From: Nelson Phillips
To: Rep. Perry, L.,
I’m writing in regard to HB112, Paul Ray's latest attempt to punish electronic cigarette users and retailers.
No doubt you’ve already heard this same story hundreds, if not thousands of times already. Rather than go into it yet again, let me just say that I was a two pack a day smoker who started smoking at 16 years old, and was finally able to quit because of the availability of electronic cigarettes. I have been ‘smoke free’ for over 3 years now, after smoking heavily for 28 years.
My health has dramatically improved. I no longer have the ‘smoker’s hack’ cough, I can taste my food, and I don’t get winded as easily. My clothes don’t smell. My teeth and fingers aren’t stained. I don’t offend other people…
Again, I’m sure you’ve heard this countless times. But are you really hearing it?
You might not think I’ve actually ‘quit’ smoking, because I vape. But that’s not correct. I still use nicotine, that is correct, but I no longer smoke. Nicotine is the addictive substance in cigarette smoke that keeps people smoking, but it’s not carcinogenic. What causes cancer in cigarette smoke IS THE SMOKE, the burnt tobacco. Ecigs emit NO SMOKE, just nicotine, which is similar to caffeine, and the health effects are also similar to caffeine. I'd say you might want to ban coffee as well, but I don't want to give Representative Ray any more ideas.
As a matter of fact, the FDA just cleared pharmaceutical companies who sell nicotine products like nicorette gum, patches and inhalers to tell their customers they may now use them long term. If nicotine is the demon, why would they do that???
It’s interesting to note that ALL of the arguments that proponents of banning and regulating ecigs have given would also apply equally to the pharmaceutical companies’ products, but magically, no one is pushing that. Nicorette gum, mists and inhalers contain the SAME nicotine, the inhalers and mists contain the SAME propylene glycol solution, and they all contain the SAME trace nitrosamines as ecig liquid. The reason the FDA doesn’t worry about the nitrosamines in Nicorette is that the levels detected are miniscule, well below what is considered harmful. And those same levels are what the FDA detected in its ecig liquid tests. They are simply trace elements, left over from the nicotine extraction process.
And yet, no one arguing against e-cigarettes will admit this fundamental truth. Why not? Perhaps Eli Lily, GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer have an interest in this debate… The pharmaceutical industry is, after all, Paul Ray’s largest on the record financial contributor. You'd be surprised who else they support, and at what levels, both on the record and off.
Extensive scientific testing HAS BEEN DONE on ecig liquid, and also on the vapor exhaled by people using ecigarettes. In case after case the conclusion has been the same… Ecig vapor is NO PUBLIC HEALTH THREAT, and ecig use is on order of magnitude 100 to 1000 TIMES LESS DANGEROUS THAN SMOKING CIGARETTES. I refer you to the very long list of studies included at the end of this email...
It's well established that electronic cigarettes are infinitely less harmful than tobacco cigarettes, and will SAVE COUNTLESS SMOKER'S LIVES. So I guess it’s a good idea to restrict or even ban their sale and use… Really??
If you were the parent of an addicted teen smoker, should you go to jail if you wanted to offer them an alternative that works, one that keeps them from getting cancer???
What kind of person does that?
The fact of the matter is, opposition to electronic cigarettes is POLITICAL, generally coming from the liberal left, the nanny-state wing of the Democratic Party.
And those beholding to money from special interests, like Paul Ray.
Oh, and Utah LDS politicians who see vaping as an evil, akin to smoking, like Paul Ray.
Contrary to what the zealots tell us, electronic cigarettes ARE NOT an invention of the tobacco industry. They were invented by Chinese pharmacist Hon Lik, a reaction to losing his father to smoking related cancer. That’s correct, ecigs were originally invented to prevent cancer. Those that say they are part of a great tobacco conspiracy are either outright lying, or are willfully ignorant. Big tobacco would love to take over the market, so they can control it, because it's a threat to them, but the vast majority of sellers out there right now have NOTHING to do with tobacco.
The main funding for opposition comes from big pharma. They want us to buy their OVER THE COUNTER NICOTINE PRODUCTS, like their FRUIT AND CINNAMON FLAVORED GUM, or their prescription drugs that don’t work, like Chantix.
The plain truth is that electronic cigarettes work like nothing before to ween people off of cigarettes. That’s what they were designed for! They do his by replicating smoking, something that gum and inhalers cannot do. They are non carcinogenic, and their use doesn’t harm the public.
So they must be evil, right? Gotta poke those sinners in the eye again… To be quite honest, we sinners are getting REALLY TIRED of having our eyes poked...
You’ve already banned indoor use, with ZERO science to back up that regulation. The readily available science proves ecig use indoors is no more harmful than plug-in air fresheners, but you now force people who are trying to quit cigarettes to go stand outside with smokers. I can’t adequately express how ‘brilliant’ an idea that was. People addicted to smoking, even when using e-cigarettes, are still attracted to the smell of dirty smoke. After 3 years without cigarettes, I STILL get cravings when I smell cigarette smoke.
Now Ray is looking to ban online sales, preventing thousands of Utahns, especially rural Utahns and the elderly, from having access to the one thing that has gotten them off of cigarettes. How kind… How loving… The vast majority of people who try to quit smoking fail, so if you ban online sales, you are condemning the vast majority of rural or invalid ecig users to go back to smoking deadly tobacco. It’s simply insane from a public health perspective… And just plain mean.
HB112 would also put good people, people with families, most of whom are trying to help others as they’ve been helped, out of business. Believe it or not, online retailers are not evil. Most truly believe in what they are doing, and that's helping people get off of tobacco cigarettes. It's actually a calling. You won't find anyone who is more anti-tobacco than a former smoker who quit with ecigs.
Ray says it’s ‘for the children’, but the fact is children can’t get a credit card, and can’t use one without their parent’s eventual knowledge. Online sales are actually more difficult for children for that reason. For each and every online sale, there’s a RECORD that shows up on a parent’s statement.
It really begs the question, "Why do so many legislators feel the need to take the place of parents?"
Also, the US Postal Service, FedEx and UPS all offer age verification services when making a delivery. If an adult doesn’t sign, they won't deliver, and the customer will have to pick up their package personally, showing valid ID.
‘For the children’ is an invalid argument. By banning online sales without even looking into the possibility of age verification, Ray shows it never was about 'the children'.
This is a societal/Mormon issue in Utah. That's why he thinks he can get it passed. That’s the truth of it, and we all know it. Pretending otherwise is beneath our dignity, isn’t it? Why else would alleged 'conservative' Republicans be copying the laws and tactics of notorious liberals around the country?
Honestly, it's time that our legislature stopped going after certain segments of our population. And it’s time you stopped trying to be everyone’s parent. This is not the proper role of government. It’s high time that Utah Republicans started acting like actual Republicans on more than just guns.
If you support this bill, you will have more in common with Michael Bloomberg and Rahm Emanuel than with Ronald Reagan.
I beg you to vote NO! on HB112. The bill will harm thousands of Utahns who are simply trying to quit smoking.
PS: Here are the studies I mentioned earlier
E-Cig and E-Juice Safety: Are They Safe?
- Scientific Errors in the Tobacco Products Directive: A letter sent by the very scientists whose research was cited by the EU Commission to draft legislation geared towards ecigarettes and their usage. The letter details the many ways in which their research was wrongly used and misinterpreted.
- Ecigs Do Not Stiffen Arteries (PDF): Researchers from Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center in Greece have found that while smoking just 2 tobacco cigarettes caused significant stiffening of the aorta, no difference was observed after the use of an e-cigarette by smokers AND vapers. Published December 2013.
- Smoking Kills, and So Might E-Cigarette Regulation: Gilbert Ross MD, is a medical and executive director of the American Council on Science and Health. In this special report on The American, he states “simple common sense would dictate that inhaling the fewer, less harmful ingredients of e-cigarettes as compared to inhaling the thousands of chemicals in the smoke from burnt tobacco, many of which have been shown to be carcinogenic, is highly likely to be healthier.” Published November, 2013.
- Research on Safety of Electronic Cigarettes (PDF): Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos’ comprehensive presentation on existing data relating to the safety of ecigarettes. Presented at The E-Cigarette Summit, Royal Society, London in November 2013.
- Nicotine Safety in the Context of E-Cigarette Use (PDF): Contrary to popular belief, the fatal overdose level for nicotine may be far higher than the generally accepted 50 to 60 mg (adult) says Dr. Jacques Le Houezec. This research was presented at the The E-Cigarette Summit, Royal Society, London in November 2013.
- E-Liquids Shown To Have Low Cytotoxicity (PDF): The results of testing of 20 e-liquids, has revealed the majority of the vapor samples were found to have no adverse effects on cardiac cells. Even on the several that did have some effect (two of which were tobacco derived), the worst was 3 times less toxic compared to cigarette smoke. Published October 2013 in the International Journal of Environmental Research And Public Health.
- Nicotine Levels Selection and Patterns of Electronic Cigarette Use: Study from Dr. Konstantinos E. Farsalinos that concludes nicotine levels seem to play a crucial role in achieving and maintaining smoking cessation in a group of motivated subjects. The study involved 111 participants who completely substituted smoking with electronic cigarette use for at least 1 month. Published September 2013.
- Vaping: coronary circulation and oxygen supply (PDF): Recent research indicates that electronic cigarette use does not affect the oxygenation of the heart. Lead by principle investigator Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos; results of the research were presented at the European Society of Cardiology annual congress in Amsterdam in August, 2013.
- Eliquids: No Health Concerns: A study by Professor Igor Burstyn of Drexel University School of Public Health based on a review available data has confirmed chemicals generally found in ecig eliquids pose no health concerns. Published August 2013 (PDF).
- MHRA Ecigarette Research: The UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) carried out extensive research on ecigarettes, arriving at the conclusion there was little concern that e-cigarettes can harm users by delivering toxic nicotine levels and little evidence of non-smokers taking up electronic cigarettes. Published in June 2013.
- Evaluation of Electronic Cigarette Use And Liquid Consumption: This 2013 study challenges an EU proposal that would result in eliquids containing more than 4 milligrams of nicotine per milliliter being banned unless approved as medicinal products.
- Electronic Cigarettes Do Not Damage The Heart: Electronic cigarettes appear to have no acute adverse effects on cardiac function according to research by cardiologist Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos. He says based on currently available data, ecigs are safer and that substituting tobacco with electronic cigarettes could be beneficial to health.
- Principles to Guide AAPHP Tobacco Policy: The American Association of Public Health Physicians recommends electronic cigarettes as a safer smoke-free tobacco/nicotine product.
- Athens University Ecig Study Challenged: Dr. Michael Siegel questions a University of Athens study claiming e-cigarettes can cause lung damage.
- Regulation: When Less Is More (PDF): Presentation slides from Clive Bates (of the Counter-factual) concerning the dangers of over-regulating ecigarettes. Mr Bates urges positively about the vast potential about e cigs, to put the (minor) risks in perspective and regulate as though the 1 billion who are predicted to die from tobacco related illnesses in the 21st century matter most. Presented at The E-Cigarette Summit, Royal Society, London in November 2013.
- Vaping profiles and preferences: 1,347 vapers were surveyed in an effort to characterize e-cigarette use, users and effects. Results generally showed respondents found ecigarettes to be satisfying to use; cause few side effects; considered healthier than smoking, resulted in improve cough/breathing and lowered levels of craving. The survey was hosted at the University of East London. Published March 2013.
Second-Hand Vapor Safety: Is Vapor Safe for Others?
- Peering Through the Mist: Systematic Review of what the Chemistry of Contaminants in Electronic Cigarettes Tells Us about Health Risks: A comprehensive review, by a Drexel University professor, based on over 9,000 observations of e-cigarette liquid and vapor. He found “no apparent concern” for bystanders exposed to e-cigarette vapor – even under “worst case” assumptions about exposure.
- Contaminants In Ecig Eliquids And Workplace Health Risks (PDF): A study that reviewed available data on chemistry of e cig aerosols and e liquids. This study found no evidence supporting the claims of e cigarette vapor exposure negatively effecting the health, and safety, of the workplace. Published January 2014.
- Cytotoxicity evaluation of ecig vapor extract: A 2013 study designed to evaluate the cytotoxic potential of 21 eliquids compared to the effects of cigarette smoke found ecig vapor is significantly less cytotoxic compared to tobacco.
- Ecigarette toxicants study: Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes have been found to be 9 to 450 times less than tobacco cigarettes in 12 brands studied; leading the researchers to conclude “substituting tobacco cigarettes with e-cigarettes may substantially reduce exposure to selected tobacco-specific toxicants”. The study was first published online on March 6, 2013.
- Is Passive Vaping A Reality?: This study sought to identify and quantify the chemicals released on a closed environment from the use of e-cigarettes – the findings? There’s little to be concerned about with regard safety. This research again confirms the type and quantity of chemicals released are by far less harmful to human health compared to regular tobacco cigarettes. In fact, it “could be more unhealthy to breath air in big cities compared to staying in the same room with someone who is vaping.”
- Indoor Vapor Air Quality Study: Data at Clarkson University’s Center for Air Resources and reviewed by an independent toxicologist indicates electronic cigarettes produce very small exposures to byproducts relative to tobacco cigarettes. The study has been peer reviewed and will appear the Journal of Inhalation Toxicology.
- E-cigarettes: harmless inhaled or exhaled: Report from Health New Zealand stating e-cigarette vapors do not contain substances known to cause death in the quantities found.
- Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (PDF): This research acknowledges that no drug is safe, but the emissions associated with the e-cigarette brand tested appear to be “several magnitudes safer” than tobacco smoke emissions.
- E-cigarette Vapor And Cigarette Smoke Comparison: High nicotine e-liquids were vaporized in a series of experiments and the emissions compared to tobacco smoke. The study results indicate “no apparent risk to human health from e-cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyzed”.
- Propylene Glycol Safe: Monkeys and rats were exposed continuously to high concentrations of propylene glycol, a common component of e liquids for periods of 12 to 18 months. Results of the research state “air containing these vapors in amounts up to the saturation point is completely harmless”.
E Cigs as Smoking Cessation Devices: Does the Research Show That They Work?
- A Longitudinal Study Of Ecig Users: This study concludes that electronic cigarettes may hep with preventing the relapses of former smokers and may even help current smokers to quit cigarettes. It also found that dual users, who were still smoking at the point of follow-up, had decreased their tobacco cigarette consumption by 5.3 cigarettes a day. Published January 2014.
- The Importance Of Flavours In Eliquids: A study, headed by Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, finds that flavors play a major role in the overall experience of dedicated vapers which supports the hypothesis that flavored e liquids are important contributors in reducing or eliminating the smoking of tobacco cigarettes. Published December 2013.
- Second Hand Vapor Study (PDF): A new study shows that even-though e-cigarettes are a source of second-hand exposure to nicotine; it’s far, far less than that associated with second hand cigarette smoke. Additionally, when tested, e-cigarette second-hand vapor did not contain combustion related toxicants. Lead author was Maciej Goniewic from the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y. Published in Oxford Journal, December 2013.
- A Longitudinal Study Of Electronic Cigarette Users: A study of 477 e cigarette users by researchers from the University of Auckland and University of Geneva has arrived at the conclusion that “E-cigarettes may contribute to relapse prevention in former smokers and smoking cessation in current smokers” Published October 2013.
- Ecigs Not A Gateway To Smoking: The study is yet to be published, but according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research (October 2013), the use of e cigarettes by teens does not lead to smoking tobacco in the vast majority of cases.
- Efficiency and Safety of an Electronic Cigarette as Tobacco Cigarettes Substitute: In a 12-month trial of ecigarettes to evaluate smoking reduction/abstinence in 300 smokers not intending to quit; complete abstinence from tobacco smoking was documented in 10.7% and 8.7% at week-12 and after a year respectively. For the group receiving the higher dose nicotine cartridges, the tobacco cigarette cessation rate was 13% after a year. The study was published on PLOS One on June 24, 2013.
- Impact of ecigarettes on schizophrenic smokers: Researchers from the CTA-Villa Chiara Psychiatric Rehabilitation Clinic and Research center in Italy determined the use of ecigs decreased tobacco cigarette consumption in schizophrenia sufferers who were smokers – and without significant side effects. Published January 2013.
- Effect of ecigs on smoking reduction and cessation: A study showing the use of e cigarettes substantially decreased cigarette consumption without causing significant side effects in smokers who had no intention to quit. Published in 2011.
- Electronic Cigarettes As a Smoking-Cessation Tool: The findings of this study indicate “e-cigarettes may hold promise as a smoking-cessation method” and that further research should be carried out.
- Electronic cigarettes: achieving a balanced perspective: This 2012 paper argues that while more research is needed on the cost–benefit of ecigs and appropriate regulation, the harms so far have been overstated relative to the potential benefits. The paper mentions a study that found of more than 2000 former smokers in this survey, 96% reported that the e-cigarette helped them to stop smoking.
So what do all these studies mean?
The papers compiled above indicates that while nothing is better than breathing clean air, the vapor derived of e-juice in e-cigarette devices is magnitudes safer than analog cigarette smoke (as well as safer than air pollution in large cities). Regarding the research on second-hand vapor, some scientists and health experts conclude that there is no real need for concern. And as far as the question about the actual effectiveness of e cigs as smoking cessation devices, the studies indicate that e-cigarettes are at least as effective as nicotine patches.
Electronic cigarette vapor appears chemically incapable of causing cancer as cigarette smoke has done. E-cigarette vapor contains toxicants concentrations averaging less than one percent of the concentrations in tobacco cigarette smoke.
Governments looking to recoup future excise losses on declining tobacco sales could be tempted to tax e-cigarettes. This would make electronic cigarettes less price-competitive and would have the unwanted side effect of protecting tobacco sales.
These randomized controlled trials followed participants for six and 12 months, and found no serious adverse events attributable to electronic cigarettes.
Lung function was not signifcantly decreased in 15 smokers using e-cigarettes, or in 15 never-smokers inhaling the vapor of e-cigarettes or inhaling smoke; lung function was, however, significantly decreased seven percent by active tobacco smoking.
Arterial stiffness is not increased from vaping
Red and white blood cells are not increased in the peripheral blood in the first hour after an e-cigarette either actively or passively inhaled.
Nicotine administered by electronic cigarette can relieve chronic idiopathic neutrophilia
Nicotine in e-cigarettes reduces the urge to smoke and improves mood, working memory, and prospective memory
QUESTION 1. DO E-CIGARETTES LEAD CHILDREN INTO SMOKING?
On the evidence to date, the answer is no. The percentage risk of never smokers using e-cigarettes (whether adolescents or adults) is near zero
- Safety evaluation and risk assessment of electronic cigarettes as tobacco cigarettes substitutes: A systematic review: A total of 114 studies are referenced in this paper, with 97 directly related to e-cigarettes or their ingredients. The review covers all aspects, from chemical to clinical studies, including studies evaluating the potential effects of selected ingredients of e-cigarettes such as propylene glycol and glycerol. It includes discussion about the effects of nicotine and findings from studies evaluating passive exposure to e-cigarette aerosol.This is the first extensive e-cigarette review published in a peer-reviewed medical journal. The main themes of the paper are: discussion about nicotine and its effects-toxicity, presentation of chemical studies, cytotoxicity studies, clinical-case report studies and surveys, passive vaping studies and miscellaneous issues such as e-cigarette use by specific subpopulations (patients with respiratory disease or psychiatric conditions), accidental nicotine exposure, electrical accidents and fires and use by youngsters and non-smokers. Discussion about mistakes in methodology and mis-interpretation of findings is also included.
- Long-term effects of inhaled nicotine: A study where rats were given inhaled nicotine at twice the amount of heavy smokers, which found “increase in mortality, in atherosclerosis or frequency of tumors in these rats compared with controls. Particularly, there was no microscopic or macroscopic lung tumors nor any increase in pulmonary neuroendocrine cells. Throughout the study, however, the body weight of the nicotine exposed rats was reduced as compared with controls. In conclusion, our study does not indicate any harmful effect of nicotine when given in its pure form by inhalation.”