Electronic cigarettes – there are many independent studies being conducted that verify the fact that electronic cigarettes contain a small fraction of the carcinogens found in tobacco cigarettes. Yet, manufacturers of electronic cigarettes are being fined and subject to other punitive actions for suggesting that e-cigs are a less health compromising alternative to tobacco cigarettes.
Electronic cigarette manufacturers are being banned by the FDA (Food & Drug Administration) from reporting such claims; there is an entire list of what can’t be said. No amount of regulation can control the press, however, and it’s important for consumers to know that the FDA is stalling on the task of putting electronic cigarettes through rigorous scientific testing to compare the health risks involved to traditional cigarettes.
If you have a basic knowledge on previous testing by the FDA on the primary chemical used in electronic cigarettes, propylene glycol, you would understand why these drastic measures are somewhat hypocritical. In fact, propylene glycol is used for the production and preservation of a wide variety of foods and products – including cigarettes. As such, it has already undergone intense scientific testing in approved FDA facilities. It is a chemical that the FDA refers to as GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe).
Still yet, the FDA is taking these advertising restrictions very seriously, and many electronic cigarettes manufacturers and suppliers that rely on affiliate marketers are terminating affiliate accounts because of information being reported on sales pages – information for which the manufacturer could face legal consequences. So why is the FDA putting such restrictions on claims of reduced health risks and why is it refusing to help get such a seemingly low risk alternative to smoking tested so that the public can be well informed?
One very possible reason is that FDA officials are in the pockets of Big Tobacco Companies who are doing everything they can to sway the public opinion of electronic cigarettes. If the FDA were to sign off on the fact that electronic cigarettes were in fact a much healthier alternative to cigarettes, imagine how many more people would be prone to switching. Taxes are continuously being increased on tobacco products, and it’s hard enough getting people to buy more expensive cigarettes. The higher tobacco sales tax becomes, the more likely it is that smokers are going to be looking for the best, least expensive alternative: E-cigarettes.
Whatever the reason is that the FDA isn’t in a big rush to give the public a definitive answer, the bottom line is that you can consider the simplicity of electronic cigarettes to the known carcinogens in tobacco cigarettes and come to the logical conclusion that e-cigs pose quite a bit less risk to one’s health.
There is a battery chamber that heats up either by your pushing a button or simply by pulling on the filter with your lips (depends on the model and manufacturer). When the battery chamber heats up, it activates the propylene glycol which passes through the nicotine filter and comes out in the form of vapor. Now obviously, anybody who’s smoked electronic cigarettes has seen tar develop in the cartridge. It only stands to reason that if there’s tar building up in the cartridge then it’s slowly building up in your lungs, as well.
The reality is, though, that by the time you’ve gotten as much out of an electronic cigarette cartridge as you’re able to, there doesn’t seem to be any more tar than what collects in a single cigarette butt. The only difference, though, is that the one e-cig nicotine cartridge is equal to at least 1 pack of cigarettes (generally at least 2).
You’re already consuming propylene glycol if you smoke. You’re already consuming nicotine if you smoke. What you’re not consuming with electronic cigarettes is the other hundred-some-odd chemicals used in traditional tobacco cigarettes. Coming up with that conclusion doesn’t require FDA approval; it just requires common sense.