Another Pack Of Lies: "electronic" Cigarettes

[Christopher]

Steve Heilig

Healthcare ethicist, cultural critic

Source: Here

There's been much news coverage of the new graphic warning labels to be required on cigarette packs, most of it positive, some of it less so (including a Chronicle editorial that seemed to me to be more opinion than fact-based). I, and many others who have fought in the "tobacco wars" for years, are in favor of such nasty images, as they reflect reality, and anything that makes people think twice about starting or continuing to smoke is worth it. But this is about another, albeit related, aspect of tobacco policy.

I was looking for something on sfgate today, and a new "advertorial" for "e-cigarettes" jumped out at me - and when I clicked on it, found a site called "the healthy consumer": http://thehealthyconsumer.com/01/default.asp?aff=xab&sub=1015

This site, written in hyper-marketing prose ("Revolutionary!", "Ground-Breaking!", "Smoke anywhere, anytime", etc...) claims all sorts of benefits for this "Miracle Technological Breakthrough" device, and claims that "The Doctors", both the TV versions and others, support e-cigs as a healthy alternative to smoking and even a way to quit smoking. When you click on the "time-limited" offer of a discounted trial, and then try to leave that page, you get extra-aggressive "Are you sure you want to miss out on this amazing offer?" pop-up marketing. It's like a parody of hucksterism - but it's serious as a heart attack.

For me, though, it's also a bad flashback. Long ago, Big Tobacco used to claim that "four out of five doctors prefer" certain cigarette brands. Then when that was no longer permitted, they long fought any claims that second hand smoke was harmful. When that was no longer possible to for anyone rational to believe or claim, they looked for other ways to market their lethal wares.

E-cigs are only one of the latest tricks in pushing tobacco to people, and to subverting anti-tobacco education and restrictions. Unhealthy components have been found therein; the FDA is fighting to regulate them as a drug delivery device, as with regular cigarettes. The World Health Association denies that e-cigs are a legitimate smoking cessation method. Canada holds that e-cigs pose similar nicotine addiction risks and banned them. Former Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed a bill that would have banned their sale in California. They are banned in some public places in other states, and on flights. They can't be sold to minors but have been flavored with fruit and candy. The nicotine content in some e-cigs has been understated in labels and is sometimes much higher than in legitimate smoking cessation products. These supposedly "safer" cigarettes undermine secondhand smoke regulations and make them harder to enforce. And so on....

So, some open questions:

1. Are "thehealthyconsumer" and other e-cig marketing sites and advertising funded by tobacco companies?

2. Does sfgate have policy regarding accepting advertising from tobacco companies? Was this advertisement/link looked at in light of such policy?

3. Do "The Doctors" from television know that their brief 2009 segment on e-cigs is being used as marketing for the devices? If so, have they received any funding from tobacco interests?

4. Can San Francisco again take a proactive role in anti-tobacco policy by regulating e-cigarettes like any other tobacco product?

So the message is: Don't believe the hype. Tobacco - however consumed - remains a leading cause of preventable illness and death. Every time the tobacco industry has presented a "safer" form of smoking, it has turned out to not be true. The American Heart Association, American Lung Association, and American Cancer Society all hold that e-cigarettes should be regulated under the same rules as regular tobacco products - which means no marketing as "healthy," no use in public places where others are exposed, and so forth. And very tight restrictions on marketing in general, including in newspapers and other publications, online and otherwise. I agree, and hope San Francisco's leading media and other authorities will too. We don't allow marketing of toxic chemicals to consumers, and especially to young people, as 'healthy." Yes, prohibition doesn't work, but health-based regulation does, and as we know much about how to regulate tobacco to minimize harm, we should do that with e-cigs too. To allow otherwise is a big step back in the Tobacco Wars, and many lives are at stake.

[Brian]

Just another knee-jerk reaction from someone who does all their research ad www.fda.gov. Typical reaction from an anti-smoking activist. Us nasty filthy dirty smokes don't need an alternative, we should just quit or die.

[TroopX]

The author prefers crack from the sounds of it.

Edited July 10, 2011 by TroopX

[nana]

Why is it that people who know so little, think they know so much?

Here's to all the "know-it-alls"...

[24leaves]

I read the article. Some of the vendors are more into making compromises than the others so they put the "HEALTHY" stamp on their products. I agree with them that electronic cigarettes are far better than the analog ones.

In the whole world there is a war sustained by the governments and the tobacco cigarettes companies against the e-cigarettes, as so far over 70% from the price of one cigarettes pack was going back to the government through taxes and only the rest of it to the actual manufactures. Of course they want us to smoke and give away 150$ / month. This is why this war is all about. In Romania at least ones a month you can wither read or watch an article ( on very well rated channels) about e-cigarettes... how bad they are and that there are no difference in between them and the analog ones.

In Romania, for example, you just can't be legal on selling e-liquids. And having all facts together... I don't think that in the next 5 years is going to happen.

[noXious]

Propaganda is easy to believe. There's no effort or work involved. Kudos to all here who make the effort to become informed.

[Logan Garrett]

Wow i just dont know what to say about any of that guys and gals. i mean i fight the whole anti smoker thing on my radio show all the time as i was a smoker and now a vaporer but you know guys as long as there is things out there that people do that other people dont do there is going to be people out there trying to stop the other side. but you know it's just like i was saying to a friend not to long ago. smokers are to laid back to really put up alot of fight and we are told so much that what we are doing is soooo wrong that we get it in our heads that we are bad people and that we dont have a foot to stand on. and now to see someone trying to do the same thing to vapeing as they have done to smoking makes me really sick. im not sure what else to really say. other then the last time i check i still lived in the USA and i believe we'er suppose to have the freedom to do what we want but that seems to change more and more with each passing day. here we are finding new better ways to do what it is that we want to do what makes us relaxed and feel good and not bother anyone else and they are still after us. i really wounder sometimes what it is that these people really want from us. sometimes i feel as thou i am a colored person living in the 30s