece until it vaporizes as the user inhales.

Opponents of the bill told lawmakers they are kidding themselves if they think that e-cigarettes are marketed to children, adding they are no different from nicotine gum in intent. They are almost exclusively used by smokers as a stopgap between quitting and trying to quit inhaling the 4,000 toxic chemical compounds emitted by a burning cigarette compared to about 20 in the vapor of an e-cigarette.

That didn’t stop proponent Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, from highlighting the potentially serious, even fatal, effects of tiny doses of nicotine exposure on toddlers. If a child manages to swallow straight nicotine and doesn’t receive immediate medical attention, it will die, Ray said, noting that nicotine is still used widely as a pesticide.

The amount of nicotine in two or three regular filter cigarettes is enough to kill someone. But because nicotine is only partially consumed and is mixed with air going into the lungs over several minutes spread out over many years, risk of nicotine poisoning from cigarette smoke is very low, even for chain smokers, he said.

Following that logic, HB88 is really saying Utah would rather someone who is trying to quit smoking do so only by inhaling nicotine, the addictive drug in cigarettes, in its dirtiest, most unhealthy form, said Spike Babaian, president of the National Vapers Club, a consumer advocacy group for former smokers who have switched to electronic cigarettes.

The argument defies both reality and common sense, Babaian said. Passage of this bill takes away a life-saving choice for Utah smokers, and it leaves smokers who have already successfully switched to e-cigarettes in an impossible situation.

“It’s inhumane, and it certainly isn’t in the interest of public health,” he said.

See the bill le.utah.gov/~2010/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0088.htm

By James Thalman
Deseret News
Feb. 19, 2010

A study supported by the National Cancer Institute and led by a Virginia Commonwealth University researcher says these changes should be consistent with cartridge content and product effect, even if that effect is a total failure to deliver nicotine.

Electronic cigarettes consist of a battery, heater and cartridge containing a solution of nicotine, propylene glycol and other chemicals and have been marketed to deliver nicotine without tobacco toxicants.

Despite no published data concerning safety or effectiveness, these products are sold in shopping malls and online. Further, “electronic cigarettes” currently are unregulated in the U.S., unlike other products intended to deliver nicotine to smokers such as lozenges, gum and patches.

“Consumers have a right to expect that products marketed to deliver a drug will work safely and as promised,” said principal investigator Thomas Eissenberg, Ph.D., professor in the VCU Department of Psychology. “Our findings demonstrate that the ‘electronic cigarettes’ that we tested do not deliver the drug they are supposed to deliver. It’s not just that they delivered less nicotine than a cigarette. Rather, they delivered no measurable nicotine at all. In terms of nicotine delivery, these products were as effective as puffing from an unlit cigarette.”

Eissenberg says these findings are important because they demonstrate why regulation of these products is essential for protecting the welfare and rights of consumers. With regulation, consumers can expect that these and similar products will be evaluated objectively and then labeled and packaged in a manner that is consistent with the drug they contain and the effects they produce, he said.

“Regulation can protect consumers from unsafe and ineffective products, but these products have somehow avoided regulation thus far,” said Eissenberg. “Our results suggest that consumers interested in safe and effective nicotine delivery need to be very wary of unregulated ‘electronic cigarettes’.”

In Eissenberg’s study, 16 people engaged in four different sessions — each separated by 48 hours — which included smoking their preferred brand of cigarettes, puffing an unlit cigarette, or using one of two different brands of “electronic cigarettes” loaded with “high” strength, which is 16 mg, nicotine cartridges. Eissenberg and his team measured the level of nicotine in the participants’ blood and also their heart rate and craving for a cigarette/nicotine.

They found that when smokers used the two brands of “electronic cigarettes,” there was no significant increase in nicotine levels or heart rate, and little reduction in craving. However, when they smoked their own brand of cigarettes, substantial and significant increases in plasma nicotine and heart rate, and decreases in craving were observed.

Eissenberg, who is director of the VCU Clinical Behavioral Pharmacology Laboratory and a researcher with the VCU Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies, has completed a series of studies demonstrating how clinical laboratory methods can be used to evaluate the toxicant exposure and other effects of novel products for tobacco users.

The research was published in the Online First issue of the journal Tobacco Control and will appear in the February print issue of the journal.

Electronic cigarettes have been a matter of concern for a while now. Several states have sued the makers of the devices and experts have warned that their use could make the addiction to nicotine worse.

By James Limbach
ConsumerAffairs.com
February 16, 2010

A federal judge has ruled that electronic cigarettes cannot be regulated as drug delivery devices by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). This decision has left the public health community red-faced.

This means electronic cigarettes will stay in the market for now. The ruling could have far-reaching implication on federal regulation of tobacco products.

Those in favor of tobacco-control said that this ruling could give birth to a range of new nicotine-laced products that have been controlled by the FDA.

The case
In September 2008, the FDA confiscated imports of battery-operated devices that were used for turning a nicotine solution into vapors, for inhalation.

The FDA labeled these as drug delivery devices and banned their entry in the nation on the pretext that they these e-cigarettes were unapproved, misbranded products being used as a substitute to traditional cigarettes.

The agency had also expressed concerns over the indefinite intensity of nicotine and other chemicals in these.

FDA was sued by Smoking Everywhere Inc. and NJOY, whose e-cigarettes were seized. The companies alleged that the agency had overstepped its authority.

On Jan. 14, a U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia agreed to this argument. Judge Richard J Leon wrote, “There is no basis for FDA to treat electronic cigarettes … as a drug-device combination when all they purport to do is offer consumers the same recreational effects as a regular cigarette.”

“FDA cites no evidence that [e-cigarettes] … are any more an immediate threat to public health and safety than traditional cigarettes, which are readily available,” the court observed, adding that FDA’s concerns did not in any way prevail over the economic harm sustained by the plaintiffs.

Concerns over e-cigarettes
As per the ruling, no restriction is to be imposed on the marketing of e-cigarettes while the case is still under litigation.

Reacting to the ruling, an FDA spokeswoman said, “The public health issues surrounding electronic cigarettes are of serious concern to the FDA.”

Questions are being raised over e-cigarettes functioning as a smoking-cessation tool, however, the World Health Organization (WHO) has ruled out it being a valid therapy.

The issue has been taken up by the American Medical Association, which will reveal the outcome of a study currently underway at its House of Delegates Annual Meeting in June.

Thomas P Houston, MD, chair of the American Academy of Family Physicians’ tobacco cessation advisory committee, said, “These devices may not be marketed for cessation, but anecdotally, that’s what the public is using them for. We still don’t know the quality control, so somebody needs to be able to set standards for safety for whatever ingredients might be added and to understand what these do for the smoker in the short and long term. Someone has to be accountable.”

Jonathan P. Winickoff, MD, MPH, chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics Tobacco Consortium, has expressed concerns over the possibility of claims made by the companies being misleading. “This product delivers nicotine, and nicotine is a potent drug that fosters addiction,” he said.

Dr. Winickoff, who helped the FDA in its study of e-cigarettes, said, “The primary claim that there is a net benefit for the public health is just unproven, and there’s a very real risk that even people who have not used any tobacco products — including children and young adults — start with an e-cigarette thinking it’s safe.”

One of the hottest new alternatives to smoking — electronic cigarettes — may deliver little of the nicotine they promise, a study at Virginia Commonwealth University is finding.

And because they lack the jolt of tobacco cigarettes, users may be modifying the electronic devices to deliver more toxic nicotine, VCU researcher Thomas Eissenberg said yesterday.

The study, to be presented this month at an academic conference, also suggests that e-cigarettes, when used according to directions, don’t suppress the craving to smoke very much, Eissenberg said.

“These data scream out for the need for regulation of these devices,” said Eissenberg, who is director of VCU’s Clinical Behavioral Pharmacology Laboratory.

“They say they are giving people nicotine, but based on our study, with the two brands we looked at and tested the way we did, that’s not clear.”

Nicotine is the addictive compound that hooks tobacco users.

E-cigarettes use small heaters to vaporize a mix of nicotine and alcohol, usually propylene glycol, a common ingredient in antifreeze, for a smoker to inhale. Because e-cigarettes do not burn tobacco leaf, users believe they avoid the toxins and cancer-causing compounds in cigarette smoke.

“There’s millions of people who use e-cigarettes, and he’s studied 16,” said Amy A. Linert, a spokeswoman for the Electronic Cigarette Association.

Eissenberg tested nicotine in the smokers’ blood streams after they used two different kinds of e-cigarettes, as well as after smoking.

He said the results from the first 16 were so surprising that he fired off a letter to the journal Tobacco Control with his preliminary findings. The letter is being published in this month’s edition of the journal. He’ll present the full results to the Society for Research in Nicotine and Tobacco this month.

His blood tests found smokers averaged 16.8 nanograms of nicotine per milliliter of blood plasma five minutes after smoking conventional cigarettes, but only 2.5 nanograms or 3.4 nanograms with the e-cigarette devices.

While nicotine affects heartbeat, he noticed an increase only after his subjects smoked tobacco but not after using the e-cigarettes.

The only significant reduction in craving for a cigarette came, briefly, after his subjects tried one variety of e-cigarette within an hour of their first attempt.

“We have hundreds of thousands of customers, and their collective experience and purchasing decisions strongly indicate that our products meet the needs of people interested in an alternative to combustible, smoke-producing cigarettes,” said Jack Leadbeater, chief executive officer of NJOY, the company that made one of the two devices Eissenberg tested.

Leadbeater said half his company’s sales are to repeat customers, and that 94 percent of customers say they continued using the product after their first trial.

Eissenberg said he’s concerned about how people are using the devices.

“If people are reporting what they are reporting about cravings, the data suggest it’s not because of the drugs in the device,” he said.

But Eissenberg said he’s concerned about comments he has seen on blogs that some e-cigarette users are “dripping,” or letting liquid from the devices’ cartridges fall directly onto the heating element.

That means they may be getting relatively large doses of nicotine, which can be toxic in amounts of about 50 milligrams, Eissenberg said.

While the cartridges contain 16 milligrams, they can be refilled from bottles labeled as containing 500 milligrams, or 10 times the toxic dose, he said.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has seized imports of e-cigarettes, saying they are unapproved drug-delivery devices. NJOY and another firm are challenging those seizures in federal court.

Washington — “Electronic cigarettes” that vaporize nicotine juice to inhale instead of smoke from burning tobacco do not deliver as promised, according to research at Virginia Commonwealth University.

“They are as effective at nicotine delivery as puffing on an unlit cigarette,” said Dr. Thomas Eissenberg, at the school’s Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies.

His study, funded by the federal National Cancer Institute, is the first by American doctors to check the function of so-called “no-smoke tobacco” devices, which are unregulated in the United States for sale or use.

The units are shaped like a cigarette and contain a battery that heats a filament to vaporize liquid nicotine in a refillable cartridge. Smokers buy the devices to get around no-smoking restrictions and to attempt to quit conventional cigarettes.

Some users nickname what they’re doing as “vaping” instead of smoking, to reflect the vapor produced by the heating element. The devices are marketed as an alternative to smoking, but retailers avoid making claims about health or safety.

Fans have established a Web site, www.e-cigarette-forum.com. Founder Oliver Kershaw said the site “is the largest e-smokers community online with some 26,000 members, most of whom are in the U.S.”

Jimi Jackson, a former tobacco smoker in Richmond, Virginia, who sells electronic cigarettes, is convinced there are immediate health advantages in avoiding the known cancer-causing substances in the smoke of a burning cigarette.

“I smoked 37 years, and when I found them, I was, like, ‘Thank, you Jesus,’ ” Jackson said with a laugh, as a reporter visited his shop, No Smoke Virginia, coincidentally just a few blocks from where the research was conducted at Virginia Commonwealth.

In March, the Food and Drug Administration imposed a ban on continued imports of the devices, pending regulatory review for any health risks.

The latest clinical evidence suggests users are not getting the addictive substance they get from smoking tobacco. “These e-cigs do not deliver nicotine,” Eissenberg said of the findings he expects to publish in an upcoming issue of the British Medical Journal.

This past summer, Eissenberg recruited smokers without prior experience using e-cigarettes to volunteer to use two popular brands of the devices for a set period. The 16 subjects were regularly measured in a clinical setting for the presence of nicotine in their bodies, their reported craving for conventional cigarettes, and certain physiological effects such as a change in heart rate.

“Ten puffs from either of these electronic cigarettes with a 16 mg nicotine cartridge delivered little to no nicotine,” the study found.

But the units may deliver hazardous chemicals, according to preliminary checks by federal regulators. In a notice to importers, the FDA blocked continued shipments after finding diethylene glycol, a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans.

The government’s statement noted there are no health warnings on the products, and that “the FDA analyses detected carcinogens, including nitrosamines.”

The notice of the import ban says “the product appears to be a combination drug-device,” that “requires pre-approval, registration and listing with the FDA” in order to be marketed in the United States.

A company challenging the import ban claims in federal court documents to have sold 600,000 of the devices in a year’s time through a network of 120 distributors in the United States.

“We are on the verge of going out of business, which is why we are suing the FDA in U.S. District Court,” said Washington, attorney Kip Schwartz, representing a company called “Smoking Everywhere,” a U.S. wholesaler that was importing the devices from China.

The lawsuit questions the FDA’s authority to block shipments of a non-tobacco product, and says the agency has violated its statutory process for product review. Liquid nicotine is available on the open market through pharmaceutical houses and vendors who sell e-cigarettes.

A judge has yet to rule on the company’s request for an injunction that would allow imports to resume. “There has been no change,” said FDA spokesman Siobhan DeLancey. She said “a decision in the case is still pending, with no timeline.”

President Obama, who has described himself as an occasional smoker, has been offered one of the devices by Florida Rep. Cliff Stearns. The Republican lawmaker’s office said the president did not respond.

An administration spokesman last year said the White House was not aware of the offer.

In a copy of a letter to the chief executive dated March 26, Stearns wrote, “I have recently given out e-cigarettes to a few members of Congress and they have become quite a hit.”

Sales of the devices continue at shopping mall kiosks and small storefront retailers, apparently drawing from stock imported before the FDA began to block shipments from overseas suppliers.
By Paul Courson, CNN
February 8, 2010

Guilford County may have banned smoking from area bars and restaurants at the first of the year, but technology is giving county health officials and other anti-smoking advocates fits. “E-cigs” – also known as “electronic cigarettes” – are becoming the nicotine dispenser of choice now that smoking traditional cigarettes has been declared illegal in most public buildings.

Electronic cigarettes are meant to simulate the experience of smoking a cigarette, and many designs look like the real thing, light up like real ones and release a puff of vapor. They’re battery-powered nicotine dispensers that “vaporize” the nicotine but, since there’s no tobacco and no combustion, e-cigs aren’t covered by state laws that ban smoking.

According to Guilford County Tobacco Prevention Coordinator Mary Gillett, the product can cause confusion when bar patrons light up their electronic cigarettes because, while it’s not illegal to do so, anti-smokers at bars can get upset with the fact that people are apparently smoking.

Gillett said bar owners can order patrons to put them out – or, rather, turn them off.

“They can do it the same way they can say, ‘No shoes, no service,’” she said.

Gillette said that, since the product is relatively new, there are a great deal of questions about the safety of the device and how it compares with cigarettes.

Health claims about the product at this point are all over the place – from “There’s nothing in the product that causes cancer,” to, “It’s just as bad if not worse for you than a traditional cigarette.”

And, though an e-cig does put off a “vapor,” that only happens when someone takes a drag on it – it’s not a continuous stream of smoke as with a lit cigarette, and advocates of the product say there’s no danger for those around the e-smoker as there is from secondhand smoke put off by traditional cigarettes.

The legislation that banned smoking in most public buildings starting at the first of this year defines “smoking” as, “The use or possession of a lighted cigarette, lighted cigar, lighted pipe, or any other lighted tobacco product.”

Electronic cigarettes aren’t the first loophole – if they are indeed one – in the law that someone has tried to use to get around the ban. Some argue that an ambiguity in the smoking ban allows clubs to ignore the ban simply by declaring an establishment a county club – as one Greensboro club owner has already done; and others may follow suit if the name-change maneuver holds up in court.

Guilford County Sheriff BJ Barnes said the law is the law, and he added that, since using electronic cigarettes isn’t illegal, it must be legal.

“The law is not supposed to be subjective,” Barnes said.

Guilford County Security Director Jeff Fowler said he hasn’t seen anyone smoking electronic cigarettes in the Guilford County Courthouse or in other county buildings.

“I did see someone smoking one in line,” said Fowler, who added that he did a double take when he saw it.

The courthouse lines often get very long and all the people with lengthy waits on cold mornings need something to occupy their time. (If Fowler and his guards do ever need to break up an argument between an e-cig user and anti-smoking advocate in line, they’ll soon have a pair of $7,000 Segways to whisk easily to even the very distant end of the line if need be.)

According to Guilford County Health Director Merle Green, as of yet, the health department has no stance on electronic cigarettes.

“The county hasn’t taken an official position on e-cigs,” Green said. “This has not been an agenda item on county board meeting agendas so far.”

The new cigarettes were invented about six years ago but are only now becoming popular in this country.

Companies marketing the electronic nicotine dispensers say it’s a product that can help people quit smoking, in much the same way a nicotine patch might help wean someone off cigarettes.

However, as traditional smoking becomes banned in more places, more and more smokers are apparently using e-cigs simply to get their nicotine fix in places where smoking real cigarettes isn’t allowed.

By Scott D. Yost
February 04, 2010

A House panel voted unanimously Friday in favor of a bill meant to create new regulations for electronic cigarettes, while placing on hold a second bill that would regulate, and in many cases ban, smokeless nicotine products.

Under HB88, it would be illegal for those under 19 to purchase or possess e-cigarettes, battery-powered substitutes into which the user inserts a cartridge and, when it’s puffed, a nicotine vapor is emitted. These devices are supposed to cut the ingestion of tar and second-hand smoke.

The bill also calls on school districts and the State Board of Education to regulate their use in schools, as HB88 would not make e-cigarettes subject to Utah’s Clean Air Act, until the FDA determines whether or not the trace nicotine emitted from them can affect those around them.

Rep. Ronda Menlove, R-Garland, called the bill she sponsored “legislation that reflects a changing world.” HB88 received support from the Utah PTA and the Utah School Board, as well as representatives for White Cloud Cigarettes, a major producer of the e-cigarettes, who said they already sought to limit use of e-cigarettes by minors and non-smokers.

The second bill, HB71, was created to target nicotine products packaged to appear like mints, cinnamon sticks and other candies, currently being analyzed by the FDA.

Rep. Paul Ray, R-Clearfield, HB71′s sponsor, claimed these were specific efforts by tobacco companies to target children.

However, committee members postponed voting on the bill after realizing that if left unchanged, the bill would make products including moist snuff and e-cigarettes illegal as well.

Ray said he would return to the committee with two amendments, one to exempt smokeless nicotine products currently sold in Utah, and another to address whether or not e-cigarettes should be allowed to continue to be sold.

Leeann Duncan, White Cloud’s west coast distributor, opposed HB71. “I’m actually proud to help sell electronic cigarettes,” she said. “It’s helping lots of people, and that’s what the whole thing is about.”

Rep. Evan Vickers, R-Cedar City, asked that both those in favor of e-cigarettes and those, like Michael Siler of the American Cancer Society, return to the committee with additional objective evidence to support their claims.

Rep. Phil Riesen, D-Holladay, asked for bills that go further than the original two. “Setting aside children, we need to figure out a way to get nicotine products out of the hands of adults, because it’s going to kill you.”

Frustrated by a lack of federal regulations governing electronic cigarettes, Arizona policy makers are taking the initiative to ban sales of the tobaccoless devices to minors.

Senate Bill 1053, sponsored by Sen. Carolyn Allen, R-Scottsdale, makes it a petty offense to sell, give or furnish the cigarettes to underage teens.

E-cigarettes, as they are called, resemble traditional cigarettes and emit a puff of nicotine vapor when inhaled. A major distributor, NJOY, is based in north Scottsdale.

The bill glided through the Senate’s Committee of the Whole on Thursday. It must get final approval in the Senatebefore advancing to the House.

According to a Senate bill fact sheet, there are no federal regulations regarding e-cigarettes and they are not required to display health warnings like conventional cigarettes.

Jennifer Boucek of the Arizona Attorney General’s Office said the danger lies in the cigarettes’ ability to attract young people with flavors such as strawberry and chocolate.

“We believe children are at risk now,” Boucek told The Arizona Republic.

Boucek said the Attorney General’s Office proposed the idea to Allen, who could not be reached for comment. The law also prohibits minors from accepting or possessing the cigarettes, with fines of up to $300.

Despite efforts by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to detain imports into the United States, a federal judge ruled earlier this month that distributors are free to import them. Electronic cigarettes are largely manufactured in China.

NJOY CEO Jack Leadbeater said the devices are for committed adult smokers only. The company has taken “numerous steps” to ban access of the products to young people, he said.

“We applaud taking steps to protect our youth, while maintaining appropriate access to the adult committed smokers,” Leadbeater said.

An opponent of the bill, Rick Galeener, said he is tired of government regulations invading personal freedoms. Galeener, who smokes regular cigarettes, said he believes political correctness has gone too far.

The FDA has denounced the cigarettes as “highly addictive” due to their nicotine content. Public-health experts said that more should be done to regulate marketing of the products, which are mostly sold online and in shopping malls.

An analysis released by the FDA last year showed some samples of the cigarettes contained carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, an ingredient found in antifreeze. The analysis has been disputed by distributors and users of the cigarettes.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration can no longer regulate electronic cigarettes, according to a court ruling last week.

Electronic cigarettes, or e-cigs, are battery-powered machines that deliver a hit of nicotine vapor, according to the FDA. The FDA had previously tried to seize imports of them, but it no longer can as a result of this ruling by U.S. District Judge Richard Leon.

Dillon Summers, an employee at Plantations Inc., a tobacco store in Sooner Mall, said he has seen an increased demand for the product from Norman residents and OU students.

Plantations Inc. does not carry e-cigs but “we do have a lot of people coming in looking for them,” Summers said.

Although Summers agreed with the ruling, he said, the store continues not to sell them because of prior bad experiences with manufacturers.

“We used to sell them, but we stopped because [the manufacturers] changed the nicotine levels on us without telling us,” Summers said.

The Internet seems to be the only place to find them in Oklahoma, Summers said.

USACIG Inc., a company that sells e-cigs, said it was excited by the ruling.

“This opens up the door for our company so that no bureaucracy will slow down our progress of launching our products in the U.S.,” stated Peter Michaels, USACIG Inc president.

Not everyone is on board with the recent ruling.

Doug Matheny, chief of Tobacco Use Prevention Service for the Oklahoma State Health Department, said e-cigs should still be regulated, just like similar products.

“I admit that they are not as dangerous without the smoke,” Matheny said. “But the makers of the product are walking a fine line. They are careful not to claim them as cessation products because then they would have to be regulated … but they do tend to promote them as something to get a nicotine fix when smoking is not allowed.”

Matheny said he had concerns people may think the products are safe to use, even though he does not think they are.

“It is an addictive product,” Matheny said. “It has not been tested to show its relative safety. You would think it would be safer, but that certainly doesn’t mean it’s safe, if that makes sense.”

The FDA stated in a press release they consider the devices to be like nicotine gum or patches, which currently are regulated. Because of the similarity, the FDA said it should be allowed to regulate e-cigs as well.

The FDA’s biggest concern is the unregulated devices might actually increase addiction or the number of young people smoking, according to a press release.

Biochemical engineering senior Yi Yang said he had not heard of electronic cigarettes but is against smoking, especially because of the negative health side effects, such as secondhand smoke.

Kathleen Evans/The Daily
January 26, 2010

There is a worrying lack of safety data on electronic cigarettes, despite their growing popularity with the public, two leading Greek researchers have warned.

In the British Medical Journal, they say that without more evidence it is impossible to know if such products actually do more harm than good.

Some studies have raised safety fears, but retailers argue e-cigarettes are a healthy alternative to the real thing.

Users can inhale nicotine without tar, tobacco or carbon monoxide.

The Department of Health suggested consumers “exercise caution”.

The report authors said consumers should stop using the devices until ongoing safety studies reported back within the next year.

The World Health Organisation is among those to raise concerns about the safety of these new types of cigarette substitute, which deliver a nicotine hit in a fine vapour.

And in the past year, US regulators have detained and blocked numerous shipments of e-cigarettes at borders because the devices are not approved.

In the UK, it is illegal to sell e-cigarettes as a “quit smoking” aid.

But they are widely available to buy as a “cigarette alternative” over the internet and are sold in a number of places, including some bars and clubs, the department store Harrods and even on board Ryanair flights.

Andreas Flouris and Dimitris Oikonomou, from the Institute of Human Performance and Rehabilitation in Greece, say there have been three main reports on e-cigarette safety – one by US regulators, one by a publicly-funded Greek research institute, and another by a private company in New Zealand.

Scant data

The US Food and Drug Administration report expressed concern after finding different brands of the battery operated device delivered markedly different amounts of nicotine vapour with each puff.

The FDA also detected traces of powerful cancer-causing chemicals.

The Greek institute Demokritos took a neutral stance on the products and did not find any evidence of chemical contamination.

Private enterprise Health New Zealand did find cancer-causing chemicals in products, but concluded that overall e-cigarettes should be recommended on the basis of the health risks associated with smoking normal cigarettes.

The researchers told the BMJ: “The scarce evidence indicates the existence of various toxic and carcinogenic compounds in e-cigarettes, albeit in possibly much smaller concentrations than in traditional cigarettes.”

Callum Reckless, director at Smart Smoker, a company that sells e-cigarettes, said: “I believe that electronic cigarettes are indeed a safer alternative to smoking real cigarettes.”

He welcomed more research into the safety of the products.

A Department of Health spokeswoman said it had been working with regulators to test the products and that none of those tested so far complied with product safety regulations.

She said the government was working to ensure e-cigarettes were labelled and sold appropriately.

“The Department of Health is not aware of any evidence about the long-term safety of e-cigarettes and, as such, would suggest that consumers exercise caution.

“E-cigarettes are not promoted by, or available on, the NHS,” she said.

Deborah Arnott, of the charity Action on Smoking and Health, said: “We do need better data on safety and appropriate regulation for e-cigarettes, although these products are certain to be significantly less hazardous than cigarettes, which lead to premature death in half all long-term users.”

She said there was demand for the products from smokers – UK estimates suggest around one in ten has already tried them.