FDA Lab Analysis Puts the Heat on E-Cigarettes

Submitted by Anne Landman on

Their websites have names like SmokeAnywhere.com and SmokingEverywhere.com, and manufacturers of electronic cigarettes, or e-cigarettes, are touting that their products are "cheaper than a cigarette," have a "cool design," come in "different flavors" and are a "tar-free option" to traditional cigarettes. The website of E-Cigarettes National boasts that its new electronic cigarettes have "eliminated over 3,900 chemicals for the smoker that is looking for a smart alternative," and one site even advertises it as a "health cigarette." But the heat on electronic cigarettes is growing. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Center for Drug Evaluation, Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis (DPA) recently purchased samples of e-cigarettes and analyzed cartridges from them for nicotine content and the presence of potentially cancer-causing tobacco constituents. DPA found one percent diethylene glycol -- a toxic ingredient used in antifreeze -- in the cartridge of one cigarette. Half the samples tested contained tobacco-specific nitrosamines, which are known human carcinogens. All but one of the e-cigarette cartridges labeled as containing no nicotine did, in fact, contain low levels of nicotine. And three different cartridges with the same label were tested and found to emit "markedly different amounts of nicotine with each puff." DPA suggests the findings indicate "that quality control processes used to manufacture these products are inconsistent or non-existent." E-cigarettes are currently manufactured, advertised and sold without FDA oversight.

Main Source: 
U.S. Food and Drug Administration, News and Events, Public Health Focus, July 22, 2009
Topics: 
Health
Tobacco
U.S. Government

Comments

Anonymous replied on

I am an e-cigarette user and have gone from 1-1/2 to 2 packs of Marlboro lights to vapor. I tried prior to the ecigarette - nicotin patch, gum, "candy", hyponosis, "cold turkey" and cutting down. NONE of those were effective. I am grateful that I found ecigarettes and have become a non-smoker. I believe if the other nicotin products can be purchased without a RX than so too should the ecigarette. As far as a cancer causing agent....the ecigarette isn't as bad as the regular cigarettes I was using and MUCH better for me. I can now breath better, my teeth are whitening up, and my sense of smell has returned. To me, that within itself is proof. I believe, wihout more accurate testing the FDA is remiss in publishing an article that scares the public. Especially, potential users of the ecigarette that could improve their life.

e-cig-er replied on

I have been a smoker for 15 years, and finally quit smoking successfully with the help of electronic cigarettes.

SOOOOO much tax revenue from real cigarettes. I wonder why the government would want to vilify an effective alternative? Hmmm.

Thad Marney replied on

The fact that trace amounts of tobacco impurities were found in some cartridges does not make e-cigarettes "as dangerous as analogs" as cited in the FDA release. If that were true, Nicorette, and Nicotrol inhalers are equally useless as safe alternatives to tobacco as they have higher levels of the same trace elements. The levels of carcinogens found are actually LESS than the levels found in NRT's, and the toxicity of the DEG found in ONE sample cartridge is significantly lower than that of the nicotine itself. Even if the sample was representative of every e-cigarette manufacturer (which it is not), a GALLON of e-juice (enough to replace about 100 cartons of cigarettes) still has a lower level of carcinogens than a single pack of ultralight cigarettes.

UserNameAlready... replied on

I have little to add to the knowledgeable comments above regarding the FDA study and the increase in quality of life and health using "electronic cigarettes" aside from my own story.

I smoked for almost 30 years. When I first heard of e-cigarettes I too looked to it as a means of cutting my exposure to the carcinogens in cigarettes. I didn't believe I could quit. And with good reason. Tried all the NRTs. They simply don't address all of the issues smokers endure while trying to quit. They simply don't work for the majority. No, these should not be marketed as smoking cessation devices. However they can significantly reduce the need for a cigarette. Many e-smokers, or vapers have "accidentally" quit when they found miraculously they no longer had the need for a cigarette. I am one of them.

After a month of vaping, my lungs feel clear, my sense of smell is back, my skin has a better color to it. I can laugh again without having a coughing fit. If vaping is so dangerous, why am I healthier? There is simply no way vaping is as harmful as cigarettes. How is it they are not banned? Would the FDA prefer to see vapers go back to smoking? That is what will happen. NRTs do not work!

Paul C replied on

Not entirely sure why the federal agency responsible for our health is doing so, but they are exaggerating their claims to produce public fear of e-cigarettes.
In the following link you can see the full details of the FDA "study" of e-cigarettes... http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ScienceResearch/UCM173250.pdf

If you read this article you will see that they only tested ten different products of only two companies (despite there being many many producers currently). Of those twenty total e-cigarette cartridges, only one showed any signs of diethylene glycol (the percentage of which is not mentioned).

The nitrosamines detected in the liquid were stated to be "impurities" inherent in the purification of nicotine with the ability to be removed through more rigorous purification.

Furthermore, the FDA failed to mention that every single chemical that they found in the e-cigarettes, including the anti-freeze, is found in real cigarettes in substantially higher concentrations. Add in the lung damage, the other 75+ known carcinogens, the other 5000+ potentially toxic chemicals, second-hand smoke, and terrible smell and then tell me e-cigarettes are just as dangerous as regular cigaettes.

Anonymous replied on

I believe that the entire situation boils down to the FDA and popular "news" media asking the WRONG QUESTION.

You should not be asking "Are E-cigarettes safe?"

You should ask "Are e-cigarettes SAFER than traditional ones?"

Write the FDA, phrase the question like that, as I did, and expect the following answer...
"We are unwilling at this time to quantify the safety of electronic cigarettes as compared to traditional cigarettes."

There is some simple, 1st grade math that you can do to answer the question though... Is 4-7 carcinogens less than 75+? orrrrrr, 7<75? Is it more likely for you to dodge 7 bullets or 75? easy answer, easy question.

The "quit or die" mentality doesn't work. nicotine addicts have a lower success rate at quitting than heroin addicts. Less than 6%. At least just let us have the safeR fix.

Thomas Wright replied on

Really? I come to PRWatch to find and article I thought I would be able to trust on ecigs - and it's vague and discounts the FDA Laboratory's professional spins and lies? On top of that, it's a year old article - and it's obviously a bad representation of information - and it's still on your website? You just went from 10 to 3 in trust-ability for me.

Eka replied on

I think this is an effective solution to start a stop real smoking cigarettes. Although I've never tried to use the E-cigarettes, this seems very worth to try. thank you for this solution.

Theonerx replied on

I recommend to my foreign colleagues to start with a conservative approach and then, if you want to spend more high-frequency trading thay can do that later, once they acquire a little more experience.

Rafi Goldmeier replied on

It's a shame the FDA has taken such a hard stance against the ecig industry.

I think smoking electronic cigarettes is a pretty good solution. It might not be perfect, but it is far better than smoking tobacco cigarettes and is more effective to help people quit smoking completely.

The FDA should be embracing the electronic cigarette industry, and trying to improve it, make it better and even safer, rather than hindering it.

Pages