Dangers Of Vaping Centered On Bad Products

are ecigs bad for you

The news media loves to talk about the dangers of vaping, even the fictional dangers that don’t scientifically exist. This isn’t a surprise, or at least it shouldn’t be. We all know that the media has a much better time with their ratings if they are scaring people. Just imagine you see a teaser for the news. It has ominous music and the narrator says “ecigs are very trendy, but the dangers of vaping are real and we’ll tell you about them tonight on the 10 o’clock news.” Think people are going to tune in to find out?

Of course they are. That’s just how the media game works and it is something you pick up on quite quickly if you just pay a little attention. That’s how the “if it bleeds, it leads” phrase became so well known. When that average American does turn on his or her nightly news broadcast feature about electronic cigarettes, they will undoubtedly be flooded with a bunch of scary threats. Lots of rumor and assumptions will come up and very soon they will end up thinking that the dangers of vaping are terrible. At the least, they’ll think that the benefits are far outweighed by those dangers.

There will obviously be comparisons made the analogue cigarettes, but they’ll stress the similarities. They’ll tell you how you are still ingesting nicotine and they’ll paint it in a way that leads you to believe nicotine is bad for you. In fact, that isn’t really the truth at all. They may tell you that there are dangers of second hand vaping, just like second hand smoke. Once again, that isn’t the truth either and nobody has scientifically proven that it is. All of these claims about the dangers of vaping are made by connecting dots that don’t really connect. But there is one danger that we know exists, and that is the one you should really be focusing on.

 

Real Dangers Of Vaping Products Exploding

Dangers Of Vaping Bad Products


Batteries are at the heart of the dangers of vaping, but it isn’t as if you should stop vaping (or not start at all). While the dangers of second hand vaping is pretty much a myth, there is real solid proof of this phenomenon of ecig batteries exploding.

We won’t paint a pretty picture here, because the reality is that it is beginning to get out of hand. Just in last week we have seen numerous news reports of people being injured by exploding ecig batteries.

But the news of an explosion that injured a mother of two in England and the one that injured a teenager in Canada are related. Just like they are related to the man in New Hampshire who suffered burns due to an ecig exploding. All of these incidents have to do with the real dangers of vaping; buying bad products.

We don’t mean bad products because they are overpriced. Nor do we mean to say they just don’t taste good or don’t produce the amount of vapor you want. No, we mean bad products because they don’t go through proper quality control. While most electronic cigarettes are made at least partly in China, there is a mammoth difference between purchasing from a reputable brand and something on a non-branded site or simply from ebay. It may be cheaper, but it heightens the dangers of vaping exponentially.

It’s true that sometimes there are faulty products and that can happen in any industry. But there is also a reason we don’t see anything negative like this in the news about any of the top brands we recommend. These are companies that have a reputation to uphold and so they take all the necessary precautions, and even the precautions that aren’t necessary. Whether driven out of a concern for their consumers or a concern for their public image, you’ll be hard-pressed to see anyone working harder to make sure that the product you buy doesn’t fail in such a dramatic way as to explode or otherwise put you in danger.

The other thing that is going on is the serious concern regarding counterfeit ecigs. Fakes are everywhere. The dangers of vaping have been exacerbated by the sheer volume of clone ecigs on the market. You will find cloned ecigs and vaping products all over the internet and sometimes even in vape shops. How bad is the problem? Here are some numbers that will shock most of you.

There are a handful or world-class ecig manufacturers in China. Eight Aspire, Kangertech, Smok, Innokin, Joyetech and a few others are exceptional. They make some of the best vaping products in the world. They have strict quality control and use only the best materials. These companies are located in an industrial area of Shenzhen, China. Within that same are are 600 ecig factories. 600!

Most of those factories are producing terrible knockoffs at rock bottom prices. The fakes look just like the real thing. They are being sold online through a number of retail and wholesale websites. Even vape shop owners are being fooled by some of these products. This is a serious problem and results in a lot of bad press for the industry when one of these clone ecigs is the root cause of some well publicized ecig accident.

If you are interested in a Kanger, Aspire, Joyetch product, you need to buy from a reputable source that knows what they are doing. The vaping business is booming and pretenders and fakes are trying to cash in as are the brands that are just blatantly selling junk! With no regulation in place it is buyer beware.

The real culprit here is greed. The dangers of second hand vaping aren’t real, nor are all these other accusations that just stoke people’s fears. No, the dangers of vaping lie in cheap ecigs. That’s why the FDA should be worried about cheap ecigs instead of fruity ecig flavors. As a consumer, make sure that these harrowing stories in the news don’t put you off from making the switch to vapor. All you have to do is make sure you buy from the right sources and you’ll be well on your way to leaving traditional tobacco cigarettes behind you, as well as ridiculous claims about the dangers of vaping.

Advertisements

E-quitting

e-cigarette.web

A five-year, first-in-Canada study, led by McGill cardiologist Dr. Mark Eisenberg, is exploring whether vaping really is the magic ticket to finally breathing free and easy.

By James Martin

Although the holidays may seem like a distant memory, statistically speaking, most of us are still sticking with our New Year’s resolutions. (For now. Let’s not talk about how many of us last until July.) For many, that means quitting smoking — and they’re hoping that electronic cigarettes will help. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, nearly half of all American smokers have tried e-cigarettes to help them kick the habit. But Dr. Mark Eisenberg wants to know: Is vaping really the magic ticket to breathing free and easy?

Dr. Eisenberg is passionate about getting people to butt out. He gives a lot of smoking cessation talks — just last month, he spoke at the Jewish General Hospital, where he is staff cardiologist — and has noticed that, invariably, reformed smokers come up to him afterward to sing the praises of e-cigarettes, those increasingly popular handheld battery-operated vaporizers that mimic conventional cigarettes.

“This is just a first step," says Dr. Mark Eisenberg of his five-year study." But the fact is that smoking is still the single most reversible cause of mortality in Canada — so it’s an important first step.”

“They say, ‘I smoked for decades and I’ve tried everything — nicotine gum, patches, Zyban, Champix — and I couldn’t stop. Then I picked up an e-cigarette and I never smoked again,’” recalls Eisenberg, who is also a professor in McGill’s Faculty of Medicine and director of the Joint MD/PhD program. “Anecdotally, we have many, many cases like this.”

What doctors don’t have, however, is hard data to back it up. That’s why, this month Eisenberg will start a five-year clinical trial to look at how effective e-cigarettes are at aiding smoking cessation. It’s not just smokers and physicians who are interested in such clarity — so are lawmakers. Under Canada’s Food and Drug Act, e-cigarettes containing nicotine cannot be imported, advertised or sold without Health Canada’s approval; nicotine-free e-cigarettes are not restricted. Although Health Canada has yet to grant such approval, nicotine-loaded e-cigarettes are nevertheless widely and openly available in Canada.

The study, which is funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), will follow 486 outpatient smokers at 19 sites across Canada. The smokers will be randomized into three groups. One group will be given e-cigarettes that contain nicotine and counselling. The second group will receive e-cigarettes that do not contain nicotine, and counselling. The third group will only receive counselling. The researchers will supply the smokers with e-cigarettes for 12 weeks, and then follow up with them after six months and a year, observing whether they graduate to total non-smoking, continue with the e-cigarettes, or return to conventional cigarettes. Although some reformed smokers may fall off the wagon after a smoke-free year, Eisenberg clarifies that “statistically significant results at 12 months would still be important evidence” for the efficacy of e-cigarettes as a cessation aid. All 486 patients will not be enrolled simultaneously, with the study expected to roll out over the course of five years.

“The ultimate goal is to use the e-cigarette as a transitional tool in going from smoking conventional cigarettes to not smoking at all,” says Eisenberg. He notes that, at least in the early stages, e-cigarettes are about “transferring the addiction. You’re getting people onto something else that is giving them their nicotine, so they may never quit. E-cigarettes also provide other physical and social aspects because they feel like a cigarette; a pack-a-day smoker makes that hand-to-mouth motion more than 70,000 times a year, for example. That’s a difficult thing to break away from, and a nicotine patch doesn’t provide it.

“We have great hopes that e-cigarettes will be helpful for people trying to quit smoking,” he adds. “Even if they just switch to smoking e-cigarettes that would be better than continuing to smoke conventional cigarettes for decades. I’m not saying that e-cigarettes are safe, but they’re much safer than conventional cigarettes. They’re not going to give you lung cancer. They’re not going to give you heart disease. They’re not going to give you emphysema.

“But what we’re really hoping for is that e-cigarettes lead people to not smoking altogether.”

(This particular study, Eisenberg notes, is not designed to investigate safety concerns, such as whether e-cigarette vapour contains trace elements of harmful substances. Other than their smoking habits, the trial’s participants are healthy, he explains, “so the chances that they’d have adverse effects over a short time like the course of one year are quite low.” The researchers will, however, track whether the smokers are hospitalized for any cardiopulmonary issues. They will also gather data about benign side effects, such as throat irritation.)

E-cigarettes are already big business, ringing up an estimated $500-plus million in sales in the U.S. alone — and that’s without being able to make any claims about helping smokers kick their habits. Eisenberg says that the e-cigarette industry itself isn’t clamouring to make such claims: “They don’t want to be regulated by the Food and Drug Administration [in the U.S.] and Health Canada, so they don’t want to support clinical trials,” he says. “And they don’t need to: Smokers are voting with their feet by buying e-cigarettes to help them quit smoking.” Governments, however, want more than anecdotal evidence.

“This study alone would not be enough for Health Canada to allow companies to market e-cigarettes as smoking cessation aids,” explains Eisenberg. “That said, if this trial shows that there is a substantial reduction in smoking traditional cigarettes, then Health Canada will have to rethink their policy.

“This is just a first step. Then we would need multiple big trials in multiple populations. We would need to use tapering [of nicotine levels] studies, and we would need to use interventions that are longer than 12 weeks. But the fact is that smoking is still the single most reversible cause of mortality in Canada — so it’s an important first step.”

Posted on Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Do e-cigarettes make it harder to stop smoking?

File picture taken on May 25, 2009 in Beiijng shows the inventor of the electronic cigarette, Hon Lik

People trying to give up smoking often use e-cigarettes to help wean themselves off tobacco. Most experts think they are safer than cigarettes but a surprising paper was published recently – it suggests that people who use e-cigarettes are less successful at giving up smoking than those who don’t.

“E-cigarettes WON’T help you quit,” reported the Daily Mail. “Smokers using vapers are ‘28% less likely to ditch traditional cigarettes,'” read the paper’s headline.

The story was reported on many other websites around the world, including CBS: “Study: E-cigarettes don’t help smokers quit,” it said.

The study causing the fuss was written by researchers at the Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education at the University of California, and published in one of the Lancet’s sister journals, Lancet Respiratory Medicine.

It is a meta-analysis, which means the authors reviewed the academic literature already available on the topic. They sifted out the weaker papers – ones that didn’t have control groups, for example – and were left with 20.

E-cigarettesImage copyrightiStock

The conclusion? Smokers who use e-cigarettes have a 28% lower chance of quitting than smokers who don’t use them, according to Prof Stanton Glantz, one of the authors.

But while the conclusion is surprising, so is the number of academics who have criticised the paper.

One was Ann McNeill, professor of tobacco addiction at Kings College London, whose own research is included in Glantz’s analysis.

“This review is not scientific,” she wrote on theScience Media Centre website.

“The information… about two studies that I co-authored is either inaccurate or misleading… I believe the findings should therefore be dismissed.

“I am concerned at the huge damage this publication may have – many more smokers may continue smoking and die if they take from this piece of work that all evidence suggests e-cigarettes do not help you quit smoking; that is not the case.”

Prof Peter Hajek, director of the Tobacco Dependence Research Unit at the Wolfson Institute also called the findings “grossly misleading”.

e-cigarettesImage copyrightiStock

The critics are making three main points. First, the definition of e-cigarettes is a bit loose. There are many different types – some look like cigarettes, others have tanks for the vaping liquid, some are disposable and other are multi-use. They all deliver different doses of nicotine. Many of the papers included in the analysis don’t specify which type people are using, according to Linda Bauld, professor of health policy at the University of Stirling.

Another point is that the studies vary in the way they measure how often people use e-cigarettes. “Some only assessed whether a person had ever tried an e-cigarette or if they had tried one recently, not whether they were using it regularly or frequently,” Bauld says.

Even the paper’s author admits it’s possible that in some of the studies e-cigarettes may only have been used once, which he says would not be a good predictor of whether they had affected people’s ability to stop smoking.

And there is another problem. You might expect, if you were going to draw conclusions about how useful e-cigarettes are in helping people quit, to focus on studies looking at people who are trying to give up.

Prof Robert West, who heads a team at University College London researching ways to help people stop smoking, says this analysis mashed together some very different studies – only some of which include people using e-cigarettes to help them quit.

Vape Lab employee uses an e-Cigarette while workingImage copyrightGetty Images

“To mix them in with studies where you’ve got people using an e-cigarette and are not particularly trying to stop smoking is mixing apples and oranges,” he says.

Some of the studies track smokers who use e-cigarettes for other reasons – perhaps because smoking a cigarette in a bar or an office is illegal and they want a nicotine hit.

“With the studies where people are using electronic cigarettes specifically in a quit attempt the evidence is consistent,” says West, referring to two randomised control trials.

Both are quite small and one was funded by the e-cigarette industry. They took two groups of smokers, and gave one real e-cigarettes, and the other a placebo. The studies reach a broadly similar conclusion to a large, real-world study called the Smoking Toolkit run by West.

West’s investigation follows people in their daily lives and assesses how successful various methods of giving up smoking are – this includes nicotine patches, medicines and going cold turkey.

These studies suggest that people using e-cigarettes to help them quit are 50% to 100% more successful than those who use no aids at all.

In his paper, Glantz acknowledges there are limitations to the research that he analysed. He agrees there are problems with the way the use of e-cigarettes is measured and accepts it’s not clear which devices people are using. But he is sticking by his analysis because he believes he has taken these factors into account.

The editor of Lancet Respiratory Medicine, Emma Grainger, defends the article too. She says she does not see a problem with the paper and that it has been through the normal peer-review process.

VapeCon International Expo in Riverside, CA (VC Official Recap)

Published on 22 Jan 2016

Vape Capitol’s Official Recap of VapeCon International in Riverside , CA.

Headlines about e-cigarettes don’t mean they’re ‘not safer than tobacco’

If your New Year’s resolution was to stop smoking, and you were looking for support to help you quit, then recent headlines suggesting e-cigarettes ‘aren’t any safer than tobacco’ might have raised an eyebrow or two.

Since Christmas, we’ve seen three sets of critical headlines about e-cigarettes, each looking at a different aspect of a device now used by millions across the UK.

But how accurately do these stories reflect the scientific evidence? What do we really know about how safe e-cigarettes are? Can they really help you quit? And do candy flavours attract kids?

If you were to go on the media reports alone, you’d be forgiven for being alarmed.

But as is so often the case in the reporting of science and risk, taking a deeper look behind the headlines reveals a very different story.

Just because they’re not “safe” doesn’t mean they aren’t “safer”

The first study to make the headlines suggested that e-cigarettes were ‘as harmful as tobacco’. After studying cells in the lab, the researchers found some indications of increased levels of DNA damage and cell death in those treated with e-cigarette vapour.

This led one of the researchers to tell the media, “I believe [e-cigarettes] are no better than smoking regular cigarettes.” (More on this statement below).

The most important thing to remember here is that this was a study looking at the effect of chemicals on cells in a lab. Although this can be useful, it obviously can’t give a clear idea of what the impact would actually be in your body. So any claims of impact on health based only on lab studies will always be far-fetched.

The study also looked at an extremely high concentration of vapour. As the researchers admitted at the time, “it was similar to someone smoking continuously for hours on end, so it’s a higher amount than would normally be delivered.”

It boils down to this: the study showed that it might be worse for your cells to be exposed to e-cigarette vapour than the air in a lab. So e-cigarettes might not be 100 per cent harm free. Andprevious studies have shown there may be some dangerous chemicals present in vapour – so this isn’t a surprise. And there’s little in life that really is ‘safe’ – even drinking too much water can kill you.

But here’s the big caveat. The researchers also treated some cells with tobacco smoke. These died within 24 hours. Those treated with e-cigarette vapour were still alive to experiment on 8 weeks later.

So, contrary to the headlines, this study actually suggests that using e-cigarettes may be far less dangerous than smoking.

You’d never believe that from the headlines though.

There were a few great critiques published shortly afterwards, (notably this one in the Guardian) and the press release was amended (more than a week later) to include the following correction:.

Contrary to what was stated or implied in much of the news coverage resulting from this news release, the lab experiments did not find that e-cigarette vapor was as harmful to cells as cigarette smoke. In fact, one phase of the experiments, not addressed in the news release, found that cigarette smoke did in fact kill cells at a much faster rate. However, because similar cell-damage mechanisms were observed as the result of both e-vapor and regular cigarette smoke, Dr. Wang-Rodriguez asserts, based on the evidence from the study, that e-cigarettes are not necessarily a healthier alternative to smoking regular cigarettes. As stated in the journal paper and the news release, further research is needed to better understand the actual long-term health effects of e-cigarettes in humans.

But we’re concerned that, as far as public perception goes, the damage may already have been done.

How can you tell if something helps people quit?

So the scientific evidence on e-cigarette vapour to date suggests it’s far safer than tobacco smoke.

But can e-cigarettes actually help you quit?

Here we come across the second set of unfortunate stories, after a systematic evidence review and meta-analysis published last week claimed that those using e-cigarettes seemed to be less likely to quit smoking than those not using the devices.

But, again, there are a number of serious problems with the review.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are usually extremely useful, because they pull together all the evidence in one area, to paint a fuller picture than one study alone.

However the relationship between this picture and reality depends entirely on the quality and relevance of the original studies that are included. In this case, since there haven’t been many high-quality trials exploring whether e-cigarettes help people quit smoking, the researchers included a range of different types of studies.

The gold standard of evidence is the randomised control trial, which, in this case, would compare a group of smokers trying to quit using a nicotine-containing e-cigarette, to a similar group using nothing (or an e-cigarette without nicotine). But here’s the problem – there have only been two published studies like that.

A 2014 meta-analysis of these found people using nicotine via an e-cigarette were more likely to successfully quit than those using e-cigarettes without nicotine.

Last week’s review included both of these randomised trials alongside a range of other ‘real-world’ non-trial studies of e-cigarette use. This is a big problem. Whatever their strengths individually, these studies didn’t use consistent measurements – neither of e-cigarette use, nor of whether people had actually quit – so the studies aren’t necessarily comparable. And so including them together in a meta-analysis is questionable, at best.

Even so, when the analysis only included studies where people were actively trying to quit (as opposed to using e-cigarettes for other reasons) the results became inconclusive – people who said they’d ‘ever’ used an e-cigarette weren’t any more or less likely to succeed.

Furthermore, some of the studies included only looked at current smokers and asked about e-cigarette use. This would exclude anyone who had used an e-cigarette but successfully stopped smoking.

Quitting smoking can be incredibly hard. Someone trying an e-cigarette once probably wouldn’t have any better chance than if they hadn’t. Whatever support aid is used it would need to be as part of a concerted quit attempt and used enough to deliver sufficient nicotine to wean yourself off tobacco, and preferably alongside specialist support from a Stop Smoking Service to get the best possible chance of quitting.

E-cigarettes aren’t a magic bullet, but that doesn’t mean they couldn’t be a useful weapon in our arsenal against tobacco. The evidence for quitters using these products both within the Stop Smoking Services and without points towards this being the case in the UK.

The impact of advertising and flavours on kids

Whether or not they’re ‘safe’, or help people quit, another big concern about e-cigarettes is that they could encourage children to start smoking – either by exposing them to nicotine (the ‘gateway’ argument) or by making smoking seem more normal again (the ‘renormalisation’ argument).

The first of these arguments isn’t supported by the evidence to date: surveys across the UK last year found that young people who hadn’t smoked weren’t using e-cigarettes.

But a small study published this week found young people rated printed adverts with flavoured e-cigarettes more appealing than those without flavours, leading to headlines suggesting children are being lured in with sweet flavours.

But when you dig into the detail, again it’s a more complex picture – the young people in this study, including those who saw the flavoured e-cigarette adverts, had negative views about e-cigarettes, and said they didn’t intend to buy them. And, perhaps more importantly, it didn’t find any evidence that e-cigarette adverts increase the appeal of regular cigarettes.

There are now measures in place to protect young people (e-cigarettes cannot be sold to under 18s, and further legislation heavily restricting advertising will come into force in May) but it’s still important to continue looking at how e-cigarette adverts might appeal to children, and to track use of both e-cigarettes and tobacco cigarettes to make sure there isn’t a negative impact from these products.

However, Linda Bauld, Professor of Health Policy at the University of Stirling (and our Cancer Prevention Champion), said the study “should provide some reassurance to those who say that e-cigarette advertising will result in a new generation of tobacco smokers.”

Where does this leave us?

When you look at the bigger picture, rather than the headlines, the evidence so far actually points towards a positive role for e-cigarettes in helping combat the biggest preventable cause of cancer. However none of the questions posed here – on safety, effectiveness and impact on children – have full answers.

As we’ve said before we need years of good quality science before we can definitively answer these questions, and at Cancer Research UK we are working towards that. But for now the evidence we have suggests e-cigarettes are far safer than smoking tobacco, they might help you quit and non-smoking children aren’t being lured into using them regularly.

While the evidence on e-cigarettes continues to accumulate, and the media controversy rages on, if you’re looking for evidence-based inspiration to quit smoking in 2016, speak to your GP or localStop Smoking Service, or check out our website… but maybe keep reading the headlines with an appropriate dose of scepticism.

Nikki Smith is a senior health information officer at Cancer Research UK

http://scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2016/01/20/headlines-about-e-cigarettes-dont-mean-theyre-not-safer-than-tobacco/

You Are Being Lied To – A Billion Lives

The truth is coming. Get updates at http://ABillionLives.com

CONGRESS NEEDS TO FIX FDA VAPOR RULE

By Phil Kerpen

After a lengthy and heavily contested regulatory process, a final rule deeming vapor products to be subject to pervasive FDA regulation is currently in the White House Office of Management and Budget for a final review before it is published and takes effect this year.  Leaks of the purported final rule suggest it remains deeply flawed and will impose a draconian, one-size-fits-all model that risks disrupting the fast-growing vapor industry and denying access to products that pose vastly less health danger than conventional tobacco cigarettes.  Unfortunately, in the final negotiations over last year’s omnibus bill a provision addressing this issue was dropped, but that should not be the last word on the issue from Congress.

Mitch Zeller, the FDA’s top tobacco regulator, told Congress “If we could get all of those people [who smoke] to completely switch all of their cigarettes to noncombustible cigarettes, it would be good for public health.”

Indeed, vapor products are displacing regular cigarettes.  The most recent data from the CDC show the percentage of the adult population that smokes has dropped six consecutive years, from 20.6 percent in 2009 to 14.9 percent in the first half of 2015. An estimated two million ex-smokers are using vapor products.

So we’re on the right track, and Zeller warned: “Let’s not lose our focus on what the primary cause is for those 480,000 avoidable deaths each year—it’s primarily burning, combusting cigarettes.”

Unfortunately, his agency is poised to do precisely that with its deeming rule.

“This is not really regulation. It’s prohibition,” says Boston University community health sciences professor Dr. Michael Siegel.

He’s referring to a feature of the rule that sets a grandfather date of February 15, 2007 – effectively denying grandfather status to nearly every vapor product on the market and forcing each to go through a lengthy approval process or be pulled from the market within 24 months.

That date and timeline were established by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, passed by Congress in 2009 – and it grandfathered all but the very newest cigarette products.  By now deeming vapor products subject to regulation seven years later, the FDA is subjecting these safer products to more draconian regulation.

Jan Verleur, co-founder and CEO of VMR Products, a major manufacturer of vapor devices, said: “It’s essentially a death sentence for industry. It could be held up in litigation for many years.”

That’s only slight hyperbole.

Once the rule is final, manufacturers would be required to submit to the FDA, for each product, a Premarket Tobacco Application (PMTA) or a Substantial Equivalence (SE) report.  The PMTA process is complex and expensive and would be challenging for all but the largest manufacturers – the major tobacco companies – to navigate.  The SE choice depends upon showing that a predicate product is already approved, but vapor technology is new and rapidly evolving, ruling this option out. The investment driving that innovation would be chilled by time and expense of submitting every product for regulatory approval – and the agency already has a substantial backlog.

The solutions are simple but will require Congress to act quickly, because the rule currently sits at OMB and could be published any day.  On the next appropriate must pass vehicle Congress should include language that either delays the rule completely or fixes its most egregious flaws – the imposition of an inappropriate grandfather date and an insufficient approval period.  Failure to do so will result in regulating vapor more strictly than cigarettes, destroying thousands of small businesses, and, tragically, likely increasing tobacco-related sickness and death.

http://www.americancommitment.org/content/congress-needs-fix-fda-vapor-rule

All You Need to Know About the Vaper’s Tongue

Vaper’s tongue… it doesn’t sound too pleasant, does it? The good news is it’s not a medical condition. The bad news is, it still isn’t that pleasant to have.

So what exactly is it? Well, it’s basically a situation where you stop sensing the flavour in whatever e-liquid you are using. Let’s say you’ve bought a nice mint e-liquid to use. At first you can taste it fine, but after a while you realise you can’t actually taste anything at all. This is vaper’s tongue.

Except that isn’t actually an accurate name. The proper name for the experience is olfactory fatigue. As you may or may not know, olfactory relates to our sense of smell. This means it’s your nose that has the issue, not your tongue or mouth.

Is it dangerous?

No – just a bit frustrating. The effect can last for anything from a few days to several weeks. Even though there is nothing actually wrong with your tongue, your nose’s temporary inability to smell the particular flavour you like to vape with means you won’t be able to taste much either.

Who is most likely to get it?

New vapers are particularly prone to being affected in this way. Remember, you’re coming from smoking a certain number of cigarettes a day. Smoking reduces your ability to smell and taste things to the same degree non-smokers do. As such, it won’t be any surprise to find you might have trouble identifying the milder flavours used in some e-liquids.

You might also get it if you like a particular flavour of e-liquid and you never change to anything else. Your senses will get used to that same flavour time and time again, and you’ll suddenly realise you can’t taste it like you used to.

People taking various types of medication might also be affected. For example, drugs that treat depression, high blood pressure and thyroid problems can all contribute to vaper’s tongue.

Can you avoid it happening to you?

You may not be able to avoid it completely, but you can certainly reduce the odds of this affecting you.

For example, we mentioned that it can happen to people who vape the exact same flavour all the time. If this includes you, you might want to try experimenting with a few different flavours. Some people have one flavour for first thing in the morning, one for during the day and another one to enjoy after dinner. This is just an example of course, but you get the idea. As you switch from one flavour to another, you’re giving your taste buds and senses something different to experience.

You should also make the effort to drink more water. This is always a good idea for your general health anyway, but it helps to rinse out your mouth and you’ll avoid dehydration too. Surprisingly, it’s the latter that can lead to vaper’s tongue, since vaping can dehydrate the parts of your body that inhale the vapour. If you can avoid this, you can hopefully avoid vaper’s tongue as well.

Trying different flavours, drinking more water and even brushing your teeth twice a day (if you don’t already) is all going to help you. But if you are still experiencing problems, you should consider whether any medication you are taking could be having a side-effect you are not aware of.

Trying to avoid being ill is a good move to make too. You can’t always avoid it of course, but colds and illnesses can deaden your senses more than you might believe. Try and think back to the last time you had a cold. How many foods did you really enjoy eating? Chances are you lost your appetite completely – and not just because you didn’t much feel like eating anything. If you lose your senses of taste and smell because you’re feeling poorly, you won’t get any enjoyment out of your food.

If you do suffer from vaper’s tongue, don’t just try swapping flavours. Swap to something stronger than you would normally vape with, too. Many people recommend menthol to help things start moving along again. A stronger tobacco flavour or even cinnamon can also work. If you want to steer clear of tobacco flavours because you’ve left those behind, stick with menthol and cinnamon and see how you get on with those.

Persevere

Sometimes you might be afflicted with vaper’s tongue even when you have done everything possible to try and avoid it. If so, keep on repeating all the steps and suggestions given above. These should at least help keep the period of ‘suffering’ to a minimum, and get you back onto vaping you can taste and enjoy again in the near future. Most importantly of all, don’t give up and go back to cigarettes!

E-Cigarette Vapour as harmless as air

When taking up vaping, many people, including myself, ask if e-cigarettes are harmful – a sensible question to ask. After spending some time reading through articles, reports, opinions and advice from medical circles it became apparent that the most toxic element I would need to be concerned about in e-cigarettes was Nicotine and this was only toxic in large volumes, massively larger than the amount inhaled through e-cigarette vapour. Coming to the world of vaping as a smoker, it was clear that there were fewer health risks associated with vaping and that vaping instead of smoking would be extremely positive change in my lifestyle.

Despite the occasional ‘scare tactic’ article in the media about vaping, the prevailing wisdom in heath circles and in the general public is that vaping is by far a healthier alternative to smoking. To further add to the body of evidence which supports this claim, a recent study shows that e-cigarette vapour is almost as harmless as air, which even to the already convinced vapour, will come as a pleasant surprise.

The tobacco giant – British American Tobacco recently funded research which seems to suggest that e-cigarette vapour could be as safe as air. The study uses human lung cells and robotic smokers to investigate the health risks and effects of smoking cigarettes and e-cigarette vapour.

The research was a joined venture between British American Tobacco and MatTek Corporation, which produces models of human cells used in laboratory experiments. The experiment involved using a smoking robot designed to emulate the smoking / inhaling process of humans. The smoking robot was used to expose the model lung cells to cigarette smoke, e-cig vapour from two different brands and plain air.

When the cells were exposed to traditional cigarette smoke for six hours, the cells died – not a surprise. However, much more surprisingly, when the cells were exposed to an aggressive and continuous dose of e-cigarette vapour, the damage to the airway tissue was “similar to that of air”.

British American Tobacco plans to conduct further research and test a wider range and brand of e-cigarettes and e-liquids to further prove their findings.
The new findings have been welcomed by health professionals and those campaigning for healthier lifestyles. Health officials are being encouraged by such professionals to promote vaping to smokers in a bid to achieve a public health victory.

So, no doubt the debate on whether or not e-cigarette vapour is safe will continue, and despite the arguments, the science and research based argument continues to add to the ever growing body of evidence that e-cigarettes are not as harmful as some misleading opinions and thoughts on the subject suggest.

Climb down on proposed e-cigarette public place ban

87099189_87099188

The ban was announced in April and would have come into force in 2017

The health minister has backed down on plans to ban the use of e-cigarettes in all enclosed public places in Wales.

Instead the Welsh government will change its Public Health Bill so they will only be banned in schools, eating places and on public transport.

In a debate in the Senedd, Mark Drakeford told AMs his personal view had not changed.

But he said he recognised his responsibility as minister to find an agreement.

He said he would bring forward amendments to define more precisely enclosed spaces where e-cigarettes would be prohibited.

He told AMs: “I’m not prepared to do nothing in the hope that harm might not occur”.

Previously the Welsh government said it wanted to restrict the use of e-cigarettes in exactly the same way as tobacco.

It was concerned their use may “normalise” smoking for children and young people while ministers feared they may act as a “gateway” into smoking tobacco.

Graphic: What's inside an E-cigarette?
  • On some, inhalation activates the battery-powered atomiser, others are manually switched on
  • A heating coil inside the atomiser heats liquid nicotine in a cartridge
  • The mixture becomes vapour and is inhaled. Many have an LED light to simulate traditional cigarette glow
  • Different brands contain different chemical concentrations
Line break

The ban, intended to come into force in 2017, would have been a first in the UK.

Ministers pointed to concerns by the World Health Organisation and steps taken in 40 other countries to regulate e-cigarettes, but it divided opinion among health and medical groups.

Some anti-smoking groups including Ash Wales, Cancer Research UK and Tenovus opposed restrictions, saying they helped smokers kick the habit.

A major review by Public Health England found e-cigarettes were 95% less harmful than tobacco and could be prescribed on the NHS in future to help smokers quit.

Before Tuesday’s debate, experts from universities and the National Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training wrote to AMs claiming there was no evidence to justify the legislation.

Media captionMark Drakeford told AMs he was not prepared to do nothing

They claimed it would discourage smokers to switch from smoking to e-cigarettes.

Public Health Wales, local health boards and the BMA supported the curbs while opposition politicians called it a “huge step backwards”.

The proposals also divided the group of AMs which looked in detail at the proposal.

The five Labour members supported curbs on e-cigarettes but they were opposed by four opposition AMs.

Less stringent restrictions on e-cigarettes than those on tobacco were suggested and that appears now to have been accepted by the health minister.

Line break

ANALYSIS by Owain Clarke, BBC Wales health correspondent

The decision this afternoon can be interpreted in two ways.

Some critics will view it an embarrassing climb down – and ask why did the health minister press ahead with the proposed ban in the face of significant opposition and unclear evidence.

Supporters of the Welsh government will say he has acted responsibly, listened to the debate and acted accordingly – an example perhaps of democracy in action.

The watering down of the proposed e-cigarette ban in public places does raise some questions about what exactly the Welsh government’s flagship Public Health Bill will now ultimately achieve.

Previously, a plan to introduce a minimum price for alcohol from the bill was taken out and introduced as separate legislation over fears of legal challenges.

Perhaps the decision today reflects the health minister’s fears that without a majority a political row about the scope of e-cigs ban could scupper the entire legislation.

This whole debate also raises another question about the role of government and the timing of the bill.

In seeking to restrict the use of e-cigarettes, were ministers acting responsibly to protect the public, just in case they were found to act as a gateway to tobacco?

Or was the Welsh government here being premature, too willing without evidence to interfere in people’s lives?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-35039630