As the debate over the electronic cigarette continues , the device has found at least three true believers in Jackson County.
Mildred “Mikay” Barrentine, 30, along with Pat Manning, 37, and 45-year-old Linda Lockwood, the latter two of Altha, are enthusiastic about the e-cigarette. All three are long-time heavy smokers who have given up traditional cigarettes in favor of “vaping,” users’ common term for this alternative to smoking.

Although e-cigarettes are not marketed or proven in studies as a smoke cessation device, all three say it has worked for them.
They breathe better and cough less. They also food tastes better, and they can smell it better, too, because they are no longer using tobacco with tar and the hundreds of chemicals contained in regular cigarettes.
Their clothes no longer get the tiny holes that flying sparks from cigarettes can ignite, and they no longer have to worry about burning holes in the carpet or their cars, since there’s no ash and fire waiting to fall onto the floorboard while they’re driving.
They spend relatively less on vaping than they spent on cigarettes, they say.
They also no longer have to leave the comfort of indoors at public places to enjoy a drag — at least for now.
That could change as the nation grapples with how to regulate the devices. Whether they should be considered permissible in “smoke free” environments is part of that discussion.
The Food and Drug Administration says not enough is known about the health effects of the devices, and the FDA has in the past seized some shipments coming from China in an attempt to regulate them as drug-delivery devices. The FDA also wants to regulate their marketing techniques, and wants to know more about quality controls.
But the agency suffered a setback in January, when a judge ruled the FDA hasn’t got the authority to do so under present regulations. The judge ruled the devices should be treated like cigarettes, which are sold over the counter at almost every convenience store and in many other venues throughout the country. They are not considered a drug-delivery device, the judge reasoned.
“There is no basis for FDA to treat electronic cigarettes … as a drug-device combination when all they purport to do is offer consumers the same recreational effects as a regular cigarette,” U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon wrote in his decision.
“FDA cites no evidence that (e-cigarettes) … are any more an immediate threat to public health and safety than traditional cigarettes, which are readily available,” he continued.
Regular cigarettes carry a Surgeon General’s warning, something e-cigarettes are not subject to at present.
At least some self-governing providers, however, do place warnings on their devices advising that they’re not for children, pregnant women or non-smokers, but rather for those who already smoke and want an alternative.
The FDA did gain traction on another point, however, which will likely put e-cigarettes back under its regulatory wing soon.
The agency was recently given authority to demand that cigarette makers disclose what is in their tobacco products, and the authority to study them determine exactly what’s in them. Based on some cigarette manufacturers’ disclosures in the 1990s, it has been widely reported that cigarettes can contain almost 600 chemicals.
The FDA had done some preliminary tests of a few e-cigarettes back when they were being seized, and has issued a statement.
In a July 2009 agency news release, the FDA warned the public about the devices.
“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration today announced that a laboratory analysis of electronic cigarette samples has found that they contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, an ingredient used in antifreeze,” the FDA wrote.
“These products are marketed and sold to young people and are readily available online and in shopping malls,” the release continued. “In addition, these products do not contain any health warnings comparable to FDA-approved nicotine replacement products or conventional cigarettes. They are also available in different flavors, such as chocolate and mint, which may appeal to young people.”
FDA also pointed out that, while the food-flavoring ingredient has been found safe for that use, the effect when inhaled as a vapor hasn’t been studied.
Those who oppose the devices say they fear smokers will not give up traditional cigarettes but will simply augment or replace their old habit with a new one, increasing the amount of nicotine they use and therefore their health risks.
Barrentine, Manning and Lockwood reacted to those statements, saying that the manufacturers market to adults, not children, and in fact have statements on their cartridges which say e-cigarettes are not meant for kids.
As for the chemicals found in the FDA’s limited testing, the women say traditional cigarettes have those chemicals and a host more. E-cigarettes, they say, are infinitely safer than regular cigarettes, and should be left available for those who want a less dangerous puff.
All three said they’d most likely go back to regular cigarettes if e-cigarettes are pulled from the market.
They say they’re not tempted in the least to use regular cigarettes while this is available, and are even repulsed by the smell and taste of their old habit.
Barrentine, who closely follows online forums, said she has yet to find comments about any side effects. She thinks her chances of coming to harm with e-cigarettes is far less than if she were still smoking.
There are many variations, and Barrentine prefers the “silver bullet” version that delivers more vapor per puff than the more traditional-looking type. She makes her own flavored nicotine juice, instead of buying cartridges, and “tailpipes” it by squeezing drops straight into the atomizer.
Manning and Lockwood also use similar, less traditional devices, but Manning also uses the more traditional e-cigarette as well.
In the ones that look most like a cigarette, the main body of the device is actually a 3.5-volt rechargeable battery encased in a cylinder about the size of a cigarette. A short metal atomizer, about the size of a filter, is screwed into it. A mostly hollow cartridge, of the same shape but slighter bigger than the atomizer, contains an amount of liquid nicotine, propylene glycol (a substance used in food coloring), and flavoring.
The cartridge, which has a small opening, slips over the vaporizer like a glove. It resembles the filter-end of a cigarette. The user sucks air through the opening, an action which sends voltage to the battery and activates the atomizer. An element in the atomizer get hot, and brings the warmed air to the cartridge, which turns the liquid nicotine into a vapor.
The user expels the vapor, which resembles smoke but doesn’t smell or behave like it. The vapor quickly dissipates, and does not create as much volume compared to the amount of smoke generated by a burning cigarette.
The smell of the vapor depends on the type of flavoring used — and there are many, ranging from chocolate to coffee. The smell is detectible only briefly and at close range. The end of the battery, like the end of a cigarette, lights up while the user is inhaling, but no combustion is used in the process.
Several different views of the e-cigarette can be found by searching the term online.
The local health department has weighed in, as well. Adrian Abner, Tobacco Prevention Specialist with the Jackson County Health Department, said his agency takes the position that no nicotine is safe and advocates total cessation.
The health department provides FDA-approved cessation aids free of charge, he said, along with full support to help people quit.
He cited the FDA report as one reason for the health department’s concerns about the devices, beyond the fact that they deliver nicotine.
“There is help out there for quitting completely,” Abner said. “That includes free nicotine replacement therapy for those who wish to quit. We can order these and provide cessastion services.”

By DEBORAH BUCKHALTER, Jcfloridan

Washington — “Electronic cigarettes” that vaporize nicotine juice to inhale instead of smoke from burning tobacco do not deliver as promised, according to research at Virginia Commonwealth University.

“They are as effective at nicotine delivery as puffing on an unlit cigarette,” said Dr. Thomas Eissenberg, at the school’s Institute for Drug and Alcohol Studies.

His study, funded by the federal National Cancer Institute, is the first by American doctors to check the function of so-called “no-smoke tobacco” devices, which are unregulated in the United States for sale or use.

The units are shaped like a cigarette and contain a battery that heats a filament to vaporize liquid nicotine in a refillable cartridge. Smokers buy the devices to get around no-smoking restrictions and to attempt to quit conventional cigarettes.

Some users nickname what they’re doing as “vaping” instead of smoking, to reflect the vapor produced by the heating element. The devices are marketed as an alternative to smoking, but retailers avoid making claims about health or safety.

Fans have established a Web site, www.e-cigarette-forum.com. Founder Oliver Kershaw said the site “is the largest e-smokers community online with some 26,000 members, most of whom are in the U.S.”

Jimi Jackson, a former tobacco smoker in Richmond, Virginia, who sells electronic cigarettes, is convinced there are immediate health advantages in avoiding the known cancer-causing substances in the smoke of a burning cigarette.

“I smoked 37 years, and when I found them, I was, like, ‘Thank, you Jesus,’ ” Jackson said with a laugh, as a reporter visited his shop, No Smoke Virginia, coincidentally just a few blocks from where the research was conducted at Virginia Commonwealth.

In March, the Food and Drug Administration imposed a ban on continued imports of the devices, pending regulatory review for any health risks.

The latest clinical evidence suggests users are not getting the addictive substance they get from smoking tobacco. “These e-cigs do not deliver nicotine,” Eissenberg said of the findings he expects to publish in an upcoming issue of the British Medical Journal.

This past summer, Eissenberg recruited smokers without prior experience using e-cigarettes to volunteer to use two popular brands of the devices for a set period. The 16 subjects were regularly measured in a clinical setting for the presence of nicotine in their bodies, their reported craving for conventional cigarettes, and certain physiological effects such as a change in heart rate.

“Ten puffs from either of these electronic cigarettes with a 16 mg nicotine cartridge delivered little to no nicotine,” the study found.

But the units may deliver hazardous chemicals, according to preliminary checks by federal regulators. In a notice to importers, the FDA blocked continued shipments after finding diethylene glycol, a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans.

The government’s statement noted there are no health warnings on the products, and that “the FDA analyses detected carcinogens, including nitrosamines.”

The notice of the import ban says “the product appears to be a combination drug-device,” that “requires pre-approval, registration and listing with the FDA” in order to be marketed in the United States.

A company challenging the import ban claims in federal court documents to have sold 600,000 of the devices in a year’s time through a network of 120 distributors in the United States.

“We are on the verge of going out of business, which is why we are suing the FDA in U.S. District Court,” said Washington, attorney Kip Schwartz, representing a company called “Smoking Everywhere,” a U.S. wholesaler that was importing the devices from China.

The lawsuit questions the FDA’s authority to block shipments of a non-tobacco product, and says the agency has violated its statutory process for product review. Liquid nicotine is available on the open market through pharmaceutical houses and vendors who sell e-cigarettes.

A judge has yet to rule on the company’s request for an injunction that would allow imports to resume. “There has been no change,” said FDA spokesman Siobhan DeLancey. She said “a decision in the case is still pending, with no timeline.”

President Obama, who has described himself as an occasional smoker, has been offered one of the devices by Florida Rep. Cliff Stearns. The Republican lawmaker’s office said the president did not respond.

An administration spokesman last year said the White House was not aware of the offer.

In a copy of a letter to the chief executive dated March 26, Stearns wrote, “I have recently given out e-cigarettes to a few members of Congress and they have become quite a hit.”

Sales of the devices continue at shopping mall kiosks and small storefront retailers, apparently drawing from stock imported before the FDA began to block shipments from overseas suppliers.

By Paul Courson, CNN

Electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, were first made in China and are sold mostly on the Internet.
They are battery-powered devices which emit a “puff” or fine mist of nicotine into the lungs and are intended to replace normal cigarettes and help smokers quit.

The products are at the center of a legal battle in the United States between manufacturers and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which regulates drugs and which wants to stop e-cigarettes from being imported into the U.S.

The FDA, which conducted research into e-cigarettes, has expressed concerns about their safety, and teams from Greece and New Zealand have also carried out studies into them.

But interpretations of the three reports vary, with the New Zealand study saying e-cigarettes should be recommended because they are safer than tobacco cigarettes, and the Greek study taking a broadly neutral stance.

“The limited information given in these three reports represents all the knowledge we currently have about e-cigarettes,” Andreas Flouris and Dimitris Oikonomou, of the Institute of Human Performance and Rehabilitation in Greece, wrote in the British Medical Journal.

“This may be one reason why the battle…between the FDA and e-cigarette manufacturers has been so heated.”

A U.S. judge last week granted an injunction barring the Obama administration from trying to ban imports of e-cigarettes, saying the move was part of “aggressive efforts” by the FDA to regulate “recreational tobacco products.”

Tobacco is the leading preventable cause of death in the world, killing more than 5 million people a year. A report by the World Lung Foundation last August said smoking could kill a billion people this century if trends hold.

Flouris and Oikonomou said that while “alternative smoking strategies are always welcome in an effort to reduce the threat to public health” caused by tobacco, safety was also vital.

“More rigorous chemical analyses are needed, followed by extensive research involving animal studies and, finally, clinical trials in humans,” they wrote.

USACIG, Inc. and Hop-on, Inc. today hailed last Thursday’s federal judge’s ruling saying the Food and Drug Administration must stop interfering with importing electronic cigarettes. The judge also indicated the devices should be regulated as tobacco products, rather than drug or medical devices.

Jay Pignatello, President of USACIG, Inc., stated, “The smoking public is one of the largest marketplaces in the world, and smoking is a social activity. USACIG is coming to market at the best time. It is very simple — USACIG is an American company. We produce our nicotine with American by-products. With all due respect to products made in China, you don’t know what you are going to get. Our product lasts longer and tastes better. My dad smoked and I wish he had a product like this that avoided the side effects of tar in traditional tobacco. We are an American company, delivering an American product, through American intellectual property with American product development expertise. When you use our product, it is like driving a Chevy.”

Pignatello continued, “USACIG is committed to being the top supplier of electronic cigarettes in the USA. We believe our product is the safest, best tasting, and least expensive in this marketplace, and will soon be available in a wide array of big box stores. Our relationship with Hop-on, combined with our experienced sales team, has us awaiting signed Letters of Intent, and our sales will increase exponentially. Additionally, we will soon be conducting a unique launch of our cigarettes to some specific retailers, at no cost to the public. Our goal is to deliver a brand name and product that everyone will be comfortable and familiar with.”

Peter Michaels, President of Hop-on, stated, “Judge Leon’s positive opinion helps us in there should be no government roadblocks to slow down our progress launching our products in the US. I have worked through issues with government bureaucracy before, and Judge Leon’s decision should make my life easier. Our products virtually have none of the cancer-causing chemicals of traditional cigarettes, but the FDA says it has not been proven safe. Our goal with USACIG is prove our products are safe, affordable for everyone and profitable for our company. We experienced no issues importing our electronics into the US market. Our product is better, less expensive, and the technology behind our cigarettes is made in America.”

With the passage of landmark tobacco legislation last year, Judge Leon added, the Food and Drug Administration’s new tobacco division will be able to regulate the contents and marketing claims of e-cigarettes in the same way it is about to begin regulating traditional tobacco products. But the agency’s drug division cannot ban the devices, the judge ruled.

About USACIG, Inc.

USACIG is the only US-based manufacturer making the actual nicotine cartridges/products in the US. The Electric Cigarette(TM) is an alternative to traditional tobacco products. It is a battery-powered device providing inhaled doses of nicotine by delivering vaporized water, propylene glycol, nicotine solution and other non-carcinogens. In addition to nicotine delivery, this vapor also provides a flavor and physical sensation similar to that of inhaled tobacco smoke, while no tobacco, smoke, or combustion is actually involved in its operation. USACIG, Inc. is a US-based manufacturer of “The Electric Cigarette” and “The Electric Cigar”(TM). USACIG manufactures its cartridges in the United States and the electronics are manufactured in China. USACIG also has US-based doctors on its board monitoring and supervising medical related issues or opportunities. For more information, visit www.USACIG.com

About Hop-on, Inc.

Hop-on, Inc. (PINKSHEETS: HPNN) offers multi-media services and has secured licensing agreements from essential patent holders for GSM, CDMA and WIFI technologies. Since its inception, known for developing the world’s first disposable cell phone, Hop-on currently remains one of the few US-based manufacturers of cellular technology. The Company also distributes The Electric Cigarette and the Electric Cigar.

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements in this news release may contain forward-looking information within the meaning of Rule 175 under the Securities Act of 1933, and are subject to Rule 3B-6 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and are subject to the safe harbor created by those rules. All Statements, other than statements of fact, included in this release, including, without limitation, statements regarding potential future plans and objectives of the company, are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and other results and further events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Future events and actual results could differ materially from those set forth in, contemplated by, or underlying the forward-looking statements.

Contact for USACIG, Inc.:
David Worley
Email Contact
Contact for Hop-on, Inc.
Danny Coleman
949-756-9008

A federal judge has reportedly just ruled that the Food and Drug Administration [FDA] does not have any authority to regulate e-cigarettes; a move which — if it stands up on appeal — will mean that the only protection the public might have lies with the states, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, whose organization petitioned the FDA to regulate e-cigarettes, and whose scheduled appearance on a national TV causes the agency to declare the product “illegal”

More and more governments are cracking down on e-cigarettes, with California and New Jersey the most recent states to weigh in, says public interest law professor John Banzhaf, who is leading the movement to use legal action against their new products which present many significant potential dangers.

California Attorney General Jerry Brown has just filed a major law suit against various
businesses involved with e-cigarettes. At about the same time, the Governor of New Jersey has signed legislation which bans the use of e-cigarettes in areas where smoking is prohibited, and also bans their sale to children.

California’s law suit follows the model set by Oregon which has prepared three legal actions on behalf of the state. Two were settled, with the defendants agreeing not to sell e-cigarettes in Oregon, and one is still pending. E-cigarette makers are face a civil class action in California, and the Attorney General of Connecticut has vowed to also follow Oregon by bringing his own law suit. Suffolk County, New York, has also banned the use of e-cigarettes.

E-cigarettes have already been banned in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, and Mexico, and restricted in Finland, Malaysia, and Singapore. The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] has determined that e-cigarettes are a “misbrand[ed]” product, an “unapproved new drug” and “are illegal until they are cleared.” The agency has blocked imports of the new product, which emit nicotine (a deadly addictive drug) and propylene glycol (which can cause respiratory problems)

In addition to nicotine and propylene glycol, the FDA has reported that it found in samples of e-cigarettes a variety of “toxic and carcinogenic chemicals”
including diethylene glycol, “an ingredient used in antifreeze, [which] is toxic to humans”; “certain tobacco-specific nitrosamines which are human carcinogens”; and that “tobacco-specific impurities suspected of being harmful to humans – anabasine, myosmine, and β-nicotyrine – were detected in a majority of the samples tested.”

PROFESSOR JOHN F. BANZHAF III
Professor of Public Interest Law at GWU,
FAMRI Dr. William Cahan Distinguished Professor,
FELLOW, World Technology Network, and
Executive Director and Chief Counsel
Action on Smoking and Health (ASH)
America’s First Antismoking Organization
2013 H Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006, USA
(202) 659-4310 // (703) 527-8418

It looks like the war against electronic cigarettes will have several fronts.

One day after state Attorney General Jerry Brownfiled suit against one maker of the “e-cigarettes,” Senator Ellen Corbett, D-San Leandro, announced the introduction of a bill that would prohibit their sale to minors. Last year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill, also by Corbett, that would have banned the sale of e-cigarettes in the state entirely.

What are electronic cigarettes, you ask? Well, they look just like regular cigarettes — down to the light at the end of the product that glows when a person inhales — but are battery-operated and contain cartridges filled with nicotine. When a user inhales, a heating device converts the chemicals contained in the cartridge into a vapor that can also be exhaled and resembles smoke.

According to Corbett’s office: “For months, producers of electronic cigarettes have used a loophole in state and federal law to sell their product without age restrictions. Retailers entice young consumers by establishing mall kiosks adjacent to food courts and popular teen stores. In malls, teens are offered targeted pitches on flavored cartridges and the appeal of a product that can be used in all public places since it emits no smoke.”

UPDATE: We just found out that a federal court today ruled against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in the suit we mentioned in our article, telling the FDA they have no jurisdiction over the product. Ray Story, a vice president at Smoking Everywhere — the company Brown sued Wednesday — claimed that the victory will render Brown’s suit null. We’re waiting to see what his office has to say about that.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/nov05election/detail?entry_id=55281#ixzz0cfZmUb1c

SCOTTSDALE, Ariz. – NJOY, the world’s leading electronic cigarette brand, has completed a scientific analysis that has determined that “there is no evidence that carcinogenic TSNAs are present in the aerosol” of its brand of electronic cigarette products.

These results address concerns raised by the FDA and others about product ingredients, safety and health risks, and specifically, found that there is no carcinogenic risk from TSNAs – tobacco specific nitrosamines – in the vapor inhaled by NJOY product users or nonusers who may be exposed to the constituents passively.

“In July the FDA released study information about the constituents of our electronic cigarettes that may have inadvertently misled the media and consumers about their health risks,” said Jack Leadbeater, CEO of NJOY. “The FDA analysis evaluated only the contents of the cartridges used with our products, and not the constituents of the aerosol or vapor to which users are actually exposed or the potential health risk, if any, that may be posed by that exposure.”

The FDA study reported the presence of four TSNAs – N-nitrosonornicotine (NNN), N-nitrosoanabasine (NAB), N-nitrosoanatabine (NAT) and 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butaone (NNK) – in NJOY cartridges at levels so minute they were not quantifiable, not dissimilar from science that has found low quantities of TSNAs in other FDA-approved products.

Of the four TSNAs noted by the FDA study, only NAT has been shown through published scientific studies to be nontoxic and noncarcinogenic, and only NAT was found in the NJOY vapor and only at trace levels. None of the other three TSNAs were present in the vapor.

“Based on my review of scientific literature, NAT is not toxic and not carcinogenic, and based on the vapor analysis, it is my conclusion that TSNAs do not pose a health risk to the users of the electronic cigarettes distributed by NJOY,” said Ben Thomas, Ph.D., a well-respected consultant with 35 years’ experience in toxicology, pathology and risk mitigation who conducted the analysis in conjunction with premier independent consulting laboratory ANALYZE.

This study and others conducted by NJOY also reveal that FDA-approved products offering nicotine, such as inhalers, gum and patches, contain TSNAs, but likewise at trace levels. To date FDA has not required manufacturers of these other nicotine-containing products to reference the presence of TSNAs in their product labeling.

“We realize smoking is a target, and so the notion of electronic cigarettes can rub some agendas the wrong way. But, we also realize that smokers desire options,” said Leadbeater. “Our product provides smokers a way to partake in an activity they enjoy, but without acrid odors, fire hazards and excessive cost, and now with some scientific clarity.”

Thomas noted that ANALYZE conducted the study “using a method based on that used by the FDA” and that the studies “were technically appropriate and appear to have been well done.”

Thomas has a bachelor’s of science degree in biology from Tulane University, and master’s of science and Ph.D. degrees in pathology from the University of Texas Health Science Center, where he is currently an adjunct professor of toxicology/risk assessment in addition to being president of the Ben Thomas Group. He has been published or presented nearly 60 times, has chaired six toxicology task forces, has provided expert testimony for numerous cases, and was a senior managing scientist at Exponent among other positions.

Since the introduction of NJOY, acceptance among smokers has been excellent and more than 300,000 committed smokers in 50 countries have begun using its products. NJOY is a smoking alternative that offers committed smokers who are of legal age the chance to smoke with many of the satisfactions of traditional smoking and without many of the inconveniences.

NJOY Resources

More than a year after MaltaToday revealed that the Health Ministry had classified the tobacco-free ‘e-cigarette’ as a tobacco product, a legal notice has established that even these devices will fall under the smoking ban.

The legal notice states that any “device which is intended as a substitute to a conventional tobacco product” shall fall under the Tobacco (Smoking Control) Act.
The e-cigarette is a tobacco-free device that is used to replicate the sensation of a traditional cigarette by means of an electronic simulation. Containing neither tobacco, nor tar, it is a nuisance-free solution for passive smokers.

According to the legal notice, any device bearing the word ‘cigarette’ or ‘tobacco’ which is intended as a substitute to a conventional tobacco product shall be deemed as a tobacco device.

It further stipulates that “all tobacco devices are to comply with the provisions of the Tobacco Act”, which means that they cannot be freely advertised, that they cannot be smoked in enclosed public spaces and that they can only be used by adults over the age of 18.

The e-cigarette looks very much like a plastic cigarette, with a mouthpiece containing a replaceable cartridge filled with liquid containing nicotine, a solvent called propylene glycol and flavourings. As smokers inhale, a sensor between the mouthpiece and the rod (which is actually the device’s rechargeable battery) activates a microprocessor to disperse the cartridge liquid into tiny droplets onto a small, inbuilt burner.

As the droplets sense the heat, the liquid is vapourised along with the nicotine. When the user inhales this vapour, the feeling of traditional smoking is simulated, and the vapour exhaled is somewhat similar to normal cigarette smoke – with the exception that it is odourless and it settles after a few seconds.

Those making use of it get their nicotine fix without the adverse effects of a normal cigarette. In the UK, the e-cigarette has allowed smokers to puff away happily in public spaces, legally and with no complaints from bystanders.

Legislation sponsored by Assemblywomen Connie Wagner and Joan Voss (both D-Bergen) to prohibit the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors and include e-cigarettes in the New Jersey Smoke Free Air Act received final legislative approval 38-0 Thursday by the Senate.

Wagner said she’s concerned e-cigarettes are being marketed to children because they offer flavors like chocolate, banana and strawberry and could serve as a gateway to real cigarette use.

“These are dangerous devices and I want to make sure our children are protected,” Wagner said. “I’m very concerned that young people who use these things will get hooked on the nicotine and eventually move onto the real thing, opening the door to a lifetime of expensive and debilitating health problems.”

E-cigarettes look like the real thing but don’t contain tobacco. They employ a metal tube with a battery that heats up a nicotine solution. Users breathe in the resulting vapor.

“Electronic cigarettes contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals, with one study even finding they use a toxic ingredient found in antifreeze,” Voss said. “We have every reason to be worried about the safety of these products that are easy for youngsters to buy and also contain no health warning like you find on real cigarettes.”

The legislation (A-4227/A-4228) would extend the state ban on the sale of tobacco products to those under 19 years of age to e-cigarettes and include e-cigarettes in the New Jersey Smoke Free Air Act, which prohibits smoking in indoor public places and workplaces.

The bill also was sponsored by Assemblywomen Nancy Munoz (R-Union), Mary Pat Angelini (R-Monmouth) and Assemblyman Paul Moriarty (D-Gloucester/Camden).

The legislation now heads to the governor.

Competition is the master of a true free market and seems to be working for the electronic cigarette industry as a whole. The improvements in technology over the last several years has produced some strong competition in the industry that is making for better quality products and strides for more controlled e liquid that is used to produce the vapor.

With top companies spending thousands on health studies and lab analysis studies to verify their products are safe, and engineering cost rising to stay ahead of the game to come out with the next generation products, it is an ideal example of the free market in the U S.

Studies of electronic cigarettes are on the rise not only in the United States. but around the globe as well. With a recent study in South Africa that shows some amazing results in helping people to quit smoking tobacco is a testament to the fact that electronic cigarettes, which was already a excellent alternative, may be deemed as a product that may help millions kick the habit of tobacco smoking. The study in South Africa stated that 45% of the people who used them for 8 weeks completely quit smoking tobacco.

Earlier in 2009 another study out of New Zealand by a world renowned health professional and ant-tobacco advocate stated that electronic cigarettes are between 100 and 1,000 times safer than traditional tobacco cigarettes. Health New Zealand was founded by Dr Murray Laugesen in 1995 after serving a full 18 years as an established medical officer in the Ministry of Health and in the Public Health Commission.

Dr Laugesen is one of the most recognized anti-smoking health practitioners in Australia and New Zealand and has been the recipient of many awards, including a medal from the World Health Organization in 1998 “for achievements deemed worthy of international recognition in promoting the concept of tobacco-free societies.” Dr. Laugesen claims that after having performed tests on electronic cigarettes, they are 100 to 1,000 times safer than commercial tobacco cigarettes.

With the progress of many studies and others that have been completed, the electronic cigarette market is a prime example of an open and free market that self regulates to make better and safer products for consumers. It seems that the only time that manufacturers are corrupted is when they become tangled in political corruption.

Legislation sponsored by Assemblywomen Connie Wagner and Joan Voss (both D-Bergen) to prohibit the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors and include e-cigarettes in the New Jersey Smoke Free Air Act, which prohibits smoking in indoor public places and workplaces, was unanimously released today by an Assembly panel.

Wagner said she’s concerned e-cigarettes are being marketed to children because they offer flavors like chocolate, banana and strawberry and could serve as a gateway to real cigarette use.

“These are dangerous devices and I want to make sure our children are protected,” Wagner said. “I’m very concerned that young people who use these things will get hooked on the nicotine and eventually move onto the real thing, opening the door to a lifetime of expensive and debilitating health problems.”

E-cigarettes look like the real thing but don’t contain tobacco. They employ a metal tube with a battery that heats up a nicotine solution. Users breathe in the resulting vapor.

“Electronic cigarettes contain carcinogens and toxic chemicals, with one study even finding they use a toxic ingredient found in antifreeze,” Voss said. “We have every reason to be worried about the safety of these products that are easy for youngsters to buy and also contain no health warning like you find on real cigarettes.”

The merged legislation (A-4227/A-4228) would extend the state ban on the sale of tobacco products to those under 19 years of age to e-cigarettes and include e-cigarettes in the New Jersey Smoke Free Air Act, which prohibits smoking in indoor public places and workplaces.

The Wagner-Voss legislation was released by the Assembly Health and Senior Services Committee and now go the Assembly Speaker, who decides if and when to post them for a floor vote.

The Electronic Cigarette Association (ECA) urged decision-makers to seek alternatives to combustible tobacco that reduce Americans’ exposure to the multitude of harmful chemicals and toxins found in cigarettes. His remarks came in response to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) study released last week showing that smoking rates among U.S. adults have risen for the first time since 1994.

“We applaud the valiant campaigns designed to encourage people to quit smoking and urge that federal, state, and local governments continue to warn people about this unhealthy and deadly habit,” said ECA President Matt Salmon. “However, we also believe, given the CDC data, that harm-reduction strategies are desperately needed to reduce smokers’ exposure to the thousands of harmful chemicals and toxins that are delivered through combustible cigarettes.”

Salmon said that electronic cigarettes, battery-operated products that deliver an inhalable nicotine vapor, offer a viable and much-needed alternative to combustible tobacco. More than one million Americans have tried electronic cigarettes since they became available in the United States in 2007. Many use electronic cigarettes to avoid the toxins of combustible cigarettes and to protect nonsmokers from inhaling secondhand smoke, which is known to cause cancer, heart disease, and other health problems.

“According to the report, 46 million Americans smoke, costing the nation $96 billion in annual health care costs,” said Salmon. “More than 400,000 people die every year as a result of their exposure to the toxins found in cigarettes. If we are unable to reduce the number of people who quit, surely we should look for alternatives that will at least lower the number of people who die each year from this harmful habit.”

Source
Electronic Cigarette Association