In sharp contrast to the false and misleading fear mongering claims by prohibitionist and propagandist Stan Glantz, the
rapidly growing mountain of scientific and empirical evidence consistently indicates that e cigarettes

are 99% ( / 1%) less hazardous than cigarettes,
have never been known to addict any nonsmoker (or youth) to nicotine,
pose no risks to nonusers,
emit similar levels of constituents as FDA approved nicotine inhalers,
are consumed almost exclusively (i.e. 99%) by smokers and former smokers who quit by switching to e cigs,
have helped several million smokers quit and/or sharply reduce cigarette consumption,
have replaced/reduced about 750 million packs of cigarettes in the US in the past five years,
are more effective than nicotine gums, lozenges and patches for smoking cessation and reducing cigarette consumption, and
pose fewer risks than FDA approved Chantix or Wellbutrin.

Had Obama’s FDA successfully banned e cigarettes in 2009, several million e cigarette consumers would have smoked an additional 750 million packs of cigarettes, which would have threatened their lives and public health.

Thankfully for public health, individual freedom, market competition and common sense, all thirteen federal judges who adjudicated litigation filed by two e cigarette companies (whose products were seized by Customs agents at US ports) agreed that the FDA’s import ban on e cigarettes was unlawful, and
struck it down in 2010.

In response, on April 25, 2011 the FDA stated its intent to regulate e cigarettes as tobacco products under the Tobacco Control Act by imposing the “deeming” regulation and by imposing additional regulations on e cigarettes (despite the agency’s repeated claims that it bases all of its regulatory policies on scientific evidence).

Meanwhile, the FDA and the lazy news media have refused to acknowledge that the “deeming” regulation would ban all e cigarettes (per Section 905(j) and Section 910 of the Tobacco Control Act), would prohibit e cigarette companies from truthfully claiming that e cigs “emit no smoke” (per
Section 911), and would otherwise decimate the e cigarette industry.

Even if the FDA exempts e cigarettes from those most devastating provisions in Chapter IX of the TCA, imposing the “deeming” regulation and additional regulations on e cigarettes would likely ban 99% of e cigarette products, eliminate 98% of e cigarette companies, and basically give the entire fledgling
e cigarette industry (comprised of many small companies) to the Big Tobacco and a few large e cig companies (basically creating an oligopoly).

The best thing the FDA can do to further protect public health is to allow the largely free market for e cigarettes to continue flourishing without any federal regulations.

More than half of the states have already banned the sale of e cigarettes to minors, and many more states would have done so had those laws not been opposed by drug industry funded Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids, American Cancer Society, American Heart Association, American Lung Association and other e cigarette prohibitionist groups that also urged FDA to unlawfully ban and seize e cigarettes in 2009.

These same drug industry funded groups have lobbied state and local governments to ban the sale and use of e cigarettes, have made many false and misleading fear mongering claims about e cigarettes, and have refused to disclose that they’ve been paid off by Big Pharma to promote Big Pharma products and to oppose competitive (but more effective) smokefree tobacco/nicotine alternatives (including e cigarettes).

Stan Glantz has become a pathological liar in his zeal to ban lifesaving e cigarettes, which will (within five years) be considered just as important for protecting public health as
pasteurization, childhood vaccines, antibiotics, sewage/water treatment and condoms.

William T Godshall, MPH
Executive Director
Smokefree Pennsylvania
1926 Monongahela Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15218
412 351 5880
smokefree

Jama network

Favorite brand of cigarettes t_t

Cannabis use may increase the likelihood of becoming addicted to nicotine, suggests a study in rats funded by the National Institute on Drug Abuse.

Data from previous epidemiologic studies have suggested that people who smoke marijuana are more likely to become addicted to cigarettes, but the reason why was unclear.

To probe whether biological factors may be involved, the researchers injected rats with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive component of cannabis, for 3 days (Panlilio LV et al. Neuropsychopharmacology. doi 10.1038/npp.2013.16 published online January 10, 2013 ). A week later the investigators implanted catheters in the animals to give them an intravenous dose of nicotine or a placebo when they completed a task. Of rats in the nicotine group, 94% learned to complete the task to get their dose, compared with 65% of the placebo group. When the rats had to work harder to obtain the dose, those in the nicotine group were more likely to persist.