FDA: E-cigarettes are as dangerous as tobacco cigarettes

What are the 2 "Leading brands" mentioned in the article above that the abnormalities were found?
The claim is false since the chemicals found were in an e-juice that was not mixed by any large corporation. What evidence has been done to make the claim that the "brand" was a leading one, and not just another common Joe mixing their own juices in an uncontrolled environment to resell it? The term "leading" suggests that sales were grater than sales of others brands in a competitive market however the “brand” in question was not a registered trademark of any corporation and could hardly be considered as "competitive" much less a “leading brand” It is far more likely that any items bought (such as Nicotine, glycols, demonized water and flavorings) were purchased individually and then re-manufactured into the final product. Furthermore many of these individual components are used in most foods and they were manufactured under the watch-full eye of the FDA. And by the authority of the FDA the trace amounts of anomalies were found to be within acceptable levels.

The FDA preformed many studies until they found the negative result they desired. These negative results were for a trace amount of toxic chemicals that was much lower than the amounts that the FDA themselves allow as a tolerance for any manufacturer much like the tolerable amounts of mercury found in canned tuna. The only real issue is that The FDA has recently been put in charge of controlling tobacco products and is trying to create a validation of why e-cigs should be placed under their jurisdiction because they are concerned that the product works so well it may hurt their financing and budgets after flocks of tobacco users become non-tobacco e-cig/e-juice users.

Hi Everyone.... There may be some small concerns over Chinese Manufacturers, but are you kidding me. Let the EVERY ADULT make their own decision. Electronic cigarettes http://www.electroniccigarettesource.com do not stain your teeth, don't have any bad odors, do not pollute the earth, because there is no second hand smoke, there is no ash and no ashtrays, also there are NO TAR, and to poisons/carcinogens which are found in traditional cigarettes. Please let every adult make their own decision once they know of all the facts.

An electronic cigarette has helped me quit hazardous chemical tobacco smoking for good! i now choose to vape over smoking. I vape freely without worrying of any danger that can effect my health, the environment or having any bad odors stinking my clothes. The best part about this device is that it gives you the freedom to vape anywhere, where a traditional hazardous chemical tobacco smoking is not allowed. Amazing invention !!! :) I purchased it from http://www.ElectronicCig.com

An electronic cigarette has helped me quit hazardous chemical tobacco smoking for good! i now choose to vape over smoking. I vape freely without worrying of any danger that can effect my health, the environment or having any bad odors stinking my clothes. The best part about this device is that it gives you the freedom to vape anywhere, where a traditional hazardous chemical tobacco smoking is not allowed. Amazing invention !!! :) I purchased it from http://www.ElectronicCig.com

I am with everyone on this blog. The FDA is being VERY careful with their wording. Read the media briefing carefully. They readily admit in that, that the chemical they are whining about is the same chemical they approve for use "at specific levels" in other products. They also mention how they fear the people will basically become un-brainwashed if they start seeing the vapor in public. Are you serious? Who cares!? That isn't your business! Since when in America does it matter what something "looks like" as long as it isn't illegal? Do you even know the meaning of liberty?

They also won't allow the e-cig manufacturers to suggest it helps people quit smoking because "there are no studies to support this" yet they readily suggest that these same "unstudied" e-cigarettes entice young occasional smokers to smoke daily or young non-smokers to start smoking. Where are your statistics to prove this? Fear mongers.

Make sure the liquid is clean and go away. YOU wouldn't figure out how to solve the smoking problem and someone else did. You toss your garbage up about the carcinogen without mentioning the masses of FDA approved products with carcinogens in them on the shelves as I write. What hypocrites. Would you prefer the now non-smokers to go back to smoking the traditional cigarette? Report the truth or shut your mouths.

It seems that the only people benefiting from the FDA's involvement are the Tobacco and Drug companies. These companies stand to make a lot more forcing people to continue smoking regular cigarettes than if smokers were given a less expensive and less harmful way to continue with their habits. The irony of it all is that the FDA's motto is, "Protecting and Promoting Your Health". Wouldn't you think that if the FDA's wings were clipped by the Supreme Court over regulating regular cigarettes that they would be happy to promote a product that would be the healthier alternative to regular cigarettes by the sheer fact that you are only inhaling nicotine instead of the numerous other harmful chemicals that ordinary cigarettes produce. Further more the electronic cigarette can also come with no nicotine. Im not smelling smoke or cigarettes here but something real fishy instead.

I conduct tobacco research at the University of Louisville. I have published a scientific critique of the FDA tests, available on my blog at http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com

Brad Rodu
Professor of Medicine
University of Louisville

Please think before you write. First, there are over 4000 chemicals found in typical tobacco cigarette smoke, many of which are carcenogenic or mutanagenic. To say that an E-cigarette is as dangerous as an analoge cigarette is completely without base. The compound that was identified as a cancer causing agent Nitrosamine, is found in meat, cheese, beer, and FDA approved smoking cessation products, just to name a few. So by your shortsighted logic, eating a cheeseburger at your local pub with a cold beer would be as dangerous as smoking a cigarette. Should the FDA outlaw cheeseburgers?

Do yourself a favor think before your write.

When places make blind assertions based on opinion, it's a leading indicator of junk science. Here are some facts:

1. SmokingEverywhere and Njoy are 2 brands generally looked down upon in the general e-smoking community, mostly due to low quality components, poor performance, and selling their products so one must get replacement cartridges instead of a bottle of e-cig juice.

2. DEG was found in ONE cartridge from SmokingEverywhere, in a concentration so low that if it was found in a twinkie, food inspectors would not bat an eye.

3. The Nicotrol inhaler was used as a control ONLY for nicotine content. Why was it not tested for carcinogens and contaminants? If it's to be accepted AS a control, then we should be testing it for these carcinogens.
Oh, that's right! Then they'd show their argument is utter failure, as their preferred products, NRT's, contain as much if not MORE carcinogens than the electronic cigarette.

4. That these e-cigs with fruity flavors will entice children to use them, get them hooked on nicotine, and be a gateway to smoking real cigs is also an opinion based on nothing more than wishful thinking. The average person buying these products are NOT 16 year olds. At $70-200 a pop for the starter kits, they aren't even priced remotely close to that.
Nope. These are aimed for, and the average purchaser is about 30-50 years old, looking for something that will help get them away from tobacco cigarettes.
Also, is it some kind of unwritten law that a 35 year old just cannot enjoy an apple, grape, strawberry, chocolate, or cinnamon flavored item? We have "candy flavored" alcohols. We have "candy flavored" nicotine gums and candy (please note that I call the lozenges candy, as they are sugar candies with nicotine added), all sitting out for CHILDREN to buy without prescription or age requirements.

5.The WHO, FDA, and CDC all look at it and think "It is like smoking, looks like it, therefore it's bad and evil and must be banned" while smokers look at it and think, "Well, this thing has substances those organizations have labed safe, or have way fewer things in them than these traditional cigarettes, so let's try them!"

6. E-smokers use this to get around smoking laws. Why, yes we do, but no we don't. Nonsmokers have complained about second hand smoke, and have banished us to a point some local authorities have banished us to our houses, unable to even smoke on the streets. Smokeless tobacco is not a part of these smoking bans. I could just as easily cram a whole pouch of redman chew into my mouth and spit everywhere and not violate the smoking laws.
The Electronic cigarette eliminates the second hand smoke and the smell that have caused us to become social pariahs, banished to little spots 25-50 feet away from any doorway, like thieves. But, because it gives us the tactile and visual feedback like a cigarette, people are throwing a fit.

There are a lot more things I could poke holes into, so I'll let others speak theor peace.

Whomever wrote this article is totally lazy or plain stupid. Even the FDA will NOT come out and say that e-cigarettes are as dangerous as actual cigarettes. The FDA is being very careful as to what they DO in fact say, likely because (in my opinion), they will have to defend their position when their own tests and further independant lab tests come back. If they go out on a limb and call it the same danger as cigarettes, they WILL get bitten by their own words. They are very aware of this. The best they could do was to be vague and say "These might not be safe."

The FDA should NOT have an agenda. They did not attempt to clarify that the e-juice they studied had a very low content (measured in parts per BILLION). They did not attempt to clarify that this was the juice, and not the actual vapor inhaled by the user. They didn't clarify that one cartridge out of 20 contained 20 parts per billion of an active ingredient in antifreeze! They didn't clarify anything except that "it might not be safe", and feed it to the media. Now I know, beyond all shadow of a doubt, that they are in the pockets of someone else. I thought their job is to make certain we are safe, to push manufacturers to live up to certain standards, and to impartially make sure we are informed. I'd much rather they work WITH the community to help this process along rather than promote the drug companies more harmful products (the drug companies FUND the FDA).

Until you have proven that the e-cigarette is not safe, beyond all shadow of doubt, then you should not be seizing shipments from overseas. At our current point, they have overstepped.

The FDA doesn't have a leg to stand on when the argument comes to safety. The only thing they did get was a crutch to lean on because some manufacturer allowed a trace element in 1 of 20 cartridges to shape the public opinion of ALL manufacturers and all products. The medical devices they recommend in place of the e-cigarette are several hundred degrees more harmful than an e-cigarette. Given new studies being released, their recommended devices have been LESS EFFECTIVE than the "newly emerged" e-cigarette.

I believe everyone interested should speak with your doctor and ask her what they think of using the e-cigarette rather than smoking. I was very clear with mine when I told him. He had actually researched the product previously. When I asked about the safety, he looked back at me and said, and I quote (word for word), "Keep on the e-cigarettes. You are doing the right thing."

I will indeed say that I do want the product to be regulated the same way tobacco is. I use this product like I used tobacco before I switched. I don't want them sold to minors. I don't want additives in it. I want the FDA to be able to sample a vendor's stock and have it tested whenever they wish. I don't want anything else in it that shouldn't be (shame on the manufacturer for allowing any foreign elements in their product on the the FDA report, no disputing this - that was shameful despite the ultra low quantity). I want to see them working with manufacturers and make this work. THIS is the function of the FDA. What they are doing now is Big Tobacco and Big Pharm protecting their interests, and it's never been more clear to me. I honestly, naively believed they were truly looking out for us. A ban serves nobody but the people who line their pockets. A ban says "Sorry guys, go back to your cigarettes, or try one of our FDA approved cessation devices." There isn't a person I've seen on the e-cigarette forums that would argue with a tax on e-juice to ensure education on the dangers of tobacco, youth education, and to fund continuous lab testing. Put some legs on this and work with us, and maybe gain back a little reputation.

To finalize my rant, I have been using my e-cigarette and buying my juice from FDA registered sources here in America. I have not been smoking cigarettes for two weeks, and to say I feel better than I have in fifteen years is an understatement.

Whoever wrote this article should be extremely embarassed by the quality of their journalistic ability. Half if not more, of the facts are wrong... Let's start and finish with your title... As dangerous as real cigarettes?!? Really, let's think about that. They found a VERY SMALL %age of a widely used chemical is a sample from a SMALL selection of suppliers. Qualify your title, does it have cyanide in it? Does it have any of the other 4000+ toxins!? Nope! In fact, some suppliers (my company for example, Smart Smoker) will have UK produced cartridges within the next few days and these have only 4 ingredients, guess what, none of them are carcinogenic.

Never before have I read such clap trap, you should print an apology and retract this garbage.

This is so misleading that you need to write a retraction.

The FDA did NOT say that, not even close, and you've got ZERO credibility here.

Why bother writing about something without doing any research?

There are some many things wrong with your article that I don't know where to begin. I understand that time is limited, but do you think you could ask some questions and get to the heart of this issue before you just print whatever is handed to you.

I smoked for many years....decades actually and I have switched, almost completely to the e-cigarette. I love it. I feel better and my doctor says I am healthier. It is a sad day for America when the media can be spoon fed particular facts to come up with a specified conclusion. The truth is that e-cigarettes are many many degrees safer then tobacco. Period. If we cut deaths caused by tobacco in half over the next 10 years, would that be a good? If so, I suggest you investigate the electronic cigarette.

Oh, and read: http://www.e-cig.org/2009/07/24/how-and-why-the-fda-misled-the-public/

First of all, why are all of these articles generalizing their "conclusions"? Its not the electronic cigarette they should be having the issue with, if there *is* an issue here its importing questionable liquid from other countries.
Im not trying to be offensive, but realistically since these are not FDA approved there could be anything in the liquid, and any method of extracting the nicotine couldve been used because its not being monitored and has no standards to meet.
Having said that, I think that the FDA/tobacco companies are going to have to accept that theres a new competitor on the market. Its fine to demand the manufacture of the liquid be monitored and regulated, but demanding banning it through the guise of health concerns is a little childish.

Test the liquid from companies like Vermont Vapor and Johnson's Creek, both american based companies, I bet they wont have the Diethylene Glycol in them. Johnson's creek actually makes the stuff fresh when you order it, i cant see them skimping out and using non-food-grade glycerin in the making of their product to save a couple bucks. (Realistically people, Food Grade Vegitable Glycerin is like $3 for a decent amount, you'd have to be nuts to use something thats non-food-grade in something you inhale.)

I just hope the general public googles some of the forums before forming opinions from this trash. Some people are obviously not taking the time to search for the answers.

I own and operate SafeSmokes.net , an online e-cigarette store. I have HUNDREDS of very satisfied customers who will be happy to tell the FDA about their experiences with the health effects of e-cigarettes. The folly of thinking that a potential replacement for a known cancerous product should be made illegal makes me wonder about the motivations of the FDA. I really believe that someone, somewhere is paying a lot of money to someone at the upper levels of the FDA to make sure this potentially life saving product either becomes so demonized that no one will use it, or so illegal that companies won't import them. That should drive cigarette (tobacco ones) sales back up nicely. My recommendation to smokers who want to try this alternative: Get them before they become illegal.

The lab results from the FDA are fairly consistent with prior studies done on electronic cigarette liquid (the consumed element). However, the conclusions drawn are not. Here is a summary of my own research in response to the press release.

Regarding Diethylene Glycol:

Looking at the Health New Zealand study(1), the presence of Diethylene Glycol was not tested for. They seem to have based their tests on manufacturer ingredient lists and known tobacco carcinogens.
So what is Diethylene Glycol? The MSDS(2) shows that chronic exposure to Diethylene Glycol can cause lesions on the liver and kidneys, as well as damage to the same organs. In the case of inhalation, the only first aid recommended is removal from the source to fresh air. The toxicalogical information is as follows:

Oral rat LD50: 12565 mg/kg. Skin rabbit LD50: 11.89 g/kg Irritation: eye rabbit, standard Draize: 50 mg mild. Investigated as a tumorigen and reproductive effector.
--------\Cancer Lists\------------------------------------------------------
---NTP Carcinogen---
Ingredient Known Anticipated IARC Category
------------------------------------ ----- ----------- -------------
Diethylene Glycol (111-46-6) No No None
This shows that Diethylene Glycol is not a known carcinogen, nor is it expected to be found as one in the future. In addition, the dose required to kill half of the sample of rats tested is 12.565 g/kg and 11.89 g/kg for rabbits. Assuming this can be extended to humans, an average adult male would have to ingest 855.925 g to receive a lethal dose.
Is Diethylene Glycol the main ingredient in antifreeze? The EPA(3) has this to say about antifreeze variations:

Antifreeze typically contains ethylene glycol as its active ingredient, but some manufacturers market propylene glycol-based antifreeze, which is less toxic to humans and pets. The acute, or short-term, toxicity of propylene glycol, especially in humans, is substantially lower than that of ethylene glycol. Regardless of which active ingredient the spent antifreeze contains, heavy metals contaminate the antifreeze during service. When contaminated, particularly with lead, used antifreeze can be considered hazardous and should be reused, recycled, or disposed of properly.
Ethylene Glycol is the main ingredient in antifreeze. While straight antifreeze is toxic, the main hazard is from used antifreeze, which absorbs heavy metals.

What about Nitrosamines? Nitrosamines are carcinogens. Tobacco specific nitrosamines (TSNAs) are found in the liquid used by Ruyan in their cartridges. According to the Health New Zealand report(1), the amount increases with the amount of nicotine, and the average is 3.928 Ng (or parts per billion [ppb]). The breakdown is as follows:

Nitrosamines
0mg - 0.260 Ng (ppb)
6mg - 3.068 Ng
11mg - 4.200 Ng
16mg - 8.183 Ng
The highest amount found was in 16mg liquid, which had an average of 8.183 Ng. In comparison, Nicorette Gum (which is approved as an NRT) contains about 8 Ng. To put that number into perspective, Swedish moist snuff contains between 1000 and 2400 ppb nitrosamines, and unburned tobacco from cigarettes contains around 1230 ppb.

1 http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2ndSafetyReport_9Apr08.pdf
2 http://www.jtbaker.com/msds/englishhtml/o8764.htm
3 http://www.epa.gov/waste/conserve/materials/antifree.htm#alternate

The FDA did not say that.. you are coming to your own conclusions and that is completely false.

Let me handle this one for you skeptics out there.

The lab report states that they found a chemical (diethylene glycol) at a minuscule amount of less than 1% from 1 specific cartridge(No other cartridges had any of this chemical) from 1 specific flavor from
1 specific brand, the same brand that is currently SUING the FDA for stealing their shipments without authority - SmokingEverywhere (I wonder if there is a connection there)...

Less than 1% was found... What's the margin of error?

Secondly the other chemicals found that are apparently toxic are nitrosamine's... These are nicotine derivatives that are already found and known to be in real cigarettes and these were only found in LESS than HALF of the cartridges tested.

These substances are also found at trace levels in just about all FDA approved nicotine replacement therapies including Nicotrol, Nicoderm CQ the patches and gums! But yet no outrage? THESE ARE THE SAME CHEMICALS FOUND IN JUST ABOUT ANY NICOTINE PRODUCT DERIVED FROM NATURAL TOBACCO!!!

The lab study shows that that about half of the cartridges tested contained NO TOXIC SUBSTANCES and 99% tested were safer than real cigarettes. Yet they are marketing the conclusion that all ecig's are dangerous? Where does this come from... if you even read the report they specifically point out this is not their conclusion.

Read the FDA summary found here:
http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm173146.htm

It states "Due to the variability among products, this analysis should not be used to draw conclusions about what substances are or are not present in particular electronic cigarettes or brands of electronic cigarettes."

So the conclusion they came to is that not all ecigarette brands are bad and out of half the cartridges tested more than 50% contain no toxins at all and 99% tested were safer than cigarettes.

This means that 50% of them tested were the real deal... A safe e-cigarette. A product that can take you off real cigarettes - safely.
So this simply just proves the concept is real and officially possible... we just need stricter nicotine liquid manufacturing - which is easy enough to come by. We don't need to ban the product outright, it's an amazing product. We just need to use nicotine liquid that is clean, which many of them may very well be.

Lastly the companies tested are SmokingEverywhere and NJOY both known throughout the electronic cigarette world as garbage. Their products suck and if you actually use Ecigs you already know this.

Let the FDA test the Ruyan, the Joye510, or Vaporking 510
(http://www.electroniccigarettesinc.com) and I guarantee you they will come up clean -

You couldn't pay me to start smoking real cigarette's again. This is all hype brought on by the Pharm and big tobacco - think about their loss of revenues from quit smoking drugs to actual cigarettes.... They find one bad egg and try to destroy the whole product... Ecig's have too much of a following, too much of a success rate, we cannot let them do this.

We might just have to protest this one folks...

This is a load of hooey. The FDA used a nicotrol inhaler as the test control. If they compared an e-cig with a normal cig, the results would've been totally different. Normal cigs have antifreeze and even MORE poison than an e-cig

I smoked for more than 10 years and now I’ve completely stopped smoking normal cigarettes. I can breathe easier and no longer cough. I’ve tried patches, nicotine gum, you name it! This is the best invention since sliced bread and I’m glad that I purchased a good unit. I started with disposable units that were cheap but they provided no throat hit, I thought, is that it? So I did my research.

After researching online for various companies and prices, I found Freshsmoking[.]com They’ve got the best prices, their starter kits start at only $48 dollars and the rest of their accessories are much cheaper than anywhere else I’ve seen. The best part about it is that their units provide a strong throat hit and a great battery and cartridge life. I’ve had my unit now for more than a month and it’s still going strong! Also, their customer service was great and their shipping was lightening fast as well. I highly recommend them!