James Watt, who is the owner of Instead Electronic Cigarettes and the Vice Chair of the Electronic Cigarette Association did a phone interview with Bill Cunningham on his radio show today. The interview was specifically about those who wish to include the electronic cigarette in smoking bans. You can use the audio player below to listen to the interview or read the transcript provided:

Transcript of October 26th, 2009 Interview of James Watt, ECA Vice Chair, on the Bill Cunningham Show on News Radio 700 WLW

BC is Bill Cunningham
JW is James Watt

BC Let’s continue with more. Twenty-nine minutes after this hour, Bill Cunningham, News Radio 700 WLW.

All right. Now there’s a big story on the front page of USA Today today that says that electronic cigarettes are battery-operated devices that turn nicotine and other chemicals into a vapor that is inhaled by the user, and they’re opening a new front in the tobacco wars because they give off no carcinogens, no secondhand smoke. And the battery-operated device is made up of a cartridge containing nicotine, flavoring, and chemicals. It turns nicotine, which is addictive, into a vapor that is inhaled.

Joining me now is James Watt, and he’s, like, vice chairman of the Electronic Cigarette Association. James Watt, welcome to the Bill Cunningham Show.

JW Thank you very much, Bill.

BC Well, let’s talk about this particular cigarette. About a half million Americans are now using these cigarettes. I’ve heard ads on our radio station that talks about these cigarettes. Talk about what they are and why they were developed.

JW Well, Bill, the–the electronic cigarette was–it’s been on the market for about five plus years now, and it’s been in the U.S. for, oh, about two and a half. Essentially, it’s an alternative to a tobacco cigarette. It works very similarly in the action where you bring something up to your mouth, you inhale, you exhale.

I think that the big difference between the two products is tobacco cigarettes use combustion, where the electronic cigarette uses vaporization. There are some very distinct differences between combustion and vaporization. So many longtime smokers find it to be a suitable replacement to their tobacco cigarettes.

BC So let’s say I’m sitting next to someone in a restaurant. I’m five–five feet away or six inches away. They’re right behind me, and they’re–and they’re using one of these electronic cigarettes. Would I even know it?

JW You would, provided you could see it. With most of the batteries on them, there is an LED will light up on the end when they inhale, and you will actually see the vapor come out. With that said, if you didn’t see the light, you didn’t see the vapor, you would not know they were using it. The–

BC Do they–do they smell?

JW No, they do not.

BC So a person that uses these–a lot smokers have smokers’ breath, and you can tell they’ve smoked because the clothes stink. That wouldn’t happen here?

JW That does not happen at all.

BC So is there any emissions at all that would rise the–raise the alarms of secondhand smokers?

JW Well, that’s a good question, an I’m certainly not a doctor or scientist that could get into specifically what’s in it. I can tell you many of the things that are produced specifically from combustion simply are not in that vapor. You know, the things that are typically produced with combustion, that’s where you get your arsenic, your carbon monoxide, your hydrogen cyanide. Those things are not produced through the process of vaporization.

BC So while the story seems to say that if you’re worried about secondhand smoke, that you’re not affected by it. Are you saying that’s true or untrue?

JW I’m saying that the electronic cigarette does not produce smoke–

BC No smoke at all.

JW –firsthand or secondhand.

BC So–

JW No smoke. It’s a vapor. There is a very distinct difference between the two.

BC And how expensive are these? If each cigarette has an indicator light, a battery, an atomizer, liquid cartridges, inhaler tips, how expensive is each cigarette?

JW Well, there’s a lot of different models on the market. I mean, there are disposable ones. But the vast majority are reusable, so the only thing you’re replacing is that cartridge with the liquid in it.

You know, typically, I think most smokers could see probably a forty to sixty percent savings by moving over to the electronic cigarette versus tobacco cigarettes.

BC Really? So you save money?

JW Absolutely.

BC Well, many states–California, New Jersey, most of the liberal ones, Oregon–are moving now to ban this. And the argument that was used for years is that you have to ban cigarette smoking in public because of secondhand smoke, because patrons would be affected, employees would be affected.

This cigarette undermines that entire argument, and I think those who oppose it are now showing their true colors because their argument is not that it produces secondhand smoke effects that are harmful. Their argument is that the person using it is harmful. So essentially, they don’t want to ban secondhand smoke. What they want to ban is cigarette use. Haven’t they showed their hand?

JW You know, I guess that’s to each their own in interpreting their actions. But I can say including the electronic cigarette with a smoking ban that does talk about, you know, specifically the secondhand smoke and the health effects of that, including the electronic cigarette in that seems unscientific, at best. You’re including something that just simply does not produce smoke.

BC And–and similar to MADD mothers, who started out trying to ban drunk driving, which is good thing, but now they’ve turned into a temperance organization. They’ve done all they can do with drunk drivers, punishing them disproportionately many times to other crimes committed by other criminals. They have now become an organization that wants to ban the use of alcohol, which is for years they said, “That’s not our intent.”

Much like the smoke–the smoke crowd, they began for years saying, “Secondhand smoke is terrible. It’s got to be stopped.” But now that the industry and now that the scientists have come up with a way to produce no secondhand smoke because there is no smoke–it’s a smokeless cigarette–now you have the left-wing activists that want to govern someone’s behavior and tell them they can’t smoke at all even though there’s no secondhand smoke.

So much like MADD mothers, to my way of thinking, they’ve demonstrated what their intent was all along, which was to ban tobacco use. And if they want to do that, James, go ahead and do it. Be forthright. But don’t use some other means or method to get to where you want to get, and then–and then what that detour was blocked by people like your trade organization, they now say, “Well, we don’t want people even to smoke smokeless cigarettes.” Why? Well, the answer is, “We don’t want you to do it.” And–and so it’s–it’s not–

JW It–

BC –it’s not about secondhand smoke. What it’s about is changing American behavior.

JW You know, some people definitely interpret it that way. I think it’s also important to understand that this product was not brought to the market by the tobacco industry. There’s no tobacco companies to my knowledge actually marketing the electronic cigarette, and there is no tobacco in it. You can have the cartridges with or without nicotine at all. There’s many users who will use the electronic cigarette with no nicotine. You know, so it’s–it’s not a tobacco product.

And I think that some of these organizations, it’s almost worse than–than the scenario that you mentioned simply because they don’t know about the electronic cigarette. There’s–I read through some of the proposals that they’re attempting to ban the electronic cigarette’s use in public places. It’s evident that they haven’t done the research to understand the product before they actually ban it.

BC Right. Well, James Watt, I’ve never smoked. I never would smoke. But I think American freedom means a lot, and if somebody wants to do this activity and no one else is affected by it, government has no role.

And, James Watt, do you want to give out a website for your group?

JW Yeah. Our website is ECASSOC.ORG.

BC All right. James Watt, good luck to you.

JW Thank you very much.

Governor Schwarzenegger Protects Adult Consumers’ Access to E-Cigarettes

Industry hails veto of anti-smoking alternative bill as victory for consumers, common sense

Washington, D.C. – October 12, 2009 | Matt Salmon, president of the Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA), today praised California Governor Schwarzenegger’s wise decision to veto Senate Bill 400, which would have banned electronic cigarette sales in the state, protecting adult consumers’ access to these alternative smoking devices.

“This is not just a victory for consumers and common sense but is smart public policy as well,” said Salmon. “Rejecting this bill is the right step and should serve as a model for other states to follow.”

In his veto message, Governor Schwarzenegger reiterated the stance of the ECA that strongly supports restricting access of electronic cigarettes to children under the age of 18. “We agree with the original intent of SB 400 to ban sales to those under the legal smoking age. And we support that on a national level as well,” added Salmon.

The Governor affirmed that this restriction should not apply to adult consumers: “If adults want to purchase and consume these products with an understanding of the associated health risks, they should be able to do so unless and until federal law changes the legal status of these tobacco products.”

The ECA actively communicated to the Governor its members’ concerns about the bill and the fact that banning these electronic cigarettes would disenfranchise thousands of California adult smokers who have difficulty quitting but want an alternative to combustible cigarettes without the host of carcinogens and harmful chemicals. Salmon credited this legislative victory to the efforts of thousands of consumers and ECA members who appealed directly to Governor Schwarzenegger to protect their rights.

“While we know that combustible tobacco smoking kills over 400,000 Americans annually, and the percentage of smokers that quit every year is dismally low, we ought to be looking for more alternatives to traditional combustible tobacco products,” said Salmon.

Electronic cigarette kits usually include the electronic cigarette, a replaceable cartridge pack (that may or may not contain nicotine), rechargeable lithium batteries, and a charger. There is some variation between different companies in what is included in their starter kit, but all components are listed on their Web sites. While ECA members do not market these devices as a healthy alternative or smoking cessation device, it is clear that they do not contain the harmful tars and hundreds of carcinogens that consumers get from combustible tobacco products.

“We look forward to working with all government agencies, including the FDA, to ensure that consumers who want an alternative to combustible tobacco products have access to e-cigarettes that contain fewer harmful substances and produce no secondhand smoke,” concluded Salmon.

###

About the Electronic Cigarette Association

The ECA (www.ecassoc.org) is an association of private sector companies engaged in electronic cigarette technologies. Its mission is to provide the tools and information necessary for policy-makers, opinion leaders, media, and private sector companies worldwide to make informed decisions about the management and use of electronic cigarette technologies. The association institutes and promotes industry-wide standards and a code of conduct, works to maintain sound professional practices, educates the public and policy-makers on the industry’s activities and potential, and works to ensure the ethical use of electronic cigarette technologies.

Matt Salmon, President of the Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA), today denounced a quotation attributed to him by Epiphany Media Group in a press release dated September 14, 2009. The falsely attributed quotation conveys the mistaken impression that some e-cigarette products have been approved by the FDA for consumer use. Salmon underscored the ECA’s commitment to abide by FDA regulations.

“It has come to my attention that a press release with false and misleading claims about e-cigarettes attributed to me was distributed without my knowledge or approval. I want to make it unequivocally clear that I have never made such statements or claims and they are patently false,” said Salmon.

The erroneous quotation, re-released on October 8, 2009, reads, “It is disheartening that the FDA issued a warning to the public against electronic cigarettes without conclusive data to support the claim.” The release goes onto say that Salmon indicated that “some of the companies that are part of the ECA such as inLife electronic cigarette product lines are approved by the FDA.”

“I don’t know of any electronic cigarette suppliers or manufacturers that have been approved by the FDA,” added Salmon. “All of our members send a warning card with every unit sold stating clearly that the product has not been approved by the FDA.”

The ECA’s policy is that member companies cannot make any health claims about their products or represent them as smoking cessation devices. E-cigarettes sold by these companies are marketed as simply an alternative to combustible tobacco smoking. Additionally, all members must ensure that they have taken precautions to prevent people under the legal smoking age from having access to their products.

“This requirement has been a long-standing policy of the ECA since its inception and we will take the necessary steps to enforce it,” Salmon concluded.

Visit www.ecassoc.org for more information about the ECA and its member companies.

1) FDA smoke screen on e-cigarettes in Washington Times by Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, president of the American Council on Science and Health

2) American Association of Public Health Physicians writes on behalf of Electronic Cigarettes to the Incoming Director of the FDA by Joel L. Nitzkin, MD, MPH, DPA
Chair, AAPHP Tobacco Control Task Force and Kevin Sherin, MD, MPH, FACPM, FAAFP
President, American Association of Public Health Physicians

3) Disingenuousness of the FDA’s Press Conference is Concerning; FDA and Anti-Smoking Groups are Committing Medical Malpractice on a Massive Scale by Dr. Michael Siegel, Professor at the Boston University School of Public Health

4) FDA’s drug and e-cigarette warnings counterproductive by Jeff Stier, associate director, American Council on Science and Health

5) Technical Review and Analysis of FDA Report: “Evaluation of e-cigarettes” by Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D. from Exponent Health Sciences

6) An Interview With David Sweanor on the E-Cigarette, Tobacco harm reduction, snus and other issues from E Cigarette Direct out of the UK

7) The FDA Crusade Against E-Cigarettes by Brad Rodu, Professor of Medicine at the University of Louisville, holds an endowed chair in tobacco harm reduction research, and a member of the James Graham Brown Cancer Center at U of L

8) Prominent Public Health Physicians and Tobacco Researchers Expose Double Standard in the FDA’s Recent Study of Electronic Cigarettes and Challenge the FDA’s Alarmist Attitude Toward the Devices by Dr. Michael Siegel, Professor at the Boston University School of Public Health and Joel L. Nitzkin, MD, MPH, DPA, Chair AAPHP Tobacco Control Task Force and Brad Rodu, Professor of Medicine at the University of Louisville

9) Electronic Cigarette Association Letter To Congress by Matt Salmom, former Congressmen and President of the ECA

10) American Lung Association Asserts that E-Cigarettes are Designed to Promote Cigarette Smoking; Can Anti-Smoking Groups’ Reasoning Get Any More Absurd? by Dr. Michael Siegel, Professor at the Boston University School of Public Health

The articles above do not necessarily represent Instead’s position or opinion and no opinions within these articles should be taken as claims to the health, safety, or use of the electronic cigarette. As we have stated many times in the past, the most healthy thing to do is to quit smoking, period. The electronic cigarette is an alternative for long time smokers who have not been able to quit. It is not healthy or safe, but simply an alternative to smoking tobacco cigarettes.

The Electronic Cigarette Association has just released a letter on it’s website that it will be sending to each member of Congress as well as some other public officials. In it, along with some information about the very poor job the FDA did in testing the electronic cigarette, there is important information about the position of the ECA when it comes to selling to kids. He is a quote:

“We do agree with the FDA, however; that E-Cigarettes should not be purchased or consumed by those under the legal age of smoking. We support any legislation, be it state or federal, that makes it illegal to sell e-cigarettes to children and those under the legal smoking age. We only market our products to committed long term smokers and would never want this to entice anyone who is not already addicted to nicotine to use our product.”

We at Instead Electronic Cigarette fully support the ECA’s stance and agree that it is important to keep those under the legal smoking age from purchasing electronic cigarettes or any other product that may contain nicotine.

Read the full Electronic Cigarette Association Letter To Congress

Matt Salmon, former Congressmen and current President of The Electronic Cigarette Association responds to the FDA’s announcement regarding electronic cigarettes:

At 3pm, 7/22/09, the FDA made an announcement to media regarding the status of the electronic cigarette. The call was headed by Judy Leon of the FDA Office of Public Affairs.

Due to the recent litigation between two electronic cigarette companies, Smoking Everywhere and nJoy, and the FDA, the FDA tested 18 cartridges from the two companies. From the testing done by the FDA on the electronic cigarette, it was noted that they found inconsistencies in the manufacturing process and that in some of the cartridges there were small amount traces of known carcinogens (Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines) and Diethylene Glycol found in one cartridge from Smoking Everywhere, which is harmful to humans. What they also withheld from the announcement is that diethylene glycol is used for drying tobacco products and is found in tobacco products. They also failed to mention that Tobacco Specific Nitrosamines (TSNAs) are also found in the currently FDA approved NRT’s.

From the conclusions of these lab tests performed by one FDA lab, it was noted that the electronic cigarette cartridges differ from one manufacturer to another and therefore, quality control is of great concern to the FDA. We can’t disagree. The whole industry is already moving towards implementing better manufacturing processes.

The rest of the discussion was led by some heavy anti-smoking hitters in the public health industry. Jonathan Thomas of the Institute of Global Health, Dr. Jonathan Winickoff, Chair of the American Academy of Pediatrics and Dr. Matthew Mikenna of the CDC’s Office of Smoking and Health, all noted that their greatest concern is how the electronic cigarette is marketed and also how it has the ability to be a gateway to tobacco use.

The marketing concerns raised were that the ecig is marketed heavily to children through the enticing use of candy/fruit flavors and also that by putting “Adult Use Only” on a product such as the electronic cigarette, is a direct marketing tactic to children.

When asked if the electronic cigarette was a legal product to be sold in the US, Michael Levi, counsel for the FDA, noted that all of the products that have been held or seized have been new drug and drug delivery devices due to the marketing of them as smoking cessation devices. He also noted that in order to continue marketing them as NRT’s they would need the proper documentation and studies to sell them as such. He could not further comment due to the current litigation.

When further asked if anything has changed due to this call, if this announcement was actually to announce anything, Levi simply noted that the FDA wanted to make the public aware that the electronic cigarette is cause for concern based on the tests they had performed and that there was definitely a need for regulation to ensure that each and every product on the market is equal to what it says it is.

There is no doubt that the electronic cigarette needs to be regulated. But in what capacity and who is going to take on this huge task? It was very clear from the discussion that the FDA takes one stance: This is not a proven smoking cessation product and the only way they want to see this on the market is if it is.

It was clear from the lack of having any doctors/groups such as Dr. Joel Nitzkin, Chair of the Tobacco Control Task Force for the American Association of Public Health Physicians or Dr. Michael Siegel of Tobacco Analysis, both prominent anti-smoking advocates but also FOR the electronic cigarette as a tobacco harm reduction strategy, that the FDA needs to be open to further discussions and also to acknowledge testing that has been done to date.

Hopefully, the FDA will not be blindsided by their defensive position due to their current litigation to see that even with the above testing on two of hundreds of different cartridges/liquids available on the market that there are a group of suppliers who do wish to be regulated, but regulated fairly.

It is interesting also that the doctors who were against the electronic cigarette and noting it as a “gateway to nicotine use”, did not voice any concerns regarding the recent overdose of nicotine by the 12 year old boy on a playground in the UK. A direct result of an anti-smoking group giving children nicotine without parental consent.

Or the fact that in another article today, Iayad Hasan, Director of the Cleveland Clinic Tobacco Treatment Center, declined the use of the ecig as a smoking cessation device because it does in fact leave the hand-to-mouth habit in tact and that does not aid in smoking cessation.

The facts are very clear. The electronic cigarette does need to be regulated. It does need quality control on the manufacturing side and it does need regulations for marketing. It is evidently clear that the electronic cigarette has helped thousands of tobacco cigarette users and it is equally clear that the Electronic Cigarette Association is needed now, more than ever. It is needed to implement standards. It is needed in order to keep the market free and open and not run by pharmaceutical and tobacco interests.

The media attention about the electronic cigarette has been growing since it first emerged onto the market a few years ago. Although some has been very positive, or at least factual, other articles wander into the arena of attacking via misinformation. To help the public understand some of the false accusations about e-smoking technology, we issued a press release which contains some responses to the most common attacks against electronic cigarettes. Here is a quote from the press release:

And when asked about the safety and effectiveness of the electronic cigarette as a smoking cessation device, Mr. Watt responded by saying, “For those who want to claim it is a smoking cessation device, then they should do the testing. I believe smokers should have the right to choose an alternative to smoking that doesn’t contain the 4,000+ chemicals found in tobacco smoke. Quit or die is a flawed philosophy”

Read “The Battle Over Electronic Cigarettes“

5) We have fabulous customer service. If you have any issues with your batteries, atomizers, or charger, just email us or call us at (321) 256-0486 and we will troubleshoot the problem and get you out replacement parts. Even if you are just not sure how everything works, contact us and we will help out.

4) The Instead Electronic Cigarette Kits are unique. We are e-smokers and know what is needed to have a great e-smoking experience. We include 2 batteries and 2 atomizers so you will always have what is needed to smoking your e-cig. Our kits also come with a water resistant storage tin and a velvet carrying pouch, not to mention small zip lock bags to store parts or cartridges that you fill up!

3) ELiquid! The Instead ELiquid is made in America. Each bottle is approximately equivalent to 300 tobacco cigarettes. The bottles are glass with a childproof cap, proper labeling, and a separate dropper. Each kit and each bottle we sell comes with 5 brand new empty cartridges. Curious about prefilled cartridges? We are e-smokers and are not big fans of prefilled cartridges. Read about why we no longer carry prefilled e-cigarette cartridges.

2) Instead works hard for the industry. We are very active on industry forums and with the ECA. We believe every smoker should have the freedom to choose an alternative to a known killer and will fight to that end. We also believe there needs to be standards in the industry and are working to make that a reality.

1) Experience! We have been using electronic cigarettes for about 2 years and selling them for almost as long. We know about the different styles and models and which are good and which are not so good. We know e-cigarette tricks and tips (many of which we share on this blog) to make your e-smoking experience satisfying. We know how to trouble shoot problems when they do arise. This experience is your assurance that we are up on the latest technology and that our e-cig sets contain some of the best products on the market.

Buy Instead Electronic Cigarettes

The specifics have not been released yet, however it is on good authority that NJoy aka Sottera has officially intervened into the case of Smoking Everywhere vs the FDA over the rights of the FDA to block the importation of electronic cigarettes. This is an update to the “What is Going on with the Electronic Cigarette and the FDA” post. NJoy entering this case is of great benefit to the industry as a whole. NJoy doesn’t make health or cessation claims and making these claims appears to be the only legal basis for the FDA stopping the electronic cigarette from entering the United States. Time will tell if the thousands and thousands of individuals using the e-cigarette are told to stop by the FDA.

For full disclosure, Instead Electronic Cigarettes and NJoy are both part of the Electronic Cigarette Association.