Electronic Cigarettes: Battle for the Truth

It has come to the editor’s attention that vile capitalist forces are doing everything they can to protect their existing assets and market foothold, by any means necessary. You see, electronic cigarettes, being the healthier alternative to smoking, pose a big problem for not only tobacco corporations but pharmaceuticals as well! Profits over at British American Tobacco have seen a steady decline over the past couple of years and electronic cigarettes appear to be the “culprit”.

Once upon a time there was a young and ambitious student, let’s call him Jack. Jack proudly graduated from Yale, his love: medicine. He vowed to help and protect the sick and needy. Climbing the career ladder Jack eventually becomes the Director of some influential public health organization. Along the way Jack had made some very powerful and influential “friends” who’ve helped him, and sometimes ask Jack to return the favor. Jack knows all too well that he’ll be punished if he bites the hand that feeds him, regardless of whether the “favor” is ethical or not. Like any other living person, Jack has weaknesses that can be exploited into serving the sponsor instead of the public. Jack is caught in a vicious circle and is bound by the chains that placed him where he is today; his pride, beliefs and honor trampled. I’ll leave the moral of the story up to the reader’s imagination.

Only the truth can set us free… And so the battle for truth on electronic cigarettes continues. Organizations like the CASAA: Consumer Advocates for Smoke-Free Alternatives Association are not giving up the fight for the truth. CASAA’s publications have brought many covered-up facts to light, fake reports, fabricated data, the works, all to give electronic cigarettes a bad name. Extensively documented reports like the Electronic Cigarette Association‘s “The Facts About Electronic Cigarettes” (PDF) clearly explain the potential of electronic cigarettes, and the danger that they pose to tobacco monopolies. Here are some famous quotes in the quest for truth:

  • “This is about as idiotic and irrational an approach as I have ever seen in my 22 years in tobacco control and public health. A public policy maker who touts himself as being a champion of the public’s health as well as some of the leading national health advocacy organizations is demanding that we ban what is clearly a much safer cigarette than those on the market, but that we allow, protect, approve and institutionalize the really toxic ones.” – Michael Siegel, a physician, researcher and professor at the Boston University School of Public Health, in response to Senator Frank Lautenburg’s (D-New Jersey) letter to the FDA suggesting the ban of electronic cigarettes
  • “We have every reason to believe the hazard posed by electronic cigarettes would be much lower than 1 percent of that posed by (tobacco) cigarettes. The testing guidelines in the current tobacco act (circulating through Congress) would represent a ban on electronic cigarettes, (yet) if we get all tobacco smokers to switch from regular cigarettes (to electronic cigarettes), we would eventually reduce the U.S. death toll from more than 400,000 a year to less than 4,000, maybe as low as 400.” – Joel Nitzkin, MD, MPH, DPA, FACPM, Chair, Tobacco Control Task Force, American Association of Public Health Physicians
  • “The vast majority of the harm caused by smoking is from the method of nicotine delivery rather than from the nicotine itself. There would be a parallel problem if people got caffeine from smoking tea leaves rather than making an infusion of these leaves in hot water. It is clear to far-sighted researchers that there are huge gains to be made from dealing with the delivery system.” – David Sweanor, BA, JD, Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa
  • “Nicotine is probably the second most used drug after caffeine. Amazingly, no one thinks of caffeine as a harmful drug. Nor should they. The possible dangers of nicotine are dwarfed by the dangers associated with tobacco. Pure nicotine has not been associated with the risk of cancer.” – International Harm Reduction Association
  • “The standard for lower-risk products for use by current smokers should be the hazard posed by (tobacco) cigarettes, not a pharmaceutical safety standard.” – Joel Nitzkin, MD, MPH, DPA, FACPM, Chair, Tobacco Control Task Force, American Association of Public Health Physicians
  • “Telling smokers they may not use electronic cigarettes until they’re approved by the FDA is like telling a floundering swimmer not to climb aboard a raft because it might have a leak.” – Jacob Sullum, senior editor at Reason magazine, nationally syndicated columnist and author of the critically-acclaimed book For Your Own Good: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of Public Health (Free Press, 1998)
  • “If the FDA would act within its own historical context it should recognize that when faced with an epidemic it should be focusing on the greatest possible reduction in deaths rather than looking at alternatives to cigarettes as if cigarettes themselves did not exist. Had the FDA acted like this in 1938 we’d likely still not have antibiotics, and had they acted this way during the various vaccination campaigns smallpox would likely still be around.” – David Sweanor, BA, JD, Adjunct Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Ottawa
  • “Huge disparities and inconsistencies exist between the tobacco and nicotine product regulations. Combustible tobacco products are the least regulated and nicotine products are the most highly regulated. Given the huge differences in the proven or likely hazards of these products to individual and public health, this represents a substantial and illogical regulatory imbalance. The regulation of nicotine products needs to be radically overhauled to encourage the use of less harmful products.” – Royal College of Physicians
  • “If one could entertain the unrealistic assumption that all tobacco users would switch to clean nicotine tomorrow, we would see an immediate effect (for the better) on cardiovascular disorders, and a delayed effect on respiratory and cancer disease.” – The International Harm Reduction Association
  • “Smokefree Pennsylvania strongly urges the FDA to consider the enormous public health disaster the agency would create by banning electronic cigarettes. Denying 45 million (tobacco) cigarette smokers access to this exponentially less hazardous alternative would result in millions of preventable deaths among smokers and millions of non-smokers continuing to be exposed to tobacco smoke pollution. It is absurd to even contemplate protecting the deadliest nicotine products (tobacco cigarettes) from market competition by these less hazardous nicotine products.” – William T. Godshall, MPH, Executive Director, Smokefree Pennsylvania

Read the consumer report to compare the Best Electronic Cigarette available on the web.

About the Author

Senior Editor

After many previous failed attempts at quitting smoking I stumbled upon electronic cigarettes and decided to give them a try. It has been five years now that I smoked my last tobacco cigarette and I am 100% nicotine-free!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *