Are Electronic Cigarettes a Safe Alternative?

Lets get one thing straight . The FDA has said that they are a gateway product to conventional cigarettes and 1400 times less harmful then conventional Tabacco cigarettes lets start there. Second the FDA calls them a drug delivery device and would like to see them marketed as such ????? So they are ok as long as they are controlled by the FDA and used to stop or curve cravings for conventional cigarettes but NOT ok to sell and compete with conventional cigarettes as a LESS HARMFULL alternative. Who is fooling who here. Wake Up. Risk Reduction people.

Remember if it does not make sense IT Makes Dollars and Cents. He who is not getting paid does not want this product. Big pharmaceutical/ Big Tabacco/and everybody supported by these 2 companys. (including health organisations and non profits)

You Wrote:"1400 times less harmful then conventional Tabacco cigarettes lets start there"

Yes, let's start there. How exactly was your "1400" figured arrived at? From what I've read, these Electronic Cigarettes offer many of the same cardiovascular risks as, as you put it, "Tabacco Cigarettes" (I'm assuming you mean "Tobacco Cigarettes").

Current smokers at elevated risk for cardiovascular problems may switch to e-cigarettes, thinking that they are far safer. But actually any decrease in health risk relates to cancer (since e-cigarettes reportedly contain far fewer carcinogens), and not to cardiovascular problems (as to which nicotine is the main culprit).

link for above quote

Why bother with facts when you can be paranoid, right?

And how dare the FDA suspect something coming out of China as being potentially dangerous and banning it. It's not like it was created to protect consumers from potentially dangerous products..............what's that, that's exactly what it was created for?........I see. Maybe if I went with some meaningless cliches instead of actually spending 5 minutes to get the facts, I could get good answers from uninformed paranoid conspiracy theorists too.

The problem with you "follow the money" people is you're always following thousands instead of millions and billions.

Why bother with facts when you can be paranoid, right? - this is rich coming from you.

Are cigarettes banned in the USA? If not, what is wrong with importing something that is no worse for your health than cigarettes?

I understand that you believe the FDA to be unbiased but this is something that has been questioned by many people - a quick search will highlight instances of these concerns.

You Wrote:"If not, what is wrong with importing something that is no worse for your health than cigarettes?"

How do you know that they are no worse than cigarettes? Have studies been done?

The FDA is just doing it's job. However, for what it's worth, I wish the FDA wouldn't regulate what you want to buy either. Then the blessed efficiency of natural selection could take its course.

<...what is wrong with importing something that is no worse for your health than cigarettes?...>

Like saccharin, for example?

I have actually tried an electronic cigarette, not as an alternative to tobacco but more as a gimmick. As a former smoker I wanted to see if it actually felt and tasted like smoking. It definitely felt like smoking, there was that distinct back of the throat burn and when you exhaled a smoke like substance came out, although being made of plastic it kind of felt like I was smoking a ball point pen. And it didn't taste like smoking, I tried a cherry flavor and it kind of just tasted like cherry flavored air.

They were being sold in the pharmacy section of Harrods department store, which struck me as weird since they have a section that sells tobacco products, but I guess that is part of the marketing scheme behind these, they are a safe alternative to tobacco?

Less cancer risk from the carcinogens made by combustion. The same cardio vascular risk as nicotine. They are a net save, but ban them anyway, I would like to maintain a steady bias against all smoking, even to increasing the age at which you can smoke by 6 months every year.

Any product that encourages smoking including; e-cigarettes, candy cigarettes, chocolate cigars, tobacco soap bubble pipes, etc should all be banned. E-cigarettes deliver nicotine and cherry coating it just makes it seem that much better to a young person. In the jurisdiction (Ontario, Canada) where I live all of these are banned. Smoking in the workplace is banned and that includes service vans. Smoking in your car with children under 16 years old is banned. Cigarettes cannot be displayed in stores but rather are kept hidden in cupboards. Is this action radical and an intrusion on your personal freedom, I for one think not. The number one thing that would benefit the most people to lower all health risk is quit smoking. That includes the biggest heart and cancer problems and can add breathing issues. I leave out some extreme sports as it does not affect us all. The abatement of smoking because of these draconian rules is usually justified by lowering of health costs. Where I live the government pays for health for all and we just give them taxes (another day argument). If you smoke you will be a drain on the system. Should self inflicted injuries be payed for by the industry or the smoker or just let our health costs keep rising.

I for one know the personal tragedy of smoking and I am sure many of us are in the same boat. I smoked as a teenager when it was very common but quit so I could get a little healthier.

E-cigarettes only serve as an added tool to pressure our already pressured youth. I am sure you can follow the money to this scheme. Ban the stupid idea everywhere or they will be putting cocaine or heroin into these E-drug delivery systems.

My preach for the day, amen.

I have been using Blu-Cigs for almost a year now. I still smoke regular cigs, but I

dropped from 2 to 3 packs a day to about half a pack or less per day. I do like them.

Unlike most e-cigs out there, Blu uses Propylene glycol with is said to be safe.

Wikipedia "

Propylene glycol is metabolized in the human body into pyruvic acid, which is a normal part of the glucose metabolism process and is readily converted to energy."

I believe the vapor exhaled poses no risk via second hand smoke (no smoke no fire).

I do agree that the FDA just is looking for money. But then they also approve over

the counter drugs, that they know may and do cause strokes in women.

I have looked into the e-cigarette and found a few interesting facts. First, there is no real claim by manufacturers that e-cigarettes are designed to help anyone stop smoking. They are advertised as a "cigarette alternative". This simply means that the nicotine delivery system consists of a glycerin/water based or other non-carcinogenic vapor, basically a "sugar water steam". Conventional cigarettes contain a large amount of carcinogenic by-products including fillers and vegetable based tar, which, when exposed to heat, create carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, ozone and so on. In this perspective, e-cigarettes are much safer, both from the production and dissemination of primary and second-hand smoke.

Now, here are a couple of drawbacks:

An e-cigarette delivers nicotine, just like a normal cigarette. Although not considered a carcinogen, nicotine is an addictive drug, no matter how you look at it. It is still a regulated substance and therefore cannot be legally sold to minors.

Also consider the cost if nothing else. A pack of 20 regular cigarettes will cost anywhere between $3.50 to as high as $7.00 depending on where you live. The cost for an e-cigarette is between $2.50 and $3.50 per cigarette. This would mean that to "enjoy" an e-cigarette at the same rate you might smoke a pack of regular cigarettes you could be spending between $50.00 and $70.00 for an equivalent pack, not a carton, a pack. If you have a pack-a-day habit, just do the math.

As a final note, whether or not anyone supports the sale of e-cigarettes, I'm inclined to think that the tobacco lobby has something to do with the FDA's decisions considering what the tobacco companies would stand to lose if e-cigarettes were to become a major competitor, not to mention the loss of tax revenue until new tax laws on e-cigarettes were implemented.

I started smoking at the age of 20 now I am 25. It's been 5 years. I tried to quit couple of times with different alternatives but couldn't because nothing was worthy to gratify my cravings. At that time I had some mix kind of feeling. Somewhat restlessness, somewhat helplessness. I wished I could quit smoking but I couldn't. Then I came across e-cigs. God's blessing. Since then I didn't smoked paper cigarette.

E-cigarettes are tar, tobacco free. No more harmful smoke, only healthy clean vapors. E-cigs are environment friendly. I prefer using jasper and jasper e-cig. I want you people to recommend me with any other brand which might satisfy in a much better way.

Sure the battle wont get stop until the FDA gives full authority for electronic cigarettes.

E-cigs is a different way to quit smoking. Because e-cigs only produce water vapor along with that it doesn't contain tobacco as compare to the regular cigs. Moreover e-cigs is quit cost effective too. So have a try, Good luck!

______________________________

Regal e Cigs

E-cigs is a different way to quit smoking. Because e-cigs only produce water vapor along with that it doesn't contain tobacco as compare to the regular cigs. Moreover e-cigs is quit cost effective too. So have a try, Good luck!

Regalcigs