The anti-smoking group known as the Americans for Nonsmokers’ Rights as put out a press release entitled “Electronic (e)-cigarette manufacturers shamelessly promote untested product for use in “smokefree” environments; make false claims about efficacy as cessation device too”. The full press release can be found here. In this press release they make so many false and misleading statements it is hard to know where to begin, but here goes:
Statement 1: “e-cigarettes pollute indoor air with detectable levels of carcinogens and other toxic chemicals”
Really?: The truth is that the are detectable levels of carcinogens that come off your bacon when you cook it. The devil is in the dose, so where are the numbers to back up this statement? We dealt with this misleading information in another post.
Statement 2: “Despite manufacturer claims that e-cigarettes are “safer than commercial tobacco products,” the contents of the e-cigarette liquid and the “vapor mist” that is exhaled by the user remain undisclosed.”
Really? Do your homework. E-liquid contains propylene glycol and/or glycerin (either works for vaporization), water, flavoring, and potentially nicotine, although it isn’t necessary. Lots of tests have been done….which leads to the next statement.
Statement 3: “In July 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released results of its preliminary analysis of several electronic cigarettes, which found that the cartridges contain carcinogens, including nitrosamines, and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, a component of antifreeze.”
Really? What the FDA found was TRACE amounts in SOME samples and in amounts well below the level considered cancerous. Read more about the bias FDA testing.
Statement 4: “What I find most egregious are the direct advertisements with false and misleading claims, including that e-cigarettes are effective smoking cessation devices, that e-cigarette use is permissible in all indoor environments, including venues that are smokefree…”
Really? First, e-cigarettes are permitted to be used where normal smoking is not, because it is not smoking. Unless a bylaw is passed specifically dealing with vaping, then why would a device that produces no smoke be included in a smoking ban? As for the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation, I refer to Michael Siegel, public health advocate.
What is truly confusing is that an organization with the mission of “dedicated to helping nonsmokers breathe smokefree air in enclosed public places and workplaces and exposing tobacco industry and allied interference.” is against a product that replaces cigarette smoke with vapor. Vapor is not smoke. Maybe they should rename themselves “Americans for Nonsmokers’ and Nonvapers’ Rights” and change their mission to “abolishing everything we don’t agree with regardless of science or facts”.