Cheap Cigarettes

Rarely has a single product evoked such diametrically opposed views or such passion as e cigarettes.

Anti smoking activists see the electronic nicotine delivery systems (the formal name) as another evil concoction of Big Tobacco, a devilish way to create new smokers and undermine hard fought public health measures.

Proponents of e cigarettes see them as a means of getting what they desperately want usually nicotine, but sometimes the tactile act of smoking without the carcinogens in tobacco, and as means to gain freedom from the increasingly oppressive measures taken against smokers.

E cigarettes are canisters used to simulate the act of smoking Batteries heat up fluid filled cartridges that contain water, flavouring agents and nicotine (though not always). The act of smoking an e cigarette is known as vaping because you inhale vapours, not smoke.

Health Canada does not allow the sale of e cigarettes containing is also illegal in Canada to make any health claims about e cigarettes, for example suggesting they are a smoking cessation tool.

The United States has, to date, taken a hands off approach, though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has served notice that it intends to extend its regulatory control of tobacco to e cigarettes in the near future.

There is no question that e cigarettes pose a dilemma for regulators and anti smoking activists. Devotees who are an unusually fanatical lot can trot out amazing anecdotal stories about the power of e cigarettes and five pack a day smokers who have become healthy vapers. Skeptics feel the arguments are eerily similar to options that have been touted in the past as being healthier like light cigarettes, cigarellos and chewing tobacco.

Dreams and fears aside, research on e cigarettes about their potential harms and potential benefits is in its infancy. Data on long term risks and benefits are especially lacking. In other words, the jury is still out, despite the grandiose claims of benefit from proponents and the dire warnings of opponents.

In a world where there are one billion smokers and smoking kills almost six million people a year, this is a high stakes debate.

The global e cigarette market is already worth $2 billion (U.S.) a year with more than half of all sales in the U.S. and it s expected to surpass $10 billion annually by 2017. And everyone is keeping a close eye on China where e cigarettes emerged in 2006 because, as it pushes to restrict tobacco, it is touting e cigarettes as an alternative.

Many anti smoking activists see e cigarettes as a Trojan horse, a gateway drug that will attract new users to tobacco and discourage current smokers from quitting. It is not clear how many so called dual users (people who alternate vaping and smoking) exist.

Then there is the fear that decades of effort to restrict smoking will be all for naught. At the recent People s Choice Awards, for example, vaping was de rigeur, to the point where it looked like a product placement for the popular brand Blu. The use of aggressive advertising using recognizable Hollywood stars is reminiscent of the old techniques of Big Tobacco.

The point of anti smoking laws and by laws is to limit exposure to second hand smoke, but if vapours are harmless, the argument for restrictions goes up in smoke.

So, do e cigarettes contain toxic chemicals and carcinogens? That is a point of much contention. Some research says yes, some no. Again, the reality is there is a broad range of products and no standards. But e cigarettes are principally a nicotine delivery system. Nicotine is addictive in fact, it s what makes people addicted to cigarettes. It s not particularly harmful it s the byproducts of processing and burning tobacco that causes cancer, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and other health woes of smokers. Isn t it preferable to have people addicted to nicotine alone rather than nicotine and a potpourri of toxins?

The answer to that loaded question is Yes if you believe in harm reduction.

Most public health officials strongly favour harm reduction when it comes to hard drugs the supervised injection site Insite, for example, allows intravenous drug users to inject in a controlled setting with clean needles rather than in back alleys with dirty needles. But making that argument for vaping versus smoking doesn t have as much traction. When it comes to tobacco, most public health officials argue for abstinence and oppose e cigarettes.

The sands are constantly shifting. The Lung Association, for example, went from being an outspoken opponent of e cigarettes to taking the position that they might be a good smoking cessation tool, a way of weaning people off cigarettes. We don t know yet if e cigarettes are as effective or as ineffective as other forms of nicotine replacement therapy.

Probably the other persuasive argument against electronic cigarettes in 2014 is that they remain an unproven commodity we shouldn t be rushing headlong to embrace the technology. At the risk of sounding like the conclusion of every research study ever published More research is needed.

In the meantime though, it seems irrational and counterproductive to ban e cigarettes in Canada. A more sensible approach would be to regulate and allow nicotine delivery devices on the market that don t contain carcinogens.

In the war on smoking which is, after all, a battle to improve the health of individuals and the collectivity e cigarettes are not a panacea, but they are a step in the right direction.

Follow me on Twitter picardonhealth

The rise of the e-cigarette – telegraph

Eu adopts tough rules to stub out killer habit – international

Debating the safety and effectiveness of electronic cigarettes is not a debate confined just to the UK. In the USA, the number of cities banning the use of e cigarettes, also known as vaping, in public places, such as bars, nightclubs and restaurants, and therefore treating them similarly to traditional cigarettes, is growing. Boston, Chicago and New York are among them, and Los Angeles is destined to join the list soon the LA City Council has already voted to ban them, so passing the measure into law is just a matter of process.

In the UK, the stance on use in public places is still very much subjective. Pub chains Wetherspoons and the Slug & Lettuce have banned the use of them insider their establishments McDonald s too. Some train operators, including First Capital Connect, have imposed a complete ban on passengers using the devices.

In February, however, Boots announced their stores would be stocking e cigarettes, making the brand, Puritane, available online as well as giving the product a presence in the high street. Under 18s are banned from buying electronic cigarettes though and the UK government has also made it illegal for adults to buy traditional cigarettes for anyone under 18.

Depending on who you talk or listen to, e cigarettes either offer the best hope yet of significantly reducing harmful smoking, or are a new way for tobacco companies to regain some control in the falling tobacco market. Though whether it actually matters if consumers are spending their money on a less harmful product instead, is another argument.

Critics also raise the concern that e cigarettes can serve as a gateway for young adults and teens to experience a form of smoking before graduating to the real thing. The counter to that, surely, is that if habits are hardened in those early and impressionable years, the user may never be tempted to try old style cigarettes.

Related Articles

• Even SMEs need big data

  20 Apr 2014

• Welsh e cigarette ban all you need to know about ‘vaping’

  02 Apr 2014

• Wales could ban e cigarettes

  02 Apr 2014

• Why it would be crazy to ban e cigarettes

  27 Jan 2014

• EU seeks ‘a ban on all currently available electronic cigarettes’

  28 Nov 2013

In brief, e cigarettes consist of a battery, a cartridge filled with nicotine, a solution of propylene glycol or glycerine mixed with water, and an atomiser to turn the solution into a vapour. When the user inhales, the solution is vaporised hence the term vaping and a nicotine hit to the lungs is delivered without tar and toxins. And this, insist e cigarette users and supporters, is what makes the crucial difference and distinction between those and traditional cigarettes.

Author Matt Ridley, who appeared on News Night, is a well known supporter of electronic cigarettes, having spoken about the subject in the House of Lords and written extensively on the subject. Ridley likens e cigs to a product widely popular in Sweden. Snus, which is put under the top lip, provides the nicotine but not the tar. Sweden has the fewest smokers per head of population of all EU countries lung cancer mortality in Swedish males over the age of 35 is less than half the British rate. “If snus can halve smoking and lung cancer deaths, imagine what electronic cigarettes could do,” Ridley wrote. “These are objects that mimic the actions of smoking but are maybe 1,000 times safer.”

Speaking on Tonight, Professor Robert West from Cancer Research UK, suggested that e cigarettes could potentially save millions of lives a year. Glenn Thomas, of the World Health Organisation, insisted that more research is required to establish what, if any, impact on health e cigarettes has.

A poll conducted after an ITV debate in January illustrated a public divided on the question of whether e cigarettes set a bad example, showing people imitating smoking even in smoke free areas, there was an even split of 42 per cent each. Asked whether it was socially acceptable to regularly use an e cigarette in public, 48 pre cent agreed it was 33 per cent did not and 19 per cent were unsure. However, 45 per cent disagreed that e cigarettes should be allowed in public, indoor places.

The benefits of electronic cigarettes may evoke debate, but the popularity of such devices cannot be disputed. The rise of the e cigarette has been verging on the meteoric in 2013, sales rose 340 per cent year on year, beating nicotine patches, lozenges and gum for the first time. While e cigarettes are not necessarily pitched as aids to help smokers quit traditional tobacco, it s clear they are being used as an alternative sales totalled f193 million last year (up from f44 million in 2012). In comparison, collective sales of patches, lozenges and gum were f131 million, an increase of just 1.7 per cent.

In France, a country almost synonymous with the image of traditional cigarette smokers, e cigarettes are hugely popular. A survey carried out by Ipsos in December 2013 revealed one in five French people that is around 10 million had tried an e cigarette. At the same time, sales of traditional cigarettes dropped by just over 7 per cent in France.

There are estimated to be around 1.3 million e cigarette users in the UK, and as the popularity of the devices grow, that figure is only going to increase. There is an extensive range of brands and styles, ranging from models which look very alike to real cigarettes in appearance, to those that resemble pens. Disposable, rechargeable and personal vaporizer versions are all readily available, as are e juices to flavour the vapour. Conventional menthol flavours sit alongside apple, pineapple, kiwi and even bubblegum for the more adventurous e pioneer.

Celebrity endorsement from rapper Snoop Dogg (now known as Snoop Lion), who has designed a vaporiser pen with a roadmap of Long Beach printed on it, and Leonardo DiCaprio have helped to cement the device’s status as a viable smoking alternative, rather than an awkward stopgap to quitting. A variety of novelty versions in the guise of lightsabres and Nintendo NES controllers, seem to promote them as a form of fashionable, ironic accessory.

Should the Welsh government succeed in banning e cigarettes from public places, those forced to go outside may well go back to smoking the real deal. It’s difficult to see how an enforced ban may affect the e cig industry, but it’s unlikely to go up in a puff of smoke any time soon.