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

Not only are the manufacturers and distributors of e-cigarettes touting e-cigs as safe, but now they are accusing the FDA of using its clout to "demonize" their product. These unethical, greedy jerks want to make money! Now it looks like the smokeless e-cig is a cancer stick or coffin nail as is a tobacco cigarette.

Immediately after the FDA warning was issued last week, which included the fact that lab tests found cancer-causing nitrosamines, the promoters of e-cigarettes countered that nitrosamines aren't really dangerous -- afterall, they are in bacon, other cured meats, and even beer.

Ethic Soup blog says that argument is like saying arsenic can't kill you because of its medical applications. An arsenic compound was used to treat syphilis before penicillin was developed, according to Ethic Soup. Read more about the FDA warning at:

http://www.ethicsoup.com/2009/07/fda-warns-ecigarettes-contain-harmful-toxins-cancer-causing-chemicals-and-a-antifreeze-compound.html

DaBrat replied on

Nowhere did the FDA state that the ecig had more carcinogens than regular tobacco. As a matter for fact the device they were comparing it to was the Nicotrol inhaler a SMOKING CESSATION Device, NOT a combustible tobacco cig.

When the FDA rang this fire bell in a church. It caused all sorts of folks to go off half-cocked about the dangers of this product. No one is saying this device is 100% safe. The air in my city is not 100% safe.

The question IS.. Is the ecigarette safer for smokers who have tried and failed to quit than the tobacco version or is it NOT? To not answer this question paid a disservice, not only to smokers but to loved ones subjected to their second-hand smoke and concerned about their health.

Ecig users are still waiting.

DarkriftX replied on

No, they do not compare them to real cigarettes because cigarettes are not a "smoking cessation" device, but tell me this: how many people do you think are going to use ecigs to try to quit the patch? How many do you think will use them to try and get off of their nicotine gum addiction? Both of those (FDA approved) smoking cessation devices have "TSNA"s which are **T**obacco **S**pecific Nitrosamines. All items with nicotine in them have them and many other items were approved by the FDA. Cigarettes (having tobacco) have them and are sold over the counter. Since we are not using these to quit the patch or the gum, they should be compared to what we are coming from. I have not smoked a cigarette in over a month because of this and I could care less if they WERE as bad as a cigarette because if NOTHING else they are cheaper. A step down is a step down no matter how you look at it and these are definately a step down.

The DE (diethylene glycol) that was found was probably either a contaminate (looking at the picture of the test equipment in the FDA's pdf file, it was probably a cleaning chemical from the hands of the tester) or a product of bad USP propylene glycol (United States Pharmacopeia) used in the mixture that made the the nicotine liquid. No doubt in any "vapers" mind that we need more regulation on this, but that is not what the FDA wants. They want to ban all sales of them until Phillip Morris or RJ Reynolds can start production because those companies are big enough to give billion dollar payoffs for allowing them.

Also does anyone else find it funny that one of the 2 brands that were tested was the company that is suing the FDA?

The FDA also warns that these are being marketed at children because they have flavors like "chocolate" but did they mention that they are approving "cinnamon" flavored nicotine lozenges (fancy name for nicotine candy)? Bet you wont see that one being destroyed in the news by the FDA. Why? Well, the reason is because its being marketed by a pharmaceutical company that is willing to pay off the right people.

jablues replied on

Very well said and to add my 2 cents, i could care less what it is being marketed as, if they told me if i used it i would live to be 100, i would still use it because the one fact i am sure of..it stopped me from smoking FDA approved cancer sticks. A lot of legal cure's proclaim a lot of different "facts" that are either exaggerated or taken at face value. We as intelligent people should be able to discern for ourselves what is true and what might work. I mean do people really believe if you take a pill a mans genitalia will grow? Did the FDA ban or investigate these outrageous claims. Hey, drink a Bud light and the girls will swarm all over you and you will be the life of the party, then get in your car and kill someone in a drunk driving accident. Wheres the government there. How irresponsible that all these politicians that want to protect us turn their back when it suits them. The only thing the FDA proved is that e cigs had at the very least 3,999 less harmful products then their friends at Phillip Morris produce. How can this be bad? Hypocrisy at its best.

DaBrat replied on

I could not help but notice your title 'E Cigarettes are a lot like arsenic'. Can't say the FDA found that in an e-cigarette but cyanide and arsenic are both found in regular cigarettes.

Which is safer?

It's Me Again replied on

"cancer-causing nitrosamines" are in bacon, beer, cosmetics, and thousands of other products.

Take everything off of the shelf, starve and then try that arguement again. It is 100% weightless considering the fact that the FDA claims it is a "contaminate", and that means not a threat. So, if it is not a threat in one product, why is it a threat in another?

The FDA is not an authority, it is an arm of our government that protects special interest. I would suggest that you see who they are teamed up with in this campaign and then follow the money trail.

The smoking cessation market generates 2.3BILLION a year for the pharma companies, and they fund these special interest.

"E-Cigarettes Will Revolutionize The Face Of Tobacco Smoking And Could Pose A Threat To the Smoking Cessation Market " Title of pharma board meeting.

The American Cancer Society; the American Heart Association, and the American Lung Association have all had experts state that there is no proof that the e-cigarette is safe and that they may attract the youth of this nation and entice them to start smoking.The facts are that they are not the “public health officials” they are reported to be. They are in fact private foundations that are not governmental in nature and the people or “experts” as they are referred to have in the past and are present operated by funding from large pharmaceutical companies. One pharmaceutical company in particular has a money trail of 99 million from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to these three special interest groups. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation has an estimated 700 million worth of stock in Johnson and Johnson, whose products are probably found in your medicine cabinet at this very moment.

The two main points of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundations were that ”

(1) the Foundation encouraged its grantees to be activists; (2) advocacy was emphasized to bring about policy change”, and in their own chilling words, they “provided financial support and, in particular, funds to help lobbying efforts which the Foundation could not support directly.” Then there is the title of this release where the e cigarette industry is looked upon as a threat to their revenues.

This is just from one special interest group and one foundation. There are over 30 groups that I know of that are funded by proxy by the pharma industry. And you call e cig retailers greedy? Surely you jest!!!

Most e cig retailers are e cig users that love the product. I am over 40 years old, and in 5 months, i dont cough, feel better, and can even RUN several flights of stairs again. I am just trying to spread the good news, and that is that there is a better alternative.

You really need to do some research before stating that e cig retailers are "Greedy" when the facts are that the opponets of e cigs are the real ones guilty of greed to the point of trying to sentence over 400k smokers to death every year when it is obvious to any second grader that they are indeed a better alternative.

Anonymous replied on

Thousands of people (including myself) are using e-cigarettes as an alternative to tobacco smoking. In doing so they are avoiding something like 4,000 chemicals, many of which are harmful and some of which cause cancer.

It's not a perfect system; but it's helping many people to finally quit smoking and using tobacco products. To ban it just doesn't make sense, unless there is some reason why the FDA wants people to keep smoking cigarettes...

Anonymous replied on

Although I am not a scientist I would like to quote one from this site
http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/
by Brad Rodu who is a Professor of Medicine at the University of Louisville, holds an endowed chair in tobacco harm reduction research, and is a member of the James Graham Brown Cancer Center at U of L.
[QUOTE] The FDA analyzed 18 cartridges from two e-cigarette manufacturers[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE] I have some experience with TSNAs, since I participated in a project with a scientist at the Swedish National Food Administration to measure the levels of these agents in smokeless tobacco products. Our research showed that TSNAs are present in most American tobacco products at extremely low levels, about 0.1 to 12 parts per million by weight. At this level of TSNAs, someone who puts 1 gram (about 1/28th of an ounce) of smokeless tobacco in his mouth is exposed to, at most, about 10 one-millionths of a gram of TSNAs. There is abundant scientific evidence that exposure at this minuscule level is not associated with ANY cancer in smokeless tobacco users. [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE] Unfortunately, the agency did not report TSNA levels. Instead, it reported that TSNAs were either “Detected” or “Not Detected,” which is entirely inadequate. For hundreds of years, one of the basic tenets of medicine has been “the dose makes the poison.” Mere detection of a contaminant is meaningless; the critical question is: At what concentration is it present?[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]In summary, the FDA tested e-cigarettes for TSNAs using a questionable sampling regimen, and methods that were so sensitive that the results may have no possible significance to users. The agency failed to report specific levels of these contaminants, and it has failed to conduct similar testing of nicotine medicines that have been sold in the U.S. for over 20 years.[/QUOTE]

Anonymous replied on

For a professional view from our perspective, I suggest you read "the Rest of The Story" as presented by Dr. Michael Siegel at the Boston University School of Public Health, Dr. Joel Nitzkin of the AAPHP Tobacco Control Task Force, and Dr. Brad Rodu, Endowed Chair, Tobacco Harm Reduction Research University of Louisville. http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/

One big question in my mind is: If e-cigarettes were tested in comparison to the Nicotrol Inhaler, where are the test results for it? Answer: It's not available because testing on it has NEVER BEEN DONE. How many known toxins are in them? ...I'd LOVE to see the FDA's reply to this.

I have been using an e-cigarette for 8 months with no adverse effects. I have quit a 3 pack-per-day, 40 year habit by using the e-cigarette smoking alternative. I previously tried every NRT available (Including hypnosis) with no success until these devices. I feel better than I have in many years as a result.

The FDA needs to think with their heads instead of their wallets. If public health is truly their concern, tobacco cigarettes would be banned before e-cigarettes.

deeanne59 replied on

You are confusing the terms "quitting smoking" and "quitting nicotine". I am a user of the personal vaporizer (e-cig). I smoked 2 packs a day for 32 years, and I tried every NRT on the market, but nothing worked. I purchased the e-cig as a SMOKING ALTERNATIVE...not to just quit smoking.

Did I quit cigarettes?...yes, but did I quit nicotine...no. What I can tell you, is that my sense of smell has returned, my sense of taste has returned, I can breathe easier, I am no longer getting short of breath upon activity, and I no longer smell like an ashtray.

My own personal, physical experience...as well as that of MANY other users, can testify to the fact that the e-cig is not as harmful as regular cigarettes. My own doctor can testify to the difference in my health since I started using it. The FDA is using a well known, frequently used scare tactic to encite people to "fear the unknown"...but they are not willing to put the product into the proper category or put it in a proper comparison to the "regular" cigarettes, which they should have done in the very beginning. All of the "ingredients" that they are screaming about in the e-cig is the EXACT SAME INGREDIENTS found in NRTs, which are AOK with the FDA and sold over the counter without a prescription.

Look deep down into all that is being said and done by the FDA over this...and you will find their true motive behind it, and it isn't pretty. They are basically telling smokers, "quit or die".

Pages