This holiday weekend I had the opportunity to speak to my husband's aunt regarding electronic cigarettes. She was smoking and showed interest. Ever the e-cig evangelist, I excitedly told her of the advantages of smokefree alternatives.
To my utter dismay, she told me her doctor had given her a prescription for a "low nicotine" or "no nicotine" cigarette, claiming that the nicotine was the dangerous component of smoking. (After an extensive Google search, I couldn't find a "prescription no/low nicotine cigarette," so I've concluded she meant a Nicotrol Inhaler.)
It took me several attempts to get her to understand that nicotine, absent the smoke, is relatively safe. "It's the smoke that contains all of the toxins," I told her. She was shocked, as the vilification of nicotine by the anti-tobacco groups had completely convinced her that nicotine is what killed people.
That led, of course, to a discussion about smoke-free tobacco and another surprise revelation - that smoke-free tobacco is up to 99% safer than smoking cigarettes. The real shock for her was finding out that the risk of mouth and throat cancer was actually up to 50% less than the risk from smoking. As with other typically brainwashed consumers, she believed that smokeless tobacco products actually had a HIGHER risk of mouth/throat cancer. To add to the irony, she had discouraged her occasional-smoker son from using oral tobacco, not because of the perceived health risks, but to prevent damage to his costly dental work. Consequently, he remained an occasional smoker, when simple, good dental hygiene would have reduced his health risks by 99%.
Finally, she told me that she never filled the prescription from her doctor, because insurance didn't cover it and just 30 doses cost $35. So, she continues smoking. After informing her of the truth about the health benefits of smokeless alternatives and electronic cigarettes and especially the low cost, she was quite interested in getting information on how to order.
This whole conversation graphically illustrated the tragic consequences of the lies and myths perpetuated by the groups calling themselves "public health." A 50-something year old woman, who knows that she should quit smoking for her health and well-being, would have been willing to switch to a less hazardous product had she known the facts. "Public health" failed her. Their scare tactics failed to inspire her to quit, their costly "treatments" were out of her financial means and their refusal to endorse reduced harm tobacco products (in a prohibitionist belief that any kind of nicotine use is unacceptable) needlessly exposed her to the most harmful tobacco product available.
It's my hope that groups like CASAA, the Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association, will be able to fill the huge gap left by the tobacco control and public health groups, by educating committed smokers and giving them the tools and knowledge to make informed decisions about their health and well-being.
If my conversation with my husband's aunt is any indication, the myth of nicotine as the killer in cigarettes continues to be pervasive and persuasive and that is what continues killing people.
The concept of reduced harm tobacco has been around for at least 15 years. In that time, public health and tobacco control have had the opportunity to save many lives. This Memorial Day, I found myself thinking of the 6.6 million smokers who died because of the prohibitionist agenda of "public health."
Showing posts with label electronic cigarettes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label electronic cigarettes. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Electronic Cigarette Users Fighting Back
Petition Aims to Save Lives
Tobacco smokers aren't known as a politically active group. Even though they make up over 20% of the adult population in the U.S. and make a significant contribution to federal and state revenues, after years of being vilified and desocialized, they've pretty much accepted that the rest of the population won't acknowledge them until they either quit smoking or die.
Their electronic cigarette-using counterparts, however, have no intention of going so quietly into the night. They believe their devices are the antithesis of tobacco cigarettes and are life-savers worthy of a petition against moves by the FDA and numerous anti-smoking groups to remove electronic cigarettes from the market.
Electronic cigarettes have been on the market worldwide for over five years.1 Some models look like a traditional cigarette, but they are actually made from a battery-powered heating element that vaporizes a water-based, flavored nicotine solution into an inhalable mist.2
As of this writing, nearly 600 people had signed and commented on the six-day-old petition posted at EcigsSaveLives.info and they have pledged to withdraw any further financial contributions to organizations, such as the American Lung Association and the American Cancer Society, until those groups reverse their current policies against e-cigarettes.3
The petition, written by the Vapers Coalition4, quoted the named organizations' own statements about the dangers of tobacco smoking and pointed out how, according to published test results, electronic cigarettes are no more of a danger to smokers than FDA-approved smoking cessation products.
As word spreads, the petition numbers are growing and organizers hope to reach at least 10,000 signatures by September 1, 2010. They intend to hand-deliver a hard copy of the petition to each organization and are encouraging petitioners to send their own individually signed hard copy, as well.
Comments on the petition ranged from testimonials of the benefits of electronic cigarettes to angry accusations of financial interests winning out over public health. Many promised to get their friends and families to support boycotting the health organizations and others warned that removing electronic cigarettes from the market would have devastating consequences.
"I am a 1 1/2 year user of PV's (e-cigs) and have been tobacco free for over a year," wrote petitioner Brenda Wood. If a ban were to take effect, I know I would revert to tobacco, as NONE of the NRT's on the market worked for me, and some made me very, very ill."
Mark Watkinson made an appeal on behalf of his father writing, "My father is dying from his habit. If he doesn't switch to an E Cigarette he may be dead in as little as 2-5 years. Please don't ban this life saving device. Nothing can be worse health wise than the legal tobacco cigarette!"
Alluding to federal and state tobacco tax revenues and the multi-billion dollar smoking cessation industry, petitioner George Seder wrote, "Which conflict of interest are you going to side with? Smokers who want to stay healthy or special interests who depend financially on misery and death?"
Electronic cigarette users are adamant that they have finally found a way to painlessly replace tobacco smoking with a product that has been shown, through testing and real-life application, to be multitudes safer than smoking. Unlike tobacco cigarettes, petitioners say electronic cigarettes are worth fighting for.
Sources:
1. A Historical Timeline of Electronic Cigarettes,http://www.casaa.org/resources
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette
3. http://EcigsSaveLives.info
4. http://VapersCoalition.org
Tobacco smokers aren't known as a politically active group. Even though they make up over 20% of the adult population in the U.S. and make a significant contribution to federal and state revenues, after years of being vilified and desocialized, they've pretty much accepted that the rest of the population won't acknowledge them until they either quit smoking or die.
Their electronic cigarette-using counterparts, however, have no intention of going so quietly into the night. They believe their devices are the antithesis of tobacco cigarettes and are life-savers worthy of a petition against moves by the FDA and numerous anti-smoking groups to remove electronic cigarettes from the market.
Electronic cigarettes have been on the market worldwide for over five years.1 Some models look like a traditional cigarette, but they are actually made from a battery-powered heating element that vaporizes a water-based, flavored nicotine solution into an inhalable mist.2
As of this writing, nearly 600 people had signed and commented on the six-day-old petition posted at EcigsSaveLives.info and they have pledged to withdraw any further financial contributions to organizations, such as the American Lung Association and the American Cancer Society, until those groups reverse their current policies against e-cigarettes.3
The petition, written by the Vapers Coalition4, quoted the named organizations' own statements about the dangers of tobacco smoking and pointed out how, according to published test results, electronic cigarettes are no more of a danger to smokers than FDA-approved smoking cessation products.
As word spreads, the petition numbers are growing and organizers hope to reach at least 10,000 signatures by September 1, 2010. They intend to hand-deliver a hard copy of the petition to each organization and are encouraging petitioners to send their own individually signed hard copy, as well.
Comments on the petition ranged from testimonials of the benefits of electronic cigarettes to angry accusations of financial interests winning out over public health. Many promised to get their friends and families to support boycotting the health organizations and others warned that removing electronic cigarettes from the market would have devastating consequences.
"I am a 1 1/2 year user of PV's (e-cigs) and have been tobacco free for over a year," wrote petitioner Brenda Wood. If a ban were to take effect, I know I would revert to tobacco, as NONE of the NRT's on the market worked for me, and some made me very, very ill."
Mark Watkinson made an appeal on behalf of his father writing, "My father is dying from his habit. If he doesn't switch to an E Cigarette he may be dead in as little as 2-5 years. Please don't ban this life saving device. Nothing can be worse health wise than the legal tobacco cigarette!"
Alluding to federal and state tobacco tax revenues and the multi-billion dollar smoking cessation industry, petitioner George Seder wrote, "Which conflict of interest are you going to side with? Smokers who want to stay healthy or special interests who depend financially on misery and death?"
Electronic cigarette users are adamant that they have finally found a way to painlessly replace tobacco smoking with a product that has been shown, through testing and real-life application, to be multitudes safer than smoking. Unlike tobacco cigarettes, petitioners say electronic cigarettes are worth fighting for.
Sources:
1. A Historical Timeline of Electronic Cigarettes,http://www.casaa.org/resources
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electronic_cigarette
3. http://EcigsSaveLives.info
4. http://VapersCoalition.org
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
American Lung Association vs Electronic Cigarettes
Organization's Efforts to Ban Devices Will Do More Harm Than Good
The American Lung Association has come out in full force by sending lobbyists to various state legislators to argue against the electronic cigarette.1 While on the surface this seems like a reasonable effort, a lack of understanding the motivations of the electronic cigarette user has placed the ALA squarely on the wrong side of the fight for public health.
A source at the ALA, an organization which claims to be dedicated to "save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease," acknowledged in response to a recent email inquiry that
So, while the ALA admitted that electronic cigarettes contain fewer chemicals than tobacco cigarettes, they refuse to acknowledge the obvious health benefit that lack of the most toxic chemicals provides to the smokers who switch. Are lives and lung health the real issue here or is nicotine addiction? The ALA must know that numerous studies show that, absent the tobacco smoke, nicotine is relatively harmless and comparable to caffeine. The American Heart Association acknowledges that nicotine is "safe" in other smoke-free forms such as patches or gum.2
Research has also shown that many of the of smokers who successfully quit using nicotine gum never actually "wean down their nicotine level so they can completely get rid of it." The success rate of NRTs (nicotine replacement therapy) has dropped to 7.2%, resulting in chronic use of the products.3 Furthermore, according to a 2004 report, over 36% of gum users continue to use the products as a smoking replacement indefinitely.4 So nicotine itself is not what is killing people. The ALA's insistence on complete nicotine abstinence is admirable yet unrealistic and their claims about the dangers of nicotine, as compared to smoking, are clearly misleading.
The ALA email also acknowledged a fact already known to many e-cigarette insiders - that the majority of smokers who switched to electronic cigarettes had no intention of quitting smoking. So, why remove the only safer option available to those who would otherwise smoke the obviously deadlier tobacco cigarettes?
The only explanation is that the American Lung Association assumes that every smoker and electronic cigarette user wants to quit smoking and uses the devices as an NRT. That is an erroneous and very dangerous assumption.
In surveys of electronic cigarette owners conducted by CASAA (Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association), respondents overwhelmingly stated that they did not use electronic cigarettes to quit smoking and would go back to smoking if denied access to electronic cigarettes.
An internet questionnaire of a self-selected sample of 783 daily users of electronic cigarettes asked, "Why did you start vaping?" ("Vaping" is a term for the vapor inhaled vs. smoke.) A staggering 92% chose to switch for reasons other than quitting smoking i.e. saving money or reducing the risks associated with smoking. Less than 8% stated they were using e-cigarettes to quit smoking.5
So, the ALA wishes to remove the safer alternative used by several hundred thousand electronic cigarettes users and force them back to smoking tobacco cigarettes, in order to "protect" the less than 8% who would otherwise be using an NRT?
Additionally, the ALA's belief that e-cigarette users will switch to traditional NRTs or quit altogether is disproved in yet another e-cigarette user questionnaire conducted by CASAA. This survey explored the habits and motivations of almost 1,000 electronic cigarette users. The poll indicates that, not only is the typical e-cigarette user a former smoker over the age of 26, but that they have overwhelmingly cut back or quit the use of tobacco cigarettes and have noticed improved health effects - indicating they provide the "improved lung health" the ALA is seeking to promote. Most importantly, the results indisputably contradict the assertion that electronic cigarette users will quit using tobacco should the devices be removed from the market. Over 80% of the respondents indicated they would most likely return to smoking tobacco cigarettes or use another smokeless tobacco alternative, such as snus. Less than 20% stated they would attempt to quit nicotine use altogether. 6
While the nicotine abstinence approach may be the ideal, it simply does not reflect the reality that 80% of smokers do not even wish to quit in the immediate future. Wouldn't it make sense to encourage those smokers to switch to a less harmful alternative in the meantime?
In their single-minded drive to ban e-cigarettes, focusing solely on the small minority of electronic cigarette users who use the devices to quit nicotine, the ALA will do more harm than good to the majority of e-cigarette users who will inevitably return to smoking the more toxic tobacco cigarettes.
The American Lung Association needs to re-read their own mission statement and determine if their opposition to electronic cigarettes would be saving lives - their stated goal - or putting those lives right back into harm's way.
Sources:
1. Michelle Manchir, State Hopes to Snuff Out E-cigarette Sales, ChicagoTribune.com
2. American Heart Association, Nicotine Substitutes/Nicotine Replacement Therapy, AmericanHeart.org
3. Etter JF, Stapleton JA., Nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: a meta-analysis., ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
4. Petra Bartosiewicz., A Quitter's Delima: Hooked on the Cure, NYTimes.com
5. CASAA, Poll of Electronic Cigarette Users: Why Did You Start Vaping?, CASAA.org
6. CASAA, Ecig User Poll Graphic, CASAA.org
The American Lung Association has come out in full force by sending lobbyists to various state legislators to argue against the electronic cigarette.1 While on the surface this seems like a reasonable effort, a lack of understanding the motivations of the electronic cigarette user has placed the ALA squarely on the wrong side of the fight for public health.
A source at the ALA, an organization which claims to be dedicated to "save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease," acknowledged in response to a recent email inquiry that
yes there are fewer chemicals but your body is still being exposed to chemicals that should not be in your system. Nicotine can also cause the body harm, so yes many of the products do contain nicotine, but used correctly a person uses the products to wean down their nicotine level so they can completely get rid of it. Many people are using the e-cigs as an alternative to smoking the regular cigs thinking that it will not harm them and have no intention of quitting, just switching.
So, while the ALA admitted that electronic cigarettes contain fewer chemicals than tobacco cigarettes, they refuse to acknowledge the obvious health benefit that lack of the most toxic chemicals provides to the smokers who switch. Are lives and lung health the real issue here or is nicotine addiction? The ALA must know that numerous studies show that, absent the tobacco smoke, nicotine is relatively harmless and comparable to caffeine. The American Heart Association acknowledges that nicotine is "safe" in other smoke-free forms such as patches or gum.2
Research has also shown that many of the of smokers who successfully quit using nicotine gum never actually "wean down their nicotine level so they can completely get rid of it." The success rate of NRTs (nicotine replacement therapy) has dropped to 7.2%, resulting in chronic use of the products.3 Furthermore, according to a 2004 report, over 36% of gum users continue to use the products as a smoking replacement indefinitely.4 So nicotine itself is not what is killing people. The ALA's insistence on complete nicotine abstinence is admirable yet unrealistic and their claims about the dangers of nicotine, as compared to smoking, are clearly misleading.
The ALA email also acknowledged a fact already known to many e-cigarette insiders - that the majority of smokers who switched to electronic cigarettes had no intention of quitting smoking. So, why remove the only safer option available to those who would otherwise smoke the obviously deadlier tobacco cigarettes?
The only explanation is that the American Lung Association assumes that every smoker and electronic cigarette user wants to quit smoking and uses the devices as an NRT. That is an erroneous and very dangerous assumption.
In surveys of electronic cigarette owners conducted by CASAA (Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association), respondents overwhelmingly stated that they did not use electronic cigarettes to quit smoking and would go back to smoking if denied access to electronic cigarettes.
An internet questionnaire of a self-selected sample of 783 daily users of electronic cigarettes asked, "Why did you start vaping?" ("Vaping" is a term for the vapor inhaled vs. smoke.) A staggering 92% chose to switch for reasons other than quitting smoking i.e. saving money or reducing the risks associated with smoking. Less than 8% stated they were using e-cigarettes to quit smoking.5
So, the ALA wishes to remove the safer alternative used by several hundred thousand electronic cigarettes users and force them back to smoking tobacco cigarettes, in order to "protect" the less than 8% who would otherwise be using an NRT?
Additionally, the ALA's belief that e-cigarette users will switch to traditional NRTs or quit altogether is disproved in yet another e-cigarette user questionnaire conducted by CASAA. This survey explored the habits and motivations of almost 1,000 electronic cigarette users. The poll indicates that, not only is the typical e-cigarette user a former smoker over the age of 26, but that they have overwhelmingly cut back or quit the use of tobacco cigarettes and have noticed improved health effects - indicating they provide the "improved lung health" the ALA is seeking to promote. Most importantly, the results indisputably contradict the assertion that electronic cigarette users will quit using tobacco should the devices be removed from the market. Over 80% of the respondents indicated they would most likely return to smoking tobacco cigarettes or use another smokeless tobacco alternative, such as snus. Less than 20% stated they would attempt to quit nicotine use altogether. 6
While the nicotine abstinence approach may be the ideal, it simply does not reflect the reality that 80% of smokers do not even wish to quit in the immediate future. Wouldn't it make sense to encourage those smokers to switch to a less harmful alternative in the meantime?
In their single-minded drive to ban e-cigarettes, focusing solely on the small minority of electronic cigarette users who use the devices to quit nicotine, the ALA will do more harm than good to the majority of e-cigarette users who will inevitably return to smoking the more toxic tobacco cigarettes.
The American Lung Association needs to re-read their own mission statement and determine if their opposition to electronic cigarettes would be saving lives - their stated goal - or putting those lives right back into harm's way.
Sources:
1. Michelle Manchir, State Hopes to Snuff Out E-cigarette Sales, ChicagoTribune.com
2. American Heart Association, Nicotine Substitutes/Nicotine Replacement Therapy, AmericanHeart.org
3. Etter JF, Stapleton JA., Nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: a meta-analysis., ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
4. Petra Bartosiewicz., A Quitter's Delima: Hooked on the Cure, NYTimes.com
5. CASAA, Poll of Electronic Cigarette Users: Why Did You Start Vaping?, CASAA.org
6. CASAA, Ecig User Poll Graphic, CASAA.org
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
CASAA Applauds Electronic Cigarette Ruling
by Krisitn Noll-Marsh
The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association (CASAA) applauded the recent ruling of U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon in the case of Smoking Everywhere v. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The group advocates providing consumers with affordable and effective alternatives to tobacco smoking, including electronic cigarettes.
Leon granted the injunction sought by the plaintiffs, Smoking Everywhere and NJOY (d.b.a. Soterra), to release shipments of electronic cigarettes that had been seized by FDA as "unapproved drug-delivery devices." The injunction prohibits FDA from seizing future shipments as well. (1)
E-cigarettes can be used as an alternative to smoking tobacco cigarettes. The devices use a battery and atomizer to vaporize a small amount of liquid in a cartridge that contains propylene glycol--the chemical used to create artificial fog in theatre productions and dance clubs—as well as water, flavoring, and a small amount of nicotine. As many as 80% of regular users of the product are now using it in place of all the tobacco cigarettes they formerly smoked.
Tobacco cigarettes deliver nicotine via the process of combustion, which produces smoke that contains tar, particles of tobacco and paper ash, carbon monoxide, heavy metals, hundreds of carcinogens, and thousands of toxins. "In the absence of quitting," continued Dr. Whitt, "smokers must have alternatives available to them, to reduce their exposure to the dangers of tobacco smoke."
Many organizations have taken a position that smokers must achieve smoking cessation only through complete nicotine abstinence. This position has been characterized as a "quit or die" mentality.
Public health groups such as the American Association of Public Health Physicians (AAPHP) have called for a Tobacco Harm Reduction approach which steers smokers toward less-harmful sources of nicotine such as smokeless tobacco and e-cigarettes, as well as nicotine replacement products in higher more-satisfying dosages. (2)
Sources:
1. Smoking Everywhere vs. FDA, http://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2009cv0771-54, USCourts.gov
2. American Association of Public Health Physicians, http://www.aaphp.org/special/joelstobac/2009/TobaccBill.htm, AAPHP.org
The Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association (CASAA) applauded the recent ruling of U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon in the case of Smoking Everywhere v. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The group advocates providing consumers with affordable and effective alternatives to tobacco smoking, including electronic cigarettes.
Leon granted the injunction sought by the plaintiffs, Smoking Everywhere and NJOY (d.b.a. Soterra), to release shipments of electronic cigarettes that had been seized by FDA as "unapproved drug-delivery devices." The injunction prohibits FDA from seizing future shipments as well. (1)
"Judge Leon's decision that reduced risk tobacco products, such as electronic cigarettes, are not drug delivery devices and should not be placed under FDA jurisdiction as such is a step in the right direction," stated CASAA president Michal Douglas. "The process of approving new drugs is prohibitive and would leave millions of electronic cigarette users at risk."
E-cigarettes can be used as an alternative to smoking tobacco cigarettes. The devices use a battery and atomizer to vaporize a small amount of liquid in a cartridge that contains propylene glycol--the chemical used to create artificial fog in theatre productions and dance clubs—as well as water, flavoring, and a small amount of nicotine. As many as 80% of regular users of the product are now using it in place of all the tobacco cigarettes they formerly smoked.
"Judge Leon's ruling is a step forward in public health, despite what some anti-smoking organizations may claim. Getting thousands of smokers to stop smoking is a good thing, even if it's with a method that currently only common sense can say is safer," said Dr. Theresa Whitt, CASAA's Medical Director.
Tobacco cigarettes deliver nicotine via the process of combustion, which produces smoke that contains tar, particles of tobacco and paper ash, carbon monoxide, heavy metals, hundreds of carcinogens, and thousands of toxins. "In the absence of quitting," continued Dr. Whitt, "smokers must have alternatives available to them, to reduce their exposure to the dangers of tobacco smoke."
Many organizations have taken a position that smokers must achieve smoking cessation only through complete nicotine abstinence. This position has been characterized as a "quit or die" mentality.
Public health groups such as the American Association of Public Health Physicians (AAPHP) have called for a Tobacco Harm Reduction approach which steers smokers toward less-harmful sources of nicotine such as smokeless tobacco and e-cigarettes, as well as nicotine replacement products in higher more-satisfying dosages. (2)
"When anti-tobacco groups fail to acknowledge the viability of reduced harm alternatives, disregarding the fact that 93% of smokers fail at repeated attempts to quit, they ultimately fail to protect public health," stated Whitt.
"Anti-smoking activists and the FDA should be encouraging smokers to make the switch to reduced harm products such as electronic cigarettes, not making it harder for them."
Sources:
1. Smoking Everywhere vs. FDA, http://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2009cv0771-54, USCourts.gov
2. American Association of Public Health Physicians, http://www.aaphp.org/special/joelstobac/2009/TobaccBill.htm, AAPHP.org
Monday, December 28, 2009
Smoke Free Wisconsin wins "Lie of the Year" award
Lie of the Year Award Winner
This year's Lie of the Year Award is presented to Smoke Free Wisconsin for its public communication which informed readers that electronic cigarettes are a Big Tobacco ploy to hook kids.
On March 25, 2009, the anti-smoking organization SmokeFree Wisconsin accused tobacco companies of using electronic cigarettes as a ploy to hook youths on these products. The group asserted that these products are being marketed to kids by virtue of their being produced in fruit flavors. For these reasons, SmokeFree Wisconsin joined a number of other health groups in supporting efforts to remove electronic cigarettes from the market. MORE
This year's Lie of the Year Award is presented to Smoke Free Wisconsin for its public communication which informed readers that electronic cigarettes are a Big Tobacco ploy to hook kids.
On March 25, 2009, the anti-smoking organization SmokeFree Wisconsin accused tobacco companies of using electronic cigarettes as a ploy to hook youths on these products. The group asserted that these products are being marketed to kids by virtue of their being produced in fruit flavors. For these reasons, SmokeFree Wisconsin joined a number of other health groups in supporting efforts to remove electronic cigarettes from the market. MORE
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Smoke Free Wisconsin Opposes Smoke Free Electronic Cigarettes
In a recent post to it's blog, USA Today - Our Opinion On Public Health, Smoke Free Wisconsin continues it's irrational opposition to electronic cigarettes.
If their goal was truly "Preserving the right to live and breathe tobacco free" then this opposition makes absolutely no sense. Electronic cigarettes ARE tobacco free. What they really seem to object to is NICOTINE.
They post the following points:
It has been shown in a few studies that the nicotine delivered by tobacco cigarettes is much higher than electronic cigarettes. No one seems concerned about the amount of nicotine in tobacco cigarettes - even though it has been reported that the tobacco companies are even using free base nicotine for greater strength. Electronic cigarettes use pharmacy-grade nicotine in clearly disclosed amounts. Even if the nicotine is higher than the extremely ineffective nicotine devices they regulate, it's still better than smoking tobacco cigarettes.
What is conveniently forgotten and never reported is what the FDA did NOT find in electronic cigarettes - no tar, carbon monoxide, ammonia, arsenic and hundreds, if not thousands, of other toxins found in tobacco cigarettes and second hand smoke. Why does Smoke Free Wisconsin refuse to acknowledge this?
This argument simply does not hold water. Aside from the fact that the greater majority of retailers refuse to sell the devices to those under the age of 18, there is no indicationthat children even have the slightest interest in them - even with the attractive flavors. On the contrary, anecdotal evidence shows that teens feel it isn't worth the high cost, nor is it "cool."
Again, the FDA did a study, so did Health New Zealand. Electronic cigarettes were found to be hundred's of times LESS toxic and contain hundred's of times LESS carcinogens than tobacco cigarettes.
Smoke Free Wisconsin did not print the follow up letter's to the USA Today editor - nor the hundreds of comments by electronic cigarette users. One letter was from a doctor endorsing their use and another was from an owner that made an excellent point:
When will Smoke Free Wisconsin realize how wrong they are? By opposing electronic cigarettes, they are signing a death warrent for millions using them to stay away from tobacco cigarettes. Read the comments by the electronic cigarette users on these articles and decide for yourself.
If their goal was truly "Preserving the right to live and breathe tobacco free" then this opposition makes absolutely no sense. Electronic cigarettes ARE tobacco free. What they really seem to object to is NICOTINE.
They post the following points:
When the FDA randomly tested the nicotine cartridges, it discovered carcinogens and a toxic chemical found in anti-freeze. Still, the most worrisome ingredient is nicotine itself. The FDA strictly regulates it in patches, gum and other smoking-cessation products, and it has banned nicotine lollipops and water. E-cigarettes deserve to be treated like other nicotine-delivery devices.
It has been shown in a few studies that the nicotine delivered by tobacco cigarettes is much higher than electronic cigarettes. No one seems concerned about the amount of nicotine in tobacco cigarettes - even though it has been reported that the tobacco companies are even using free base nicotine for greater strength. Electronic cigarettes use pharmacy-grade nicotine in clearly disclosed amounts. Even if the nicotine is higher than the extremely ineffective nicotine devices they regulate, it's still better than smoking tobacco cigarettes.
What is conveniently forgotten and never reported is what the FDA did NOT find in electronic cigarettes - no tar, carbon monoxide, ammonia, arsenic and hundreds, if not thousands, of other toxins found in tobacco cigarettes and second hand smoke. Why does Smoke Free Wisconsin refuse to acknowledge this?
E-cigarettes come in flavors — from traditional menthol to chocolate and
strawberry — that might lure curious youngsters and prompt them to move on to
the real thing. Distributors say their product is for adults only, but who's to
stop young people from buying it? Only a few locales have banned sales to
minors.
This argument simply does not hold water. Aside from the fact that the greater majority of retailers refuse to sell the devices to those under the age of 18, there is no indicationthat children even have the slightest interest in them - even with the attractive flavors. On the contrary, anecdotal evidence shows that teens feel it isn't worth the high cost, nor is it "cool."
Despite protests from the Electronic Cigarette Association that its membersWhile it may seem reasonable to disregard the claims from manufacturers, but what about the actual owners? Why do non-smoking advocates continuously ignore the experiences of the millions of people who have used these devices to quit smoking and report no adverse health effects? On the contrary, they report improved health and positive doctor's reports.
don't make claims about helping smokers quit, plenty of sellers make far
more outrageous health claims. In recent weeks, one marketer
claimed e-cigarettes reduce the risk of heart disease and touted an endorsement
by a physician-and-nurses group. Another website, which says it reviews
e-cigarettes, went them one better: It claims, based on a 1942 study, that an
ingredient in e-cigarettes could prevent flu and other respiratory diseases.
"The most important point that article makes is this, "All the public has to go on now is the word of the product's marketers. Before consumers inhale something that gives them "vapes" of highly addictive nicotine, they might want an independent authority testing the product to see what's in it." If the e-cig makers are anything like their Big Tobacco counterparts, truth in advertising is bent at the expensive of health and in the favor of profits. "
Again, the FDA did a study, so did Health New Zealand. Electronic cigarettes were found to be hundred's of times LESS toxic and contain hundred's of times LESS carcinogens than tobacco cigarettes.
Smoke Free Wisconsin did not print the follow up letter's to the USA Today editor - nor the hundreds of comments by electronic cigarette users. One letter was from a doctor endorsing their use and another was from an owner that made an excellent point:
"If the majority of users were substituting e-cigarettes for FDA-approved smoking cessation products, perhaps e-cigarettes would deserve to be treated like other nicotine-delivery devices. But the nicotine-delivery devices that e-cigarette users have given up are tobacco cigarettes. They are not using e-cigarettes because of any outrageous health claims on the part of retailers. They are using them because, unlike the FDA-approved smoking cessation products, these work. "
When will Smoke Free Wisconsin realize how wrong they are? By opposing electronic cigarettes, they are signing a death warrent for millions using them to stay away from tobacco cigarettes. Read the comments by the electronic cigarette users on these articles and decide for yourself.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Your Joye510
Welcome to the world of personal vaporizers! The Joye510 is one of the most popular models currently on the market.
Now that you have your new device, you may have heard that there is a bit of a learning curve. This guide is meant to answer the most common questions about the use and maintenance of the 510 model.
.........................................
Guide Index:
What to Order
--Starter Kit
--E-Liquid/Nicotine
Getting Started
510 Components
--Battery
----Automatic
----Manual
----USB Pass-through
--Atomizer
----Flooding
----Cleaning
----Burnt/Chemical/Harsh Taste
--Cartridge/Mouthpiece
----Loose Fitting Cartridge
--Filler
----Filler Modifications
----Dripping
----Dipping
--Chargers--E-Liquid
........................................
What to Order
The following list is what is most commonly advised by experienced owners for a basic starter kit:
2-4 Batteries
2-4 Atomizers
USB or AC Charger
Personal Charging Case
USB Pass-through
Empty Cartridges
Extra FillerTweezers (Pointed tip)
e-Liquid Nicotine Strength Recommendations:
Occasional Smoker: Zero to Low
Up to 1 pack/day: Low to Medium
Up to 2 packs/day: Medium to High
Over 2 packs/day: High to Extra High
Getting Started
When you first get your device, you will want to set it up properly for the best experience.
First, fully charge your batteries. Place them in the charger until the light turns green. Some recommend to charge for a minimum of 4 hours, regardless of the green light.
Second, blow out your atomizer. The atomizer comes from the factory with a “primer fluid” to keep it moist, but it tastes terrible. Simply place your mouth over the threaded end and blow hard onto a paper towel until no more liquid comes out.
Third, fill your cartridge. DO NOT OVERFILL. Use the dropper to drip the liquid until it no longer absorbs into the filler. Usually around 15 drops. If some liquid pools at the top, dab with a paper towel.
Fourth, drip TWO drops directly onto the metal coil in the atomizer.
Finally, attach the cartridge to the atomizer and then screw the atomizer onto the fully charged battery.
NOTE: There may still be some primer fluid on the atomizer, so you want to take a few puffs into your mouth and blow it directly out, to get the liquid flowing into the atomizer. Give 20-30 seconds between puffs, so the atomizer doesn’t get too hot. If you continue to taste a burnt/chemical taste, this is the atomizer burning off the primer fluid. Continue to “puff & blow” until the taste diminishes. If the taste gets worse, add two more drops directly onto atomizer again and continue to “puff and blow.”
For more information on the “burnt/bitter/chemical” taste issues, see this link: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/42077-10-tips-avoid-harsh-burnt-taste-510-atomizers.html
Once the primer fluid has burned off, you should be good for up to 20 puffs before you have to "top off" (adding a couple of drops to the filler) or refilling. Read the sections below on cartridge modifications for optimal filling techniques and using the batteries properly.
Remember that this is NOT a tobacco cigarette. You don't draw on it as you would a cigarette. You want to take it easy on the draw. Slowly inhale, to allow the atomizer time to heat the liquid. Don't draw on it hard or you'll end up with a mouthful of unvaporized liquid!
510 Components
Battery
This is what powers your device. It is recommended that you charge it fully before first use. Batteries come in assorted body colors and LED colors. They are also available with no LED. Batteries come in automatic and manual styles.
Automatic:
The automatic has a switch built into it that activates by the air that rushes through it when you inhale. It is good for hands-free use, however, it is very sensitive and is known to activate by sound and light impact. This may cause it to turn on while in a pocket or purse and may have to be recharged more frequently. Automatic batteries also have an automatic shutoff built in that frustrates some users who want a longer, deeper draw. The automatic batteries have a hole in them to allow air flow for the switch. Consequently, it is recommended that caution be used not to overfill the cartridge, direct drip or flood the atomizer, because it can get into the battery. (More on flooding & dripping later.)
When using an automatic battery, it is recommended to employ a "primer puff" before every draw, to pre-heat the atomizer for optimal vapor production. This is taking a short puff, followed by the actual inhale draw.
Manual:
The manual switch activated with a button. It is generally the more popular option with experienced vapers, because it allows more control over the draw and heat. It also allows the atomizer to get a little hotter and produce more vapor. It usually does not have a shutoff built in. With this kind of use, the battery life tends to be shorter. The manual battery does not have any hole and therefore, better adapted for dripping and less susceptible to damage from the liquid.
When using a manual battery, a "primer puff" is not needed. Simply press the button before you begin your draw, then release after you are finished.
Regular & Extra Long Batteries:
The 510 has two lengths of batteries available. The regular length is what comes in most kits. An extra long version is available from some vendors. The extra long battery, also known as the Titan MEGA, lasts longer, however, it takes longer to charge and will not fit in the 510 Personal Charging Case.
USB Pass-through:
This accessory allows for direct power from a computer or AC outlet. It looks like a battery, but has a cord with a USB plug. It can be plugged directly into a computer USB port or into a USB AC or Car Adapter and plugged into an AC outlet or car lighter outlet. There are two versions of this accessory – one has an actual battery that is continuously recharged by the USB port (in a small battery case near the plug) and the other just has wires that go directly from the connector to the USB plug. Neither has an LED.
Atomizer
The atomizer (atty) is a heating element that heats up the liquid and turns it into a vapor. One end screws into the battery and the other end fits the cartridge. It consists of a small pot or chamber, which holds a reserve of the liquid. There is a metal mesh coil or “bridge,” which draws in the liquid from the cartridge to a fiberglass wick. The heating element heats up the liquid and turns it into a vapor, which is then drawn back through vents in the mouthpiece by the user. The 510 atomizer is often the source of issues with performance and taste.
Flooding:
If you get a “gurgling” sound when you draw on the device, you have flooded the atomizer. This means that there is too much liquid in the atomizer for it to properly vaporize. Remove the atomizer from the battery and cartridge and blow out the excess liquid onto a paper towel from the threaded end.
Cleaning:
The atomizers, by design, are not meant to last forever. However, you may be able to extend the life of your atomizer and improve performance with occasional cleaning. There are many tried and UN-proven methods for cleaning, some more successful than others. Most agree that occasionally blowing out the atomizer is a safe practice, as the liquid tends to build up in the atomizer.
Some signs that your atomizers may need cleaning are:
-Reduced vapor production
-Hard or difficult draw
-Burnt/Harsh taste
Here are the recommendations by the manufacturer, Joye Technologies: 510 usage and maintenance instructions from Joye Technology
The following cleaning methods have been tried by various ECF members. It is advised that these cleaning methods be tried ONLY AS A LAST RESORT. There are many, many opinions on cleaning and it is STRONGLY suggested that you read the various threads on this topic.
Hot Water Rinse: Run under VERY hot water. Dry 48 hours.
Soaking/Baths: Soak in one of the following; Everclear or 100 proof vodka, isopropyl alcohol, diet cola, Polident (denture cleaner), hydrogen peroxide, vinegar or ice machine cleaner. Rinse VERY well under hot running water. Dry 48 hours.
Read more on these methods:http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/38167-cleaning-atomizers-5.html
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/experiments-equipment/10475-cola-method-taken-another-level-works.html
Hot Water Boil: Boil for 2-3 minutes, stirring continuously. Dry 48 hours.
Hot Water Boil w/Baking Soda: As above but with 1 tbsp baking soda added to the water. Rinse well. Dry 48 hours.
Dry Burn: Rinse under hot water. Dry 48 hours. Attach atomizer to battery. Press and hold battery button 4-7 seconds. Repeat until there is no vapor produced during the dry burn.
Burnt/Chemical/Bad Tastehttp://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/42077-10-tips-avoid-harsh-burnt-taste-510-atomizers.html
Cartridge/Mouthpiece
The cartridge on a 510 is more complex than it seems at first glance. It is a combination of mouthpiece and filler/liquid chamber. One end is open to a chamber to add the filler material and liquid, the other end has another, smaller chamber, which is closed off with a removable end cap, with a hole in the center. This end can be round or have a “whistle tip,” which is flattened on two sides. If you look closely, there are two slots on the flat sides of the liquid chamber, going into the mouthpiece chamber. This is how the vapor gets from the atomizer to the mouth. The vapor does not travel through the filler material, it travels around the liquid chamber, into the mouthpiece chamber. When the filler end is fitted into the atomizer, the metal coil acts like a wick, drawing the liquid into the atomizer to be vaporized.
Loose Cartridges:
The diameter of 510 atomizer was recently made larger, resulting in the older, smaller cartridges not fitting properly and falling off. Loose cartridges were also a problem with the M-401 model and an ECF member came up with a modification to fix the problem. With the 510, you would make the modification to the outside of the cartridge, but you can get the idea here: Fixing loose cartridges on an M-401 electronic Cigarette
Filler
This is the material inside the refillable cartridge. It is a polyester batting material. It acts like a sponge, to keep the liquid from spilling out of the cartridge and available for the atomizer wick. This may be removed and replaced with another material, which is called a “modification” or “mod” for short. The liquid can eventually get "gummy" and affect the taste, throat hit or draw, so the filler should occasionally be removed, rinsed and dried for reuse.
Filler Modifications:
PTB (Pyramid Tea Bag) Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/34401-ptb-plug-full-510-cart-2.html
Straw Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/11421-cart-mod-better-refilling.html#post176708
Fluval Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/20403-fluval-cartridge-restuffing-video-instructions.html
Blue Foam Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/27723-eheim-filterpad-mod.html
Brass Screen Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/38161-brass-screen-mod.html
More Ideas: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/index2.html
Dripping:
Some owners eschew filler altogether and choose to "direct drip." This simply means to take the filler out of the cartridge and "drip" 2-3 drops of liquid directly on the atomizer coil. Then, replace the mouthpiece and use as normal. Be careful not to over drip or you will flood the atomizer! Proponents of this method feel this gives a more consistant vapor and throat hit, without relying on filler materials.
Here is a modification made to aid with the drip method: Direct Drip Cart Mod (DDC)
There is also a cool little gadget for dripping called an e-Dobbit: .. : Sticker to it!, Vinyl Graphics & Lettering
Dipping:
Similar to dripping, dipping delivers the liquid directly to the atomizer. Dipping does not work well with the 510 atomizer, as the coil is recessed within its casing. Other models have an exposed atomizer coil, which allows for the owner to "dip" the coil into a small container of liquid. If you would like to try dipping with your 510, you can purchase a 306 model atomizer, which is compatible with the 510 battery. Proponents of this method sometimes prefer this over dripping, because it is less likely to flood the atomizer.
Chargers
There are three common chargers available for most 510 batteries: USB, AC and PCC.
USB:
Charges a single battery and plugs directly into your computer’s USB port. Place the threaded end of the battery in the hole and screw it in place until the light turns red. It will turn green when charged.
AC:
Charges a single battery and plug into a standard wall outlet. Has a removable cord. Also has a port for a car charger. Place the threaded end of the battery in the hole and screw it in place until the light turns red. It will turn green when charged.
PCC (Personal Charging Case):
Charges a single battery and also holds one atomizer and two cartridges. Plugs into a USB port, with a mini USB on one end and a standard USB on the other. Place the battery in the far right hole, thread side down. The pressure from the lid will push it into place to charge - it does not screw in place.
There are three lights on the PCC:
Top Light - Red indicates a battery is charging. Turns off when charged.
Middle Light - Red indicates the PCC battery is too low to charge the battery inside.
Bottom Light - Red indicates the PCC needs to be charged. Green means the PCC is fully charged and ready for your battery.
USB to AC Adapter: Allows any USB cord to plug into a standard AC outlet.
USB Car Charger Adapter: Allows any USB cord to plug into a car lighter outlet.
Car Charger: Allows the AC charger to charge a battery using a car lighter outlet.
e-Liquid
This is the liquid which gets vaporized by the atomizer. If you bought pre-filled cartridges, it has already been filled by the manufacturer. If you bought empty cartridges, you need to buy the liquid from a reputable vendor. Some liquids are factory-made in China and resold directly to the customers. Some liquids are custom-made by the vendor. The best way to decide on which liquid to buy is to visit the Supporting Suppliers forums: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/supporting-suppliers/ and read what their customers have to say about them.
e-Liquid is made of water, propylene or vegetable glycol, nicotine and food flavoring. Some also contain glycerine.
Common Nicotine Levels:
NONE (Zero)
Extra Low: 6-8MG
Low: 10-12mg
Medium: 16-18mg
High: 24-26mg
Extra High: 36mg
For Mixing/Diluting Only: 48mg, 60mg
Some vendors have created special mixes for higher temperature devices, which also work well with the 510 manual batteries. No one can tell you what tastes the best, it’s a matter of trial and error. It’s recommended that you buy samples from different vendors and find what works for you.
You can mix flavors to create your own. A couple of drops of "cola" with a drop or two of "vanilla" makes a great vanilla coke! Experiment and have fun. Don't limit yourself to just tobacco flavors, either - it's one of the best features of vaping.
Some people new to vaping complain that the flavors of the liquids are too faint or all taste the same in the 510. Give it some time. You have to break in/season the atomizer, to really get the full flavor. Also, after being off tobacco cigarettes for a few days, your taste buds will start to recover and the flavors will become more distinct. Some vendors even offer an option to double the flavor in their liquids. After a while, you be noticing all of the subtle tastes and smells you've been missing all of this time!
If you like menthol, you can increase the menthol content of your liquid by adding menthol crystals or menthol drops. Suprisingly, menthol liquid is popular with both former menthol tobacco smokers and non-menthol smokers alike. It's believed to add extra throat hit to other flavors, as well. Read more: Menthol fans!
It's recommended that you use a fresh atomizer for each flavor, as it's difficult to get certain flavors, such as menthol or clove, out if the atomizer wick. You don't want to have to do a throrough cleaning and wait 48 hours for drying time, every time you want to change flavors. So, get a new atomizer for each flavor you use. Some people label their atomizers or color code it with paint/nailpolish. You can also put the atomizer, with the cartridge, into a Ziploc Snack Bag with it's bottle, to keep them organized.
This guide is meant to be a primer and is not the definative guide to the Joye510! You can get advice and read more about your new 510 in the Model Specific Forum: Joye 510 - e-cigarette-forum.com • The place for electronic cigarette reviews, news and chat
Now that you have your new device, you may have heard that there is a bit of a learning curve. This guide is meant to answer the most common questions about the use and maintenance of the 510 model.
.........................................
Guide Index:
What to Order
--Starter Kit
--E-Liquid/Nicotine
Getting Started
510 Components
--Battery
----Automatic
----Manual
----USB Pass-through
--Atomizer
----Flooding
----Cleaning
----Burnt/Chemical/Harsh Taste
--Cartridge/Mouthpiece
----Loose Fitting Cartridge
--Filler
----Filler Modifications
----Dripping
----Dipping
--Chargers--E-Liquid
........................................
What to Order
The following list is what is most commonly advised by experienced owners for a basic starter kit:
2-4 Batteries
2-4 Atomizers
USB or AC Charger
Personal Charging Case
USB Pass-through
Empty Cartridges
Extra FillerTweezers (Pointed tip)
e-Liquid Nicotine Strength Recommendations:
Occasional Smoker: Zero to Low
Up to 1 pack/day: Low to Medium
Up to 2 packs/day: Medium to High
Over 2 packs/day: High to Extra High
Getting Started
When you first get your device, you will want to set it up properly for the best experience.
First, fully charge your batteries. Place them in the charger until the light turns green. Some recommend to charge for a minimum of 4 hours, regardless of the green light.
Second, blow out your atomizer. The atomizer comes from the factory with a “primer fluid” to keep it moist, but it tastes terrible. Simply place your mouth over the threaded end and blow hard onto a paper towel until no more liquid comes out.
Third, fill your cartridge. DO NOT OVERFILL. Use the dropper to drip the liquid until it no longer absorbs into the filler. Usually around 15 drops. If some liquid pools at the top, dab with a paper towel.
Fourth, drip TWO drops directly onto the metal coil in the atomizer.
Finally, attach the cartridge to the atomizer and then screw the atomizer onto the fully charged battery.
NOTE: There may still be some primer fluid on the atomizer, so you want to take a few puffs into your mouth and blow it directly out, to get the liquid flowing into the atomizer. Give 20-30 seconds between puffs, so the atomizer doesn’t get too hot. If you continue to taste a burnt/chemical taste, this is the atomizer burning off the primer fluid. Continue to “puff & blow” until the taste diminishes. If the taste gets worse, add two more drops directly onto atomizer again and continue to “puff and blow.”
For more information on the “burnt/bitter/chemical” taste issues, see this link: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/42077-10-tips-avoid-harsh-burnt-taste-510-atomizers.html
Once the primer fluid has burned off, you should be good for up to 20 puffs before you have to "top off" (adding a couple of drops to the filler) or refilling. Read the sections below on cartridge modifications for optimal filling techniques and using the batteries properly.
Remember that this is NOT a tobacco cigarette. You don't draw on it as you would a cigarette. You want to take it easy on the draw. Slowly inhale, to allow the atomizer time to heat the liquid. Don't draw on it hard or you'll end up with a mouthful of unvaporized liquid!
510 Components
Battery
This is what powers your device. It is recommended that you charge it fully before first use. Batteries come in assorted body colors and LED colors. They are also available with no LED. Batteries come in automatic and manual styles.
Automatic:
The automatic has a switch built into it that activates by the air that rushes through it when you inhale. It is good for hands-free use, however, it is very sensitive and is known to activate by sound and light impact. This may cause it to turn on while in a pocket or purse and may have to be recharged more frequently. Automatic batteries also have an automatic shutoff built in that frustrates some users who want a longer, deeper draw. The automatic batteries have a hole in them to allow air flow for the switch. Consequently, it is recommended that caution be used not to overfill the cartridge, direct drip or flood the atomizer, because it can get into the battery. (More on flooding & dripping later.)
When using an automatic battery, it is recommended to employ a "primer puff" before every draw, to pre-heat the atomizer for optimal vapor production. This is taking a short puff, followed by the actual inhale draw.
Manual:
The manual switch activated with a button. It is generally the more popular option with experienced vapers, because it allows more control over the draw and heat. It also allows the atomizer to get a little hotter and produce more vapor. It usually does not have a shutoff built in. With this kind of use, the battery life tends to be shorter. The manual battery does not have any hole and therefore, better adapted for dripping and less susceptible to damage from the liquid.
When using a manual battery, a "primer puff" is not needed. Simply press the button before you begin your draw, then release after you are finished.
Regular & Extra Long Batteries:
The 510 has two lengths of batteries available. The regular length is what comes in most kits. An extra long version is available from some vendors. The extra long battery, also known as the Titan MEGA, lasts longer, however, it takes longer to charge and will not fit in the 510 Personal Charging Case.
USB Pass-through:
This accessory allows for direct power from a computer or AC outlet. It looks like a battery, but has a cord with a USB plug. It can be plugged directly into a computer USB port or into a USB AC or Car Adapter and plugged into an AC outlet or car lighter outlet. There are two versions of this accessory – one has an actual battery that is continuously recharged by the USB port (in a small battery case near the plug) and the other just has wires that go directly from the connector to the USB plug. Neither has an LED.
Atomizer
The atomizer (atty) is a heating element that heats up the liquid and turns it into a vapor. One end screws into the battery and the other end fits the cartridge. It consists of a small pot or chamber, which holds a reserve of the liquid. There is a metal mesh coil or “bridge,” which draws in the liquid from the cartridge to a fiberglass wick. The heating element heats up the liquid and turns it into a vapor, which is then drawn back through vents in the mouthpiece by the user. The 510 atomizer is often the source of issues with performance and taste.
Flooding:
If you get a “gurgling” sound when you draw on the device, you have flooded the atomizer. This means that there is too much liquid in the atomizer for it to properly vaporize. Remove the atomizer from the battery and cartridge and blow out the excess liquid onto a paper towel from the threaded end.
Cleaning:
The atomizers, by design, are not meant to last forever. However, you may be able to extend the life of your atomizer and improve performance with occasional cleaning. There are many tried and UN-proven methods for cleaning, some more successful than others. Most agree that occasionally blowing out the atomizer is a safe practice, as the liquid tends to build up in the atomizer.
Some signs that your atomizers may need cleaning are:
-Reduced vapor production
-Hard or difficult draw
-Burnt/Harsh taste
Here are the recommendations by the manufacturer, Joye Technologies: 510 usage and maintenance instructions from Joye Technology
The following cleaning methods have been tried by various ECF members. It is advised that these cleaning methods be tried ONLY AS A LAST RESORT. There are many, many opinions on cleaning and it is STRONGLY suggested that you read the various threads on this topic.
Hot Water Rinse: Run under VERY hot water. Dry 48 hours.
Soaking/Baths: Soak in one of the following; Everclear or 100 proof vodka, isopropyl alcohol, diet cola, Polident (denture cleaner), hydrogen peroxide, vinegar or ice machine cleaner. Rinse VERY well under hot running water. Dry 48 hours.
Read more on these methods:http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/38167-cleaning-atomizers-5.html
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/experiments-equipment/10475-cola-method-taken-another-level-works.html
Hot Water Boil: Boil for 2-3 minutes, stirring continuously. Dry 48 hours.
Hot Water Boil w/Baking Soda: As above but with 1 tbsp baking soda added to the water. Rinse well. Dry 48 hours.
Dry Burn: Rinse under hot water. Dry 48 hours. Attach atomizer to battery. Press and hold battery button 4-7 seconds. Repeat until there is no vapor produced during the dry burn.
Burnt/Chemical/Bad Tastehttp://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/42077-10-tips-avoid-harsh-burnt-taste-510-atomizers.html
Cartridge/Mouthpiece
The cartridge on a 510 is more complex than it seems at first glance. It is a combination of mouthpiece and filler/liquid chamber. One end is open to a chamber to add the filler material and liquid, the other end has another, smaller chamber, which is closed off with a removable end cap, with a hole in the center. This end can be round or have a “whistle tip,” which is flattened on two sides. If you look closely, there are two slots on the flat sides of the liquid chamber, going into the mouthpiece chamber. This is how the vapor gets from the atomizer to the mouth. The vapor does not travel through the filler material, it travels around the liquid chamber, into the mouthpiece chamber. When the filler end is fitted into the atomizer, the metal coil acts like a wick, drawing the liquid into the atomizer to be vaporized.
Loose Cartridges:
The diameter of 510 atomizer was recently made larger, resulting in the older, smaller cartridges not fitting properly and falling off. Loose cartridges were also a problem with the M-401 model and an ECF member came up with a modification to fix the problem. With the 510, you would make the modification to the outside of the cartridge, but you can get the idea here: Fixing loose cartridges on an M-401 electronic Cigarette
Filler
This is the material inside the refillable cartridge. It is a polyester batting material. It acts like a sponge, to keep the liquid from spilling out of the cartridge and available for the atomizer wick. This may be removed and replaced with another material, which is called a “modification” or “mod” for short. The liquid can eventually get "gummy" and affect the taste, throat hit or draw, so the filler should occasionally be removed, rinsed and dried for reuse.
Filler Modifications:
PTB (Pyramid Tea Bag) Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/34401-ptb-plug-full-510-cart-2.html
Straw Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/11421-cart-mod-better-refilling.html#post176708
Fluval Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/tips-tricks/20403-fluval-cartridge-restuffing-video-instructions.html
Blue Foam Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/27723-eheim-filterpad-mod.html
Brass Screen Mod: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/38161-brass-screen-mod.html
More Ideas: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/cartridge-mods/index2.html
Dripping:
Some owners eschew filler altogether and choose to "direct drip." This simply means to take the filler out of the cartridge and "drip" 2-3 drops of liquid directly on the atomizer coil. Then, replace the mouthpiece and use as normal. Be careful not to over drip or you will flood the atomizer! Proponents of this method feel this gives a more consistant vapor and throat hit, without relying on filler materials.
Here is a modification made to aid with the drip method: Direct Drip Cart Mod (DDC)
There is also a cool little gadget for dripping called an e-Dobbit: .. : Sticker to it!, Vinyl Graphics & Lettering
Dipping:
Similar to dripping, dipping delivers the liquid directly to the atomizer. Dipping does not work well with the 510 atomizer, as the coil is recessed within its casing. Other models have an exposed atomizer coil, which allows for the owner to "dip" the coil into a small container of liquid. If you would like to try dipping with your 510, you can purchase a 306 model atomizer, which is compatible with the 510 battery. Proponents of this method sometimes prefer this over dripping, because it is less likely to flood the atomizer.
Chargers
There are three common chargers available for most 510 batteries: USB, AC and PCC.
USB:
Charges a single battery and plugs directly into your computer’s USB port. Place the threaded end of the battery in the hole and screw it in place until the light turns red. It will turn green when charged.
AC:
Charges a single battery and plug into a standard wall outlet. Has a removable cord. Also has a port for a car charger. Place the threaded end of the battery in the hole and screw it in place until the light turns red. It will turn green when charged.
PCC (Personal Charging Case):
Charges a single battery and also holds one atomizer and two cartridges. Plugs into a USB port, with a mini USB on one end and a standard USB on the other. Place the battery in the far right hole, thread side down. The pressure from the lid will push it into place to charge - it does not screw in place.
There are three lights on the PCC:
Top Light - Red indicates a battery is charging. Turns off when charged.
Middle Light - Red indicates the PCC battery is too low to charge the battery inside.
Bottom Light - Red indicates the PCC needs to be charged. Green means the PCC is fully charged and ready for your battery.
USB to AC Adapter: Allows any USB cord to plug into a standard AC outlet.
USB Car Charger Adapter: Allows any USB cord to plug into a car lighter outlet.
Car Charger: Allows the AC charger to charge a battery using a car lighter outlet.
e-Liquid
This is the liquid which gets vaporized by the atomizer. If you bought pre-filled cartridges, it has already been filled by the manufacturer. If you bought empty cartridges, you need to buy the liquid from a reputable vendor. Some liquids are factory-made in China and resold directly to the customers. Some liquids are custom-made by the vendor. The best way to decide on which liquid to buy is to visit the Supporting Suppliers forums: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/supporting-suppliers/ and read what their customers have to say about them.
e-Liquid is made of water, propylene or vegetable glycol, nicotine and food flavoring. Some also contain glycerine.
Common Nicotine Levels:
NONE (Zero)
Extra Low: 6-8MG
Low: 10-12mg
Medium: 16-18mg
High: 24-26mg
Extra High: 36mg
For Mixing/Diluting Only: 48mg, 60mg
Some vendors have created special mixes for higher temperature devices, which also work well with the 510 manual batteries. No one can tell you what tastes the best, it’s a matter of trial and error. It’s recommended that you buy samples from different vendors and find what works for you.
You can mix flavors to create your own. A couple of drops of "cola" with a drop or two of "vanilla" makes a great vanilla coke! Experiment and have fun. Don't limit yourself to just tobacco flavors, either - it's one of the best features of vaping.
Some people new to vaping complain that the flavors of the liquids are too faint or all taste the same in the 510. Give it some time. You have to break in/season the atomizer, to really get the full flavor. Also, after being off tobacco cigarettes for a few days, your taste buds will start to recover and the flavors will become more distinct. Some vendors even offer an option to double the flavor in their liquids. After a while, you be noticing all of the subtle tastes and smells you've been missing all of this time!
If you like menthol, you can increase the menthol content of your liquid by adding menthol crystals or menthol drops. Suprisingly, menthol liquid is popular with both former menthol tobacco smokers and non-menthol smokers alike. It's believed to add extra throat hit to other flavors, as well. Read more: Menthol fans!
It's recommended that you use a fresh atomizer for each flavor, as it's difficult to get certain flavors, such as menthol or clove, out if the atomizer wick. You don't want to have to do a throrough cleaning and wait 48 hours for drying time, every time you want to change flavors. So, get a new atomizer for each flavor you use. Some people label their atomizers or color code it with paint/nailpolish. You can also put the atomizer, with the cartridge, into a Ziploc Snack Bag with it's bottle, to keep them organized.
This guide is meant to be a primer and is not the definative guide to the Joye510! You can get advice and read more about your new 510 in the Model Specific Forum: Joye 510 - e-cigarette-forum.com • The place for electronic cigarette reviews, news and chat
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
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 <http://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.
Contact:Matt Salmon
202.841.6729
msalmon@policyimpact.com
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 <http://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.
Contact:Matt Salmon
202.841.6729
msalmon@policyimpact.com
Monday, October 12, 2009
FDA Miscalculates Real Danger to Smokers
The FDA is at a loss.
It knows why people want to quit smoking tobacco cigarettes - exposure to first and second hand smoke is proven to cause numerous health problems, from heart disease to cancer.
Up until now, the only way thought to quit smoking was to cure nicotine addiction. Beat the nicotine cravings, beat the urge to smoke - or so the theory goes. Consequently, the term "smoking cessation" has become synonymous with curing nicotine addiction with the use of Nicotine Replacement Therapies or NRTs.
However, focusing solely on nicotine addiction has been proven to be ineffective.
FDA-approved medications are tested in clinical trials and the enthusiasm of participants, close monitoring and counseling may all inflate the success numbers found in those studies, according to a report released in a 2002 edition of Journal of the American Medical Association (Vol. 288, No. 10: 1260-1264). "These products are designed to help with the cravings associated with smoking, but not the behavioral aspects," stated co-author Professor Elizabeth Gilpin, of the University of California. The report also pointed out that NRTs were originally by prescription only, giving patients trying to quit access to a physician's support and behavioral counseling.(1)
In the 2006 study, "Nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: a meta-analysis," the authors wrote, "Due to relapse, the overall efficacy of NRT treatment in terms of additional ex-smokers declined from 10.7% over and above placebo (6.6% to 14.8%) after one year to 7.2% (3.8% to 11.3%) at an average of 4.3 years follow up. "
"Because the long-term benefit of NRT is modest," the study concluded, "tobacco dependence treatment might be better viewed as a chronic disorder, requiring repeated episodes of treatment."(2)
So, why the extraordinary failure rate?
What Nicotine Replacement Therapy and other medications designed to solely treat nicotine addiction fail to address is the basic human tendencies of habit and ritual. Smokers don't just crave the nicotine. The physical act of smoking becomes integrated into their everyday activities to the point where the smokers are essentially lost without it. They become loyal to their cigarette brand. They find just the right holder and the best lighter.
Certain activities trigger the desire to light up, mostly common activities such as morning coffee, driving or after a meal. Just as people may bite on pen caps, twirl their hair or chew their lip, the act of taking a cigarette out, fiddling with it, lighting it, the sensation of inhaling the smoke, the feel of the smoke at the back of the throat and seeing the smoke swirling in the air are all part of the comfort mechanism for a smoker. That comforting ritual and habit is far and away the greatest reason why treatments that focus solely on nicotine addiction fail. After a year, there shouldn't be any more cravings for nicotine. Ask smokers why they started up again and they'll most likely point to a stressful event or period that caused them to seek out the comforting ritual of smoking, giving them a sense of control over their stress, not the craving for nicotine.
Nicotine is already acknowledged by the FDA and medical professionals to be one of the safer ingredients in tobacco cigarettes, as it's commonly used medically to assist smokers in the attempt to quit. Therefore, the FDA and medical professionals must agree that the greater danger in cigarettes is contained in the actual smoke, the known source of the tar, ammonia, acetone, carbon monoxide and other toxins and carcinogens.(3) So, why isn't the urgency to improve the smoker's health focused on removing the exposure to smoke, rather than the addiction to nicotine? Up until now, there hasn't been any alternative.
Enter the Personal Vaporizer or "electronic cigarette," a device whose growing popularity has left the FDA at a loss of how to properly categorize it.
For the first time in history, there is a device which, when used in lieu of tobacco cigarettes, targets the smoker's ritual and habit instead of the nicotine addiction. Nicotine is still present in the electronic cigarette and smokers are still comforted by the look and feel, as if they are still smoking, but the component most lethal to tobacco cigarette smokers and bystanders - the smoke - is absent.
Unlike NRTs, the consumer decides when and if they will reduce or eliminate their nicotine intake. The nicotine liquid sold by reputable manufacturers is available in measured levels of nicotine content, chosen by the consumer to match their former tobacco use. It consists of water, propylene glycol, nicotine and flavoring. Propylene glycol, a substance which is generally recognized as safe and approved for human inhalation by the EPA (4), is often confused with diethylene glycol, which is a toxic ingredient found in tobacco cigarettes (and antifreeze.) Propylene glycol is actually FDA-approved for human consumption and is used as a base for consumable products such as imitation vanilla and toothpaste and is the same substance used to create theatrical fog.
In July 2009, the FDA announced that laboratory analysis of two brands of electronic cigarettes found traces (approximately 1%) of diethylene glycol in one cartridge and certain tobacco-specific toxins, which are also found in tobacco cigarettes and FDA-approved NRTs. (5) However, the agency's analysis was also quite positive in the fact that researchers did not find the dangerous levels of toxins and carcinogens, such as the tar, carbon monoxide, ammonia, etc., that is found in tobacco smoke.(6)
The FDA, however, objected to some manufacturers' claims that the electronic cigarette is a smoking cessation device - falling back on the now outdated view that smoking cessation must involve nicotine replacement therapy - and electronic cigarettes have not been proven effective as NRTs through the proper studies. Electronic cigarette companies countered that their products are not intended for use as an NRT smoking cessation device, but rather as a smokeless alternative - one that mimics the habits and rituals of tobacco smoking, without giving up the nicotine. An FDA rebuttal cited numerous reports, including testimonials on vendor web sites, that consumers were using the device as a way to quit smoking and that indicated "intended use." As all NRTs fall under FDA jurisdiction, electronic cigarettes, the agency maintained, must be tested and shown to be as effective as other medicinal drugs.
Another July 2009 press release stated, "The FDA has been examining and detaining shipments of e-cigarettes at the border and products it has examined thus far meet the definition of a combination drug-device product under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The FDA has been challenged regarding its jurisdiction over certain e-cigarettes in a case currently pending in federal district court. The agency is also planning additional activities to address its concerns about these products." (7)
Most would agree that the FDA has some valid points. The nicotine liquid does need to be regulated for consistency in ingredients, labeling and safe packaging. Studies should be done for the long-term effects of its use. Laws should be passed limiting the use and sale to legal adults. However, in its zeal to gain control over the regulation of electronic cigarettes, the FDA insisted that the product be removed from the market altogether, rather than cautious use while the studies are being made. This caused a snowball of misinformation in the media and gave the general public the impression that electronic cigarettes have all of the same dangers of tobacco cigarettes, if not worse. These concerns have prompted several anti-smoking groups and legislators to call for a complete ban of electronic cigarettes, ignoring the undeniable fact that, in the absence of an alternative, most electronic cigarette owners will return to smoking deadly tobacco cigarettes.
Because the FDA is at a loss as to how to categorize electronic cigarettes as a smoking cessation device without classification as an NRT and furthermore, by insisting that a smoking cessation device must address nicotine addiction, many believe the agency has miscalculated the greater danger facing current tobacco smokers - the actual smoke.
1. ACS News Center, "Smoking Cessation Aids Use Increases, Success Rate Declines" American Cancer Society
2. Jean-François Etter and John A Stapleton, "Nicotine replacement therapy for long-term smoking cessation: a meta-analysisTobacco Control
3. Terry Martin, The Effects of Smoking on Human Health. About
4. U.S. Environmengtal Protection Agency, Rerregistration Eligibility Decision For Propylene Glycol and Dipopylene Glycol. EPA
5. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FDA Warns of Health Risks Posed by E-Cigarettes FDA
6. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Summary of Results: Laboratory Analysis of Electronic Cigarettes Conducted By FDA FDA
7. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FDA and Public Health Experts Warn About Electronic Cigarettes FDA
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Negative Reactions Mystify Electronic Cigarette Owners
By Kristin Noll-Marsh
The booth at the Wisconsin State Fair Expo was black with big, gold lettering exclaiming, "Electronic Cigarettes - The Smoking Alternative!" Initially, I found the concept of electronic smoking laughable, as would most tobacco users. However, after dragging my husband over to the booth for a look, it only took us a moment to realize that this was a truly revolutionary invention. Surprisingly, the price was reasonable, too!
The vendor made it clear that it was not intended as a smoking cessation device, only a much safer and cheaper way to smoke. To date, there is no scientific proof that they are safer, but it didn't take a degree in rocket science to see that the absence of smoke, tar and a few thousand other ingredients - including the 60-70 known carcinogens and poisons found in tobacco - made the flavored nicotine liquid seem tame by comparison. Moreover, the ability to reduce the nicotine levels from high, medium and low to liquid containing no nicotine whatsoever was an appealing way to wean off nicotine altogether.
Of course, as soon as I got our new devices home, I had to log online to see what I could find out about them.
The first thing I found was a wide range of different devices and liquids available and not all devices are created equal.
Additionally, I found that a whole subculture has quickly built up around the new phenomenon of "vaping," the term coined by electronic cigarette owners to differentiate it from tobacco smoking. The electronic cigarette is known as a personal vaporizer, as it produces a fine mist or vapor, similar to the steam from a cup of hot coffee. Tobacco cigarettes are amusingly called "analogs." Personal vaporizer owners who have quit using tobacco cigarettes proudly consider themselves non-smokers.
"I feel free of cigarettes for the first time in my life," said James Solie, of Hudson, WI. Solie said his life has changed in so many ways since he has quit smoking. "I used to go to bed at night and could smell the smoke on myself, and it wasn't good. I don't miss that. I just feel better in every way imaginable. I breathe better, don't have that nasty congestion in the morning. My throat feels better. My sense of smell, thus taste, is much better." Solie added that his wife is happy that he has quit smoking, as well.
The fact that personal vaporizer owners are no longer smoking is difficult for non-smokers and smoke-free advocates to understand, because vapor looks similar in appearance to smoke. Thus many advocates welcomed recent news of the FDA's proposed ban on certain electronic cigarettes, due to safety concerns, and proposed bans on their use in public spaces in municipalities in New York, Connecticut and Oregon. Vaporizer owners fear the public has been falsely led to believe that personal vaporizers aren't any different than tobacco cigarettes.
"Because vaping looks like smoking people immediately associate the two and come to a bad conclusion," said Scott Brower, of Santa Clarita, CA. Brower said he was an occasional pipe and cigar tobacco smoker, but now enjoys only nicotine-free electronic pipes and cigars. "They need to be educated to understand the fundamental differences."
On the FDA report, Brower said, "The announcement was rushed and omitted critical details. What should have been a scientific process and conclusion felt more political and reactionary. While I applaud their recognition of vaping and the need for testing, I also have to admonish their lack of care and due process. The FDA serves a critical role and I want them to take a very hard look at vaping. However, they must follow the scientific method to the letter if they are to fulfill their purpose.
Given the potential significance of this to real tobacco users, and their fair and accurate treatment of this is literally life and death for millions."
Brower's response was typical of many vaporizer owners - one of shock and disbelief at the knee-jerk public and governmental reaction. It is hard for them to see the logic in allowing the sale and use of tobacco cigarettes, which are proven to contain dozens of poisons and carcinogens and create second-hand smoke while attempting to ban the vaporizers, which were found, in the FDA's own research, to possibly only contain trace amounts of adverse ingredients. As Brower pointed out, those results were based on incomplete data collected from only a few samples - out of hundreds of different liquids and cartridges available on the market.
Dr. Michael Siegel is a professor at Boston University School of Public Health and a physician who specialized in preventive medicine and public health. On his blog, The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary, he commented, "With the FDA now approving the sale and marketing of conventional cigarettes, it is absurd to think that the Agency would spend so much of its energy on an attempt to remove this much safer alternative from the market, while ignoring the very real threat posed by the cigarettes being smoked by 45 million Americans."
"While further testing of electronic cigarettes is certainly warranted, and while restrictions on the sales of these products to minors and the types of marketing claims that can be made are reasonable," Dr. Siegel stated, "it would be criminal to take these products off the market. Smokers who have found these products to be a life-saver, allowing them to stay off regular cigarettes, should be permitted to have the choice of continuing to use the product while more definitive studies are conducted."
Other physicians seem to agree with his conclusions.
Just a few days before she started using a personal vaporizer, Julie Williams of Manchester, TN had a blood pressure reading of 230/110 and her heart rate was elevated. "I was on medication but it wasn't working," she recalled. "Within a week of vaping and only smoking 2-3 cigarettes a day, all my numbers went down to normal ones. My primary care doctor and cardiologist both attribute the change to me stopping smoking and vaping [instead.] Both doctors are telling other patients about e-cigs." She said she has now quit smoking tobacco cigarettes altogether. "Both my primary care physician and my cardiologist are behind me 100% in my vaping. I even vape in the exam rooms while we discuss my ongoing treatments."
Williams' doctors don't seem too concerned about alleged "second-hand vapor" either, unlike a few legislators and anti-smoking groups across the country, such as Suffolk County, NY, which, sponsored by Majority Leader Jon Cooper (D-Lloyd Neck), bans e-cigarette use in public spaces.
"There is no substantial evidence that these devices do any harm to the user or bystanders around the user," argued Spike Babaian, of Long Island, NY, in a recent press release. "Despite the plethora of evidence provided to the Suffolk County legislature, that shows evidence that these devices are no more harmful than consuming a hot dog, they have determined that the "stress, fear and confusion," which the public could potentially feel due to the presence of the fog, was sufficient reason to force vapers to follow the Suffolk County smoking ordinance and utilize these devices only in areas where smoking is allowed."
"This restriction would push thousands of non-smoking Suffolk County residents who utilize nicotine vaporizers into smoking areas where they would be exposed to the second hand smoke and toxic chemicals that they quit smoking to avoid," continued Babian. "This is a clear violation of the civil rights of non-smokers who wish to avoid the toxic chemicals given off by cigarette smoke. This law was passed based on public fear, rather than fact, and the total disregard for the safety of these former smokers is an unjustifiable disgrace. Suffolk County’s Health and Human Services Committee, which is supposed to protect the health of Suffolk County residents, has put "psychological discomfort" of the minority ahead of physical health and that is an unforgivable offense."
Aside from putting electronic cigarette owners back into the toxic cloud produced by tobacco smoke, personal vaporizer owners point out that their vapor doesn’t contain the amounts of lethal toxins nor does it behave in the same manner as cigarette smoke. The vapor isn't created unless actively in use, unlike the smoke that continuously comes from a lit cigarette and it doesn't appear to travel more than a couple of feet from the user. It also tends to dissipate more quickly than smoke, making it fairly undetectable and unobtrusive for those nearby, so presenting the two as the same thing is misleading.
In addition to the "second-hand vapor," legislators and anti-smoking groups such as ASH, the national anti-smoking group Action on Smoking and Health, argue that the electronic cigarettes are being marketed to appeal to children, specifically through fruit and candy-like flavors. Such claims leave a bad taste in vapers mouths.
"I didn't know that once I grew up I had to stop liking things that taste good," said a confused Julie Williams. "You can get the [nicotine] gum in a number of flavors and they are out in the open for any kid to grab. What is a kid going to choose to buy...an e-cig that they have to save up to buy online ($50 and up for a starter kit) or a pack of cigarettes they can get anywhere for $5.00?"
Ed Corcoran, of Lowell, MA, was equally shocked by the allegations. "I think that's ludicrous," he said. "Many alcohol products have sweet, fruity flavors. No one accuses those manufacturers of marketing their products to children based on that criteria. Just because something is meant for adults only, that doesn't mean it has to taste bad."
Others counter that many children get access to cigarettes because of the low cost or sneaking cigarettes from a parent – something which is almost impossible to do unnoticed with a personal vaporizer. And even if a child decided to spend over $100 on equipment and liquid refills and lie about their age to obtain it, what reason would they have to order a fruity flavor filled with nicotine? Nicotine produces no pleasant "rush" or "high" for a non-smoker and the liquids are available nicotine-free, with the same taste. The accusation holds no credibility and defies logic.
Many proponents of personal vaporizers have begun to suspect that the bad press is being manufactured and research results are being misrepresented purely for financial gain. Simple research online reveals that their claim can easily be substantiated.
ASH, one of the loudest opponents to electronic cigarettes and often a source of exaggerated or false propaganda, reportedly receives huge contributions from Pfizer Inc., the maker of numerous nicotine replacement drugs designed to assist smokers with quitting cigarettes. One of their products is Chantix, already known by the FDA to have been related to 78 deaths, 28 of which were suicides. Yet, the FDA has not banned that particular smoking cessation product and is going after electronic cigarettes, which have thus far not had any reported adverse effects or related deaths.
"If e-cigarettes really take off, they represent a huge threat to the profits of pharmaceutical companies, and in turn, they represent a threat to future funding of ASH," explained Dr. Siegel on his blog. "This conflict of interest is significant, but ASH has failed to disclose it in any of its statements about the dangers of electronic cigarettes. Each of the other anti-smoking groups which have warned the public about the dangers of e-cigarettes is also heavily funded by Big Pharma. Is this merely a coincidence? I think not."
While reputable electronic cigarette manufacturers and resellers do not advertise their product as a smoking cessation device, it is hard to ignore the anecdotal evidence that they end up being just that for many tobacco smokers who switch exclusively to personal vaporizers. It is common knowledge that most FDA-approved medical alternatives, such as nicotine gum and patches, are dismal failures, with some studies showing less than a 6.75% success rate after six months.
"The drugs are approved because they've shown in FDA studies that they're better than placebo," said Dr. Edward Levin, a psychopharmacological researcher at Duke University Medical Center in Raleigh, N.C., in a recent CNN article. "But being better than placebo doesn't take a whole lot, so there really is room for improvement." A University of Wisconsin study showed that the most successful drug, Chantix, only had a 44% success rate during 12 weeks of use. That success dropped to one in four in the weeks after the treatment was stopped.
In contrast, a survey of personal vaporizer owners at an electronic cigarette support site shows that 79% of respondents indicated that they have successfully quit smoking tobacco cigarettes. Some continue to use nicotine doses, others have reduced or eliminated the nicotine altogether. They feel that the gradual reduction of nicotine intake, with a familiar and comforting delivery system, allows them to immediately remove the known dangers of cigarette smoke while weaning off the nicotine.
Some may even continue to use the devices purely for recreational use, even with the nicotine. They see no difference in enjoying their nicotine alternative like others who enjoy recreational use of alcohol, caffine or chocolate. Personal vaporizers give them a way to do this without affecting those around them, as cigarette smoke did. Nicotine is a legal substance and adults should be allowed to enjoy it responsibly, they argue.
Dawn Brain, of Smith Mountain Lake, VA, did not start using personal vaporizers to quit smoking, she only wanted a lower cost alternative.
"I didn't start using them for health reasons," Brain said. "I decided to try [personal vaporizers] because I was tired of the cost of cigarettes going up. When the price of the brand I was smoking went from $23 to $35 in one week I was fed up. If I had not had PVs to turn to I would have kept smoking and just grumbled about the fact that my cost went up by 50% over night, but this time I had an option and I jumped on it.
"Added to the cost benefit," Brain continued, "I liked the fact that my house and clothes would no longer smell like cigarettes and I wouldn't be putting 35 cigarette butts into the landfill daily. I no longer have to worry about my cats knocking over my ashtray and having to clean up ashes and butts."
"It never occurred to me that I would feel so much better, be able to breathe deeply for the first time in 23 years, and be able to taste things that had lost much of their flavor from my smoking."
Electronic cigarettes may save many lives, providing the FDA doesn’t make them illegal. Responsible vaporizer owners are mystified about the reactions to the revolutionary device, and hope that as the public becomes more knowledgeable, they will be more positively received.
Thanks to a chance encounter at the expo that day, my husband and I are now ex-smokers. Like thousands of other personal vaporizer owners, who are now smoke free, I wonder how can that be considered a bad thing?
__________________________________________________________
Dr. Michael Siegel, My Op-Ed in Hartford Courant Calls for a Scientific, Not an Ideological or Political Response to the Electronic Cigarette Issue, The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary
Dr. Michael Siegel, Action on Smoking and Health Warns Public of the Dangers of "Secondhand Electronic Cigarette Smoke", The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary
U.S. Food & Drug Administration, Summary of Results: Laboratory Analysis of Electronic Cigarettes Conducted By FDA , FDA.gov
Suffolk County Legislature, Resolution No. 717: A local law banning the sale of e-cigarettes to persons under the age of 19, legis.suffolkcountyny.gov
Spike Babaian, Suffolk County, New York says Former Smokers are still "Smoking", PRLog.org
Aaron Smith, Antismoking drugs go up in smoke, CNNMoney.com
E-cigarette-forum.com Poll, E-Cig Success Rate?, e-cigarette-forum.com
National Cancer Institute, Cigarette Smoking and Cancer: Questions and Answers, Cancer.gov
John R. Polito , Chantix blamed for 3,063 serious injuries and 78 deaths, WhyQuit.com
__________________________________________________________
Kristin Noll-Marsh is a real estate consultant, blogger, freelance writer and now an ex-smoker in Antigo, WI.
The booth at the Wisconsin State Fair Expo was black with big, gold lettering exclaiming, "Electronic Cigarettes - The Smoking Alternative!" Initially, I found the concept of electronic smoking laughable, as would most tobacco users. However, after dragging my husband over to the booth for a look, it only took us a moment to realize that this was a truly revolutionary invention. Surprisingly, the price was reasonable, too!
The vendor made it clear that it was not intended as a smoking cessation device, only a much safer and cheaper way to smoke. To date, there is no scientific proof that they are safer, but it didn't take a degree in rocket science to see that the absence of smoke, tar and a few thousand other ingredients - including the 60-70 known carcinogens and poisons found in tobacco - made the flavored nicotine liquid seem tame by comparison. Moreover, the ability to reduce the nicotine levels from high, medium and low to liquid containing no nicotine whatsoever was an appealing way to wean off nicotine altogether.
Of course, as soon as I got our new devices home, I had to log online to see what I could find out about them.
The first thing I found was a wide range of different devices and liquids available and not all devices are created equal.
Additionally, I found that a whole subculture has quickly built up around the new phenomenon of "vaping," the term coined by electronic cigarette owners to differentiate it from tobacco smoking. The electronic cigarette is known as a personal vaporizer, as it produces a fine mist or vapor, similar to the steam from a cup of hot coffee. Tobacco cigarettes are amusingly called "analogs." Personal vaporizer owners who have quit using tobacco cigarettes proudly consider themselves non-smokers.
"I feel free of cigarettes for the first time in my life," said James Solie, of Hudson, WI. Solie said his life has changed in so many ways since he has quit smoking. "I used to go to bed at night and could smell the smoke on myself, and it wasn't good. I don't miss that. I just feel better in every way imaginable. I breathe better, don't have that nasty congestion in the morning. My throat feels better. My sense of smell, thus taste, is much better." Solie added that his wife is happy that he has quit smoking, as well.
The fact that personal vaporizer owners are no longer smoking is difficult for non-smokers and smoke-free advocates to understand, because vapor looks similar in appearance to smoke. Thus many advocates welcomed recent news of the FDA's proposed ban on certain electronic cigarettes, due to safety concerns, and proposed bans on their use in public spaces in municipalities in New York, Connecticut and Oregon. Vaporizer owners fear the public has been falsely led to believe that personal vaporizers aren't any different than tobacco cigarettes.
"Because vaping looks like smoking people immediately associate the two and come to a bad conclusion," said Scott Brower, of Santa Clarita, CA. Brower said he was an occasional pipe and cigar tobacco smoker, but now enjoys only nicotine-free electronic pipes and cigars. "They need to be educated to understand the fundamental differences."
On the FDA report, Brower said, "The announcement was rushed and omitted critical details. What should have been a scientific process and conclusion felt more political and reactionary. While I applaud their recognition of vaping and the need for testing, I also have to admonish their lack of care and due process. The FDA serves a critical role and I want them to take a very hard look at vaping. However, they must follow the scientific method to the letter if they are to fulfill their purpose.
Given the potential significance of this to real tobacco users, and their fair and accurate treatment of this is literally life and death for millions."
Brower's response was typical of many vaporizer owners - one of shock and disbelief at the knee-jerk public and governmental reaction. It is hard for them to see the logic in allowing the sale and use of tobacco cigarettes, which are proven to contain dozens of poisons and carcinogens and create second-hand smoke while attempting to ban the vaporizers, which were found, in the FDA's own research, to possibly only contain trace amounts of adverse ingredients. As Brower pointed out, those results were based on incomplete data collected from only a few samples - out of hundreds of different liquids and cartridges available on the market.
Dr. Michael Siegel is a professor at Boston University School of Public Health and a physician who specialized in preventive medicine and public health. On his blog, The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary, he commented, "With the FDA now approving the sale and marketing of conventional cigarettes, it is absurd to think that the Agency would spend so much of its energy on an attempt to remove this much safer alternative from the market, while ignoring the very real threat posed by the cigarettes being smoked by 45 million Americans."
"While further testing of electronic cigarettes is certainly warranted, and while restrictions on the sales of these products to minors and the types of marketing claims that can be made are reasonable," Dr. Siegel stated, "it would be criminal to take these products off the market. Smokers who have found these products to be a life-saver, allowing them to stay off regular cigarettes, should be permitted to have the choice of continuing to use the product while more definitive studies are conducted."
Other physicians seem to agree with his conclusions.
Just a few days before she started using a personal vaporizer, Julie Williams of Manchester, TN had a blood pressure reading of 230/110 and her heart rate was elevated. "I was on medication but it wasn't working," she recalled. "Within a week of vaping and only smoking 2-3 cigarettes a day, all my numbers went down to normal ones. My primary care doctor and cardiologist both attribute the change to me stopping smoking and vaping [instead.] Both doctors are telling other patients about e-cigs." She said she has now quit smoking tobacco cigarettes altogether. "Both my primary care physician and my cardiologist are behind me 100% in my vaping. I even vape in the exam rooms while we discuss my ongoing treatments."
Williams' doctors don't seem too concerned about alleged "second-hand vapor" either, unlike a few legislators and anti-smoking groups across the country, such as Suffolk County, NY, which, sponsored by Majority Leader Jon Cooper (D-Lloyd Neck), bans e-cigarette use in public spaces.
"There is no substantial evidence that these devices do any harm to the user or bystanders around the user," argued Spike Babaian, of Long Island, NY, in a recent press release. "Despite the plethora of evidence provided to the Suffolk County legislature, that shows evidence that these devices are no more harmful than consuming a hot dog, they have determined that the "stress, fear and confusion," which the public could potentially feel due to the presence of the fog, was sufficient reason to force vapers to follow the Suffolk County smoking ordinance and utilize these devices only in areas where smoking is allowed."
"This restriction would push thousands of non-smoking Suffolk County residents who utilize nicotine vaporizers into smoking areas where they would be exposed to the second hand smoke and toxic chemicals that they quit smoking to avoid," continued Babian. "This is a clear violation of the civil rights of non-smokers who wish to avoid the toxic chemicals given off by cigarette smoke. This law was passed based on public fear, rather than fact, and the total disregard for the safety of these former smokers is an unjustifiable disgrace. Suffolk County’s Health and Human Services Committee, which is supposed to protect the health of Suffolk County residents, has put "psychological discomfort" of the minority ahead of physical health and that is an unforgivable offense."
Aside from putting electronic cigarette owners back into the toxic cloud produced by tobacco smoke, personal vaporizer owners point out that their vapor doesn’t contain the amounts of lethal toxins nor does it behave in the same manner as cigarette smoke. The vapor isn't created unless actively in use, unlike the smoke that continuously comes from a lit cigarette and it doesn't appear to travel more than a couple of feet from the user. It also tends to dissipate more quickly than smoke, making it fairly undetectable and unobtrusive for those nearby, so presenting the two as the same thing is misleading.
In addition to the "second-hand vapor," legislators and anti-smoking groups such as ASH, the national anti-smoking group Action on Smoking and Health, argue that the electronic cigarettes are being marketed to appeal to children, specifically through fruit and candy-like flavors. Such claims leave a bad taste in vapers mouths.
"I didn't know that once I grew up I had to stop liking things that taste good," said a confused Julie Williams. "You can get the [nicotine] gum in a number of flavors and they are out in the open for any kid to grab. What is a kid going to choose to buy...an e-cig that they have to save up to buy online ($50 and up for a starter kit) or a pack of cigarettes they can get anywhere for $5.00?"
Ed Corcoran, of Lowell, MA, was equally shocked by the allegations. "I think that's ludicrous," he said. "Many alcohol products have sweet, fruity flavors. No one accuses those manufacturers of marketing their products to children based on that criteria. Just because something is meant for adults only, that doesn't mean it has to taste bad."
Others counter that many children get access to cigarettes because of the low cost or sneaking cigarettes from a parent – something which is almost impossible to do unnoticed with a personal vaporizer. And even if a child decided to spend over $100 on equipment and liquid refills and lie about their age to obtain it, what reason would they have to order a fruity flavor filled with nicotine? Nicotine produces no pleasant "rush" or "high" for a non-smoker and the liquids are available nicotine-free, with the same taste. The accusation holds no credibility and defies logic.
Many proponents of personal vaporizers have begun to suspect that the bad press is being manufactured and research results are being misrepresented purely for financial gain. Simple research online reveals that their claim can easily be substantiated.
ASH, one of the loudest opponents to electronic cigarettes and often a source of exaggerated or false propaganda, reportedly receives huge contributions from Pfizer Inc., the maker of numerous nicotine replacement drugs designed to assist smokers with quitting cigarettes. One of their products is Chantix, already known by the FDA to have been related to 78 deaths, 28 of which were suicides. Yet, the FDA has not banned that particular smoking cessation product and is going after electronic cigarettes, which have thus far not had any reported adverse effects or related deaths.
"If e-cigarettes really take off, they represent a huge threat to the profits of pharmaceutical companies, and in turn, they represent a threat to future funding of ASH," explained Dr. Siegel on his blog. "This conflict of interest is significant, but ASH has failed to disclose it in any of its statements about the dangers of electronic cigarettes. Each of the other anti-smoking groups which have warned the public about the dangers of e-cigarettes is also heavily funded by Big Pharma. Is this merely a coincidence? I think not."
While reputable electronic cigarette manufacturers and resellers do not advertise their product as a smoking cessation device, it is hard to ignore the anecdotal evidence that they end up being just that for many tobacco smokers who switch exclusively to personal vaporizers. It is common knowledge that most FDA-approved medical alternatives, such as nicotine gum and patches, are dismal failures, with some studies showing less than a 6.75% success rate after six months.
"The drugs are approved because they've shown in FDA studies that they're better than placebo," said Dr. Edward Levin, a psychopharmacological researcher at Duke University Medical Center in Raleigh, N.C., in a recent CNN article. "But being better than placebo doesn't take a whole lot, so there really is room for improvement." A University of Wisconsin study showed that the most successful drug, Chantix, only had a 44% success rate during 12 weeks of use. That success dropped to one in four in the weeks after the treatment was stopped.
In contrast, a survey of personal vaporizer owners at an electronic cigarette support site shows that 79% of respondents indicated that they have successfully quit smoking tobacco cigarettes. Some continue to use nicotine doses, others have reduced or eliminated the nicotine altogether. They feel that the gradual reduction of nicotine intake, with a familiar and comforting delivery system, allows them to immediately remove the known dangers of cigarette smoke while weaning off the nicotine.
Some may even continue to use the devices purely for recreational use, even with the nicotine. They see no difference in enjoying their nicotine alternative like others who enjoy recreational use of alcohol, caffine or chocolate. Personal vaporizers give them a way to do this without affecting those around them, as cigarette smoke did. Nicotine is a legal substance and adults should be allowed to enjoy it responsibly, they argue.
Dawn Brain, of Smith Mountain Lake, VA, did not start using personal vaporizers to quit smoking, she only wanted a lower cost alternative.
"I didn't start using them for health reasons," Brain said. "I decided to try [personal vaporizers] because I was tired of the cost of cigarettes going up. When the price of the brand I was smoking went from $23 to $35 in one week I was fed up. If I had not had PVs to turn to I would have kept smoking and just grumbled about the fact that my cost went up by 50% over night, but this time I had an option and I jumped on it.
"Added to the cost benefit," Brain continued, "I liked the fact that my house and clothes would no longer smell like cigarettes and I wouldn't be putting 35 cigarette butts into the landfill daily. I no longer have to worry about my cats knocking over my ashtray and having to clean up ashes and butts."
"It never occurred to me that I would feel so much better, be able to breathe deeply for the first time in 23 years, and be able to taste things that had lost much of their flavor from my smoking."
Electronic cigarettes may save many lives, providing the FDA doesn’t make them illegal. Responsible vaporizer owners are mystified about the reactions to the revolutionary device, and hope that as the public becomes more knowledgeable, they will be more positively received.
Thanks to a chance encounter at the expo that day, my husband and I are now ex-smokers. Like thousands of other personal vaporizer owners, who are now smoke free, I wonder how can that be considered a bad thing?
__________________________________________________________
Dr. Michael Siegel, My Op-Ed in Hartford Courant Calls for a Scientific, Not an Ideological or Political Response to the Electronic Cigarette Issue, The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary
Dr. Michael Siegel, Action on Smoking and Health Warns Public of the Dangers of "Secondhand Electronic Cigarette Smoke", The Rest of the Story: Tobacco News Analysis and Commentary
U.S. Food & Drug Administration, Summary of Results: Laboratory Analysis of Electronic Cigarettes Conducted By FDA , FDA.gov
Suffolk County Legislature, Resolution No. 717: A local law banning the sale of e-cigarettes to persons under the age of 19, legis.suffolkcountyny.gov
Spike Babaian, Suffolk County, New York says Former Smokers are still "Smoking", PRLog.org
Aaron Smith, Antismoking drugs go up in smoke, CNNMoney.com
E-cigarette-forum.com Poll, E-Cig Success Rate?, e-cigarette-forum.com
National Cancer Institute, Cigarette Smoking and Cancer: Questions and Answers, Cancer.gov
John R. Polito , Chantix blamed for 3,063 serious injuries and 78 deaths, WhyQuit.com
__________________________________________________________
Kristin Noll-Marsh is a real estate consultant, blogger, freelance writer and now an ex-smoker in Antigo, WI.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
