Testing & Reporting
The results of studies, numerous reports and comments from government and academia are now starting to make their way into the public domain, and in the main they are overwhelmingly positive (especially when you focus on study data and not published findings or comments). The whole 'smoking' topic is a very complicated issue and so it helps to understand the motivations of the researchers and publishers (as well as the commentators) before you can properly understand, and in some cases trust, the findings. For instance, here at eciginfo we are in favour of the electronic cigarette, clearly, and so if we see a report highlighting negative aspects where we believe it may be in the publisher's interest to do so then we are more likely to dismiss the findings. Ultimately we just want the truth, we have all been using ecigs for a number of years now and we are not interested in political posturing or profit safeguarding, just the plain old truth.
STOP THE PRESS
"Try smokeless nicotine cigarettes, says government"
The following is from the guardian on 14th Sept 2011
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/sep/14/smokeless-nicotine-cigarettes-government?CMP=twt_gu
Here at some excerpts from the story:
"experts have advised the UK government that the nicotine contained in some new, smoke-free cigarettes is no more harmful than caffeine in coffee. A Cabinet Office source said: "A lot of countries are moving to ban this stuff; we think that's a mistake."
"The Medicine and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is looking into approving these devices for use. If it finds in their favour, the government is likely to push for them to be placed prominently in shops alongside tobacco cigarettes, where they would be sold at a cheaper rate."
"David Halpern, the unit's head, told the Guardian: "As with seatbelts and the smoking ban, these ideas were unpopular at first but after a while when you explain them to people, they understand and say, 'Yeah, alright then.'
"A year in," Halpern added, "we're much more confident about how well this can work, and the early trials have also made us much more confident about public acceptability. There's no doubt it can save many lives and hundreds of millions of pounds. In fact, our problem has become that we have so many inquiries from across Whitehall, we have to turn down many of the requests for help."
Journal of Public Health Policy
In a fairly recent study by Zachary Cahn and Professor Michael Siegel in the journal of Public Health Policy (in which they analysed the results from 16 different studies) they argue that the e-cigarette is both safer than cigarettes and more effective than cessation aids. Not only that but they concluded that we actually know more about electronic cigarettes than we do about tobacco cigarettes!
You can see the full report here (http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jphp/journal/v32/n1/abs/jphp201041a.html) but unfortunately you have to be registered on the site and then pay $30 to read it.
I already knew about the thousands of known chemicals found in real cigarettes but I did not know that there up to 100,000 chemicals that are yet to be identified!
MHRA - Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency
Public consultation (MLX 364): The regulation of nicotine containing products (NCPs)
Published: 1st Feb 2010
There are quite a lot responses to go through so if you have a spare evening or three then feel free to go through them all.
Here is our favourite response:
UK Centre for Tobacco Control Studies:
"Radical improvements in nicotine delivery technology, and in formulation, pricing and packaging, have been achievable for some time but have not been actively pursued by the pharmaceutical companies that currently enjoy market dominance. It is therefore important that any new regulatory system actively encourages competition in the nicotine market by making it much easier for innovations to reach the smokers who need safer nicotine products, and does not, through putting strict regulatory barriers to market access, end up perpetuating the status quo"
LACORS
This is a strange one and I am not quite sure what to make of it. They got their math wrong which makes their statement wholly inaccurate - but they have so far failed to retract their incorrect statement:
LACORS are the UK government body responsible for Trading Standards across the UK. In 2009 they analysed the electronic cigarette and found that the device contained more than 20% nicotine, a quantity in excess of the 7.5% allowed under the poisons act. They issued a release stating that:
"Results of tests commissioned by LACORS on e-cigarettes reveal that these products are currently being sold illegally in the UK. All four e-cigarettes tested had nicotine at more than seven percent in solution and therefore are legally required to display 'Highly Toxic' product warnings. One refill contained nearly 20 percent nicotine, or 18mg per refill, equivalent to 20 cigarettes. The majority of e-cigarettes are sold online but they are becoming more widely available at street markets and shops."
Like we say though, as they didn't take into account the international weights and measurements system their finding are completely wrong. The 'nearly 20%' should actually read 1.8% which would mean that the quantity of nicotine delivered by electronic cigarettes is less than that in a regular cigarette. This is in line with the Health New Zealand's tests, Australian tests and the FDA tests.
We don't disagree with what LACORS are doing, ultimately they just want to ensure that the products are safe and that they are properly regulated as this letter shows (http://www.cieh.org/uploadedFiles/Furniture/Policy/Letter_to_DH_about_electronic_cigarettes_Sept_2009.pdf).
We just wish they'd pay more attention to the math having gone to the effort of undertaking the study in the 1st place.
Electronic cigarettes: a survey of users
Jean-Francois Etter
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Geneva, Switzerland
Published: 4th May 2010
On the whole this is another positive report but as the Ashtray Blog points out - "full of errors" (http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/ashtray-blog/2010/05/new-research-on-electronic-cigarettes-positive-but-inaccurate.html)
Press Release from the FDA - U.S. Food and Drug Administration
Published July 22nd 2009
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/2009/ucm173222.htm
Guess what - even their findings have come in for a fair bit of criticism. Carl Phillips of the TobaccoHarmReduction.org Institute at the University of Alberta, Canada was asked the following questions by ecigarettedirect.
Q: Professor Michael Siegel suggested that if we banned electronic cigarettes based on the carcinogens found in the FDA study we would have to ban peanut butter. Is that something you would agree with?
Carl Phillips: At least! We'd have to ban half the foods that are available. I mean, the FDA study really didn't find any cancer risk. That study was basically pure propaganda.
Q: Following on from those concerns about the quality of production, let's talk about the FDA. The FDA carried out tests on electronic cigarettes in which they found diethylene glycol in one "Smoking Everywhere" e-cigarette and traces of tobacco specific nitrosamines in both Smoking Everywhere and NJOY electronic cigarettes. So what are the significance of those findings?
Carl Phillips: There's no significance of those findings whatsoever from a scientific or health standpoint. From a political standpoint the fact that they did that was quite significant.
More analysis of the FDA findings can be found here (http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/research/njoy-testing.html)
On this page you can also access a report on NJOY Testing. NJOY were understandably a bit miffed by the misleading reporting of the FDA so they commissioned their own comprehensive tests. They chose Ben Thomas, Ph.D., a well-respected consultant with 35 years' experience in toxicology, pathology and risk mitigation and leading independent consulting laboratory, ANALYZE.
The Conclusion:
"More tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNA) were detected in the FDA-approved nicorette than in the NJOY electronic cigarette. (These TSNA's, however, were of such low a level that they were of no concern.)
The only TSNA to be found in the NJOY electronic cigarette was non-toxic, which means, given the FDA had found no other toxins in the NJOY, that the NJOY vapour has been tested one hundred percent toxin free.
"Based on my review of scientific literature, NAT is not toxic and not carcinogenic, and based on the vapor analysis, it is my conclusion that TSNAs do not pose a health risk to the users of the electronic cigarettes distributed by NJOY," concluded the Professor Ben Thomas.
Health New Zealand
30th October 2008
This research was funded by Ruyan but no test results were withheld. The report is positive, in their findings they stated the following:
Ruyan e-cigarette is designed to be a safe alternative to smoking. The various test results confirm this is the case. It is very safe relative to cigarettes, and also safe in absolute terms on all measurements we have applied. Using micro-electronics it vaporizes, separately for each puff, very small quantities of nicotine dissolved in propylene glycol, two small well-known molecules with excellent safety profiles, - into a fine aerosol. Each puff contains one third to one half the nicotine in a tobacco's cigarette's puff. The cartridge liquid is tobacco-free and no combustion occurs.
The full report can be here.
"Though not many good studies of electronic cigarettes exist yet, but of those that do, no negative health effects have been found. The devices are quite simple so there is not much to worry about. They are for the most part, traditional cigarettes with all the known dangers removed. And this is why we are quite certain they are much safer than smoking. The major danger in smoking has always been tobacco smoke, and that has now been removed."
Paul Bergen of the Tobacco Harm Reduction project.
Here at eciginfo we have reviewed a lot of data and we are happy with our choice to continue to use the electronic cigarette as an alternative to the tobacco cigarette. We are not generally swayed by marketing statements but we are in agreement that the ecig is a 'healthier alternative'.