Following the Welsh government’s ban on vaping in public places in June 2015 and a ban on e-cigarette advertising in Ireland the same month, it appears that officials are not as clear-eyed about e-cigarettes as we had hoped.
In fact, two of the UK’s largest health charities – Cancer Research UK and the British Heart Foundation – have spoken out against the ban, claiming there is “insufficient evidence” to support it and that it cannot be “justified”. Bans like these have been a major stumbling block to the growth of vaping . With e-cigarettes being touted as a way to quit smoking , banning their use in public places would force smokers to vape outside with other smokers, which would certainly discourage those who are considering quitting.
In the US, the FDA has yet to decide what to do about e-cigarettes. Thousands of e-cigarette and e-liquid products are already on the market, so having an agency to review new products before they are released seems pointless, regulation needs to be put in place. Yet this is exactly what is being considered in Congress, as a Department of Agriculture bill has proposed this appropriation.
We checked the FDA website for e-cigarettes and found that they have not updated important information. You can see the outdated information for yourself below.
First, vapers know exactly how much nicotine is inhaled during use, which is the number on the label based on a regular use rate. Second, we know how many potentially harmful chemicals are inhaled, which is up to 95% less than traditional cigarettes—just 25 volatile organic compounds, 11 fewer than the number of VOCs left in indoor air, and 61 fewer than regular cigarette smoke, and not all of the VOCs are toxic. Interestingly, isoprene, listed as a carcinogen in California’s Proposition 65, is only present in exhaled breath and not in e-cigarettes. We also know that e-cigarettes have increased the likelihood of smokers quitting.
According to a report by Public Health England, 2.6 million people have used e-cigarettes to quit smoking, and once again, the claim that e-cigarettes are a ‘gateway’ to encourage young people to try regular cigarettes has been dismissed. Hazel Chesseman, head of ASH Policy, reassured us, commenting on the PHE report: “These results should reassure the public that e-cigarettes are not associated with increased youth smoking. Although more young people are trying e-cigarettes, and more people are aware of them, this does not lead to an increase in smoking or regular cigarette use.” So we are asking the FDA to update the information on e-cigarettes on their website with accurate information.
“These results should reassure the public that e-cigarettes are not associated with increased youth smoking,” said Hazel Cheeseman. “Although more youth are experimenting with e-cigarettes, and more people are aware of them, they are not leading to increased smoking or regular tobacco use.”
Interestingly, many governments around the world are unsure how to deal with e-cigarettes, and how to regulate them. Norway recently banned advertising of e-cigarette products, with a senior official stating that “e-cigarettes are an alternative to cigarettes and should therefore be included in the advertising ban.” And New Zealand has banned e-cigarettes that deliver nicotine, while keeping tobacco (which has a higher nicotine content) legal. Despite this, a recent report by the Norwegian Institute found that the benefits of e-cigarettes are still unknown, although, they are less harmful than smoking, especially in causing cancer. They warned that the long-term health effects are still unknown, suggesting that again more research is needed.
Funny, isn’t it, everyone is pointing the finger at the vaping community, because the ingredients used in e-liquids are unregulated and therefore “unknown”. Let’s not forget that tobacco is largely unregulated. Let’s also not forget that traditional cigarettes themselves have never been strictly regulated. Just as it’s unbelievable that scientists have proven that tobacco and the chemicals inside it are the direct cause of cancer, disease, and death decades ago, and yet the ingredients inside them have not changed at all.
On August 6, 2015, a Malaysian Islamic scholar, Dr. Zulkifli Mohamad al-Bakri, called for e-cigarettes to be “banned” for Muslims. He said that vaping imitated non-Islamic culture and portrayed an indecent image. What was used to reinforce his bold decision was that “e-cigarettes contain tobacco and nicotine, which are both toxic and can be dangerous to human health.” Now, we can see the fallacy in Dr. Zulkifli’s argument. First, e-cigarettes definitely do not contain tobacco, it is true that some e-liquids have a tobacco flavor but due to the vaporization process of e-cigarettes, e-liquids absolutely do not contain tobacco. Of course, there are e-liquids that contain nicotine, but because of the bad impressions surrounding tobacco, nicotine has been lumped together with tobacco as harmful in anti-tobacco movements. While many reputable sources have advocated nicotine replacement therapies, explaining that nicotine itself is not as harmful as smoking, with WebMD, a health website, stating that “tar, cardon monoxide and other toxic substances in cigarettes are the cause of harm, not nicotine.” And the NHS says nicotine does not cause cancer. It seems that with e-cigarettes, nicotine is harmful, but nicotine patches and gum are fine. And we are struggling to see evidence for the researchers’ claims. In fact, banning Muslims from using e-cigarettes to help them quit smoking would do more harm than good.
And here’s the real problem, people are severely misinformed, and accurate information about e-cigarettes is limited, and that information is also distorted by the media. It’s this confusing mix of information that leaves health professionals confused and unsure of which direction to take.
So here are some studies to clarify this. Earlier this year, a study conducted by Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, a prominent figure in e-cigarette research, found that e-cigarettes are up to 95% safer than traditional cigarettes, with aldehyde levels found to be up to 250 times lower.
This was published in the journal Environmental Research and Public Health, demonstrating that e-cigarettes are a safe alternative to tobacco. Other studies conducted in New Zealand have shown that e-cigarettes are as effective as nicotine patches in helping smokers quit. Action on Smoking and Health stated in their November 2014 report on e-cigarettes: “The devices help smokers cut down or quit smoking and provide a way to completely quit nicotine addiction.
Problem:
This is not a comprehensive overview of the benefits of vaping. Here are some things people may or may not know, but have been proven:
- Vape vapor is harmless, and is less dangerous than regular breathing (unlike smoking regular cigarettes)
- E-cigarette vapor does not have a negative effect on the viability of respiratory tissues (and we all know the harmful effects of regular cigarettes)
- Average doses of nicotine are dangerous, but caffeine and regular nicotine do not cause cancer; instead, it is the tar from regular cigarettes that contains cancer-causing carcinogens that is harmful.
- Electronic cigarettes do not contain tobacco
- It will be illegal for a retailer to sell e-cigarettes to under-18s in the UK from 1 October 2015; in the US this is raised to 21 in some states.
We also know that unfortunately:
There are many organizations trying to prove that vaping can be influential and appealing to minors, when there is no evidence in studies to prove this.
There is currently very little scientific evidence to prove that vaping is completely harmless, although it is known that it is not as harmful as cigarette smoke, reducing the harmful effects of cigarettes by 95%.
With people unaware of the benefits of e-cigarettes, coupled with their image being constantly tarnished in the media, it has led to mass confusion. Many people don’t know what to believe, but with misinformation constantly being pushed out, can you blame them?
It has also been widely noted that further research is needed into the health effects of e-cigarettes if users continue to inhale vapour for 5 to 10 years from now. Unfortunately, the exact information on this is still not known. Ultimately, the known risks of smoking outweigh the risks of vaping, with over half of long-term smokers dying from the habit. And we must remember that tobacco is legal, even though it is clear that smoking is the biggest cause of cancer in the UK.
That said, a complex conflict has emerged, with growing tensions and public impatience for a verdict on the future of vaping. Awareness of e-cigarettes has been clouded by companies like NJOY giving out free samples to their employees. This type of marketing is not designed to convince smokers to quit, but to promote e-cigarettes more broadly. After all, the goal of e-cigarettes was to eliminate smoking, not to introduce a new form of smoking to the market.
The use of regular cigarettes will continue to decline, and the use of e-cigarettes will continue to increase, that much we can be sure of. But of course, there will be plenty of naysayers, with the media always ready to spread any misinformation they can find. Thankfully, the e-cigarette industry is getting a breath of fresh air as more research and reports from credible sources are coming out, and e-cigarettes are finally getting the recognition they deserve.
