Sweanor: Ontario’s vaping policy: Did smoke get in their eyes?

Recently, the Ontario government announced its intention to treat vaping the same as cigarette-smoking. If this strikes you as being as dumb as treating clean needles like dirty ones, or safe sex the same as the unprotected variety, you have grasped the problem with the plan.

Well, actually, its dumber. What they are doing will protect well-established and well-heeled cigarette companies, giving them a big competitive advantage over the upstart vaporizers. After all, smokers don’t need to learn what cigarettes are, or be taught how to use them. But many need to learn to vape and determine which combination of device and liquid is right for them in order to quit smoking, and the proposed rules prohibit the testing or sampling of such products. So they will make quitting that much harder.

Sweanor Ontario's vaping policy Did smoke get in their eyes

And by forcing vapers to stand outside with smokers, the Ontario government flies in the face of research which tells us anyone seeking to quit smoking should avoid temptation by staying away from cigarettes and those using them. All this despite credible scientific authorities determining that vaping emits nothing that is particularly harmful.

Epidemics are terrible things, but few things can be worse than totally preventable ones that result from poor policy decisions. Cigarette smoking has long been a classic example. It still causes 37,000 Canadian deaths a year. That is almost one in every five deaths in our country.

Nicotine is the reason people use cigarettes – but it’s not what kills them. The human body is just not equipped to repeatedly inhale smoke without being at great risk of it causing cancers, heart and lung disease and other severe health consequences. Dealing with the epidemic of these diseases should be simple. Essentially, it comes down to four words: “It’s the smoke, stupid.”

Were smokers able to get the nicotine they need or want without smoking, this horrendous epidemic would virtually disappear. This is consistent with longstanding public health efforts to reduce risks from a huge range of activities. Consumers have been encouraged to switch to less hazardous ways of driving, home heating, working, sexual activity, eating, alcohol consumption, prescription drug use and a wide variety of other activities. But when it comes to our largest cause of preventable death, and one so very easily prevented, we see policy proposals that do the opposite. Surely Ontario can do better.

Smokers are more than willing to cooperate. A large majority say that they want to quit and a tremendous number try to quit on a regular basis. But quitting is tough – and most fail. Finally, they have powerful allies: the scientists and entrepreneurs who have brought forward a consumer-acceptable way to deliver the nicotine without the smoke. Increasing numbers are finding vaping a way out of cigarette dependence, as a visit to one of the now widespread vape shops will show. More will do so as products improve.

It is that great leap forward in public health that the Ontario government seems determined to thwart. We do need sensible policies in place, including to protect youth from nicotine use and consumers from faulty goods. But vaping offers to save taxpayers money while saving smokers’ lives. The opportunity to end an epidemic warrants the use of some creative thinking and the application of basic principles of public health. We need to have the vision to facilitate technology that could rapidly relegate the epidemic of smoking-caused disease to our history books rather than our hospital wards.

Canada led on much of the early policy action that reduced smoking rates. Ontario’s government has the opportunity to again put itself on the side, not just of the science, but of millions of smokers who want to quit. They need to get the smoke out of their eyes, so others can get it out of their lungs.

Source: http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/sweanor-ontarios-vaping-policy-did-smoke-get-in-their-eyes

Minister’s ‘cheap date’ jibe scuppers Welsh Government’s planned e-cigarettes ban

The National Assembly’s last full session before the election in May ended in acrimony with the defeat of the Labour government’s bid to introduce a partial ban on e-cigarettes in public places following a “jokey” comment made by a Minister.

This unexpected decision means there will be no legal ban on “vaping” in Wales.

Plaid Cymru, which had originally given its AMs a free vote on the Public Health (Wales) Bill, opted to vote against the partial ban

The National Assembly’s last full session before the election in May ended in acrimony with the defeat of the Labour government’s bid to introduce a partial ban on e-cigarettes in public places following a “jokey” comment made by a Minister.

This unexpected decision means there will be no legal ban on “vaping” in Wales.

Plaid Cymru, which had originally given its AMs a free vote on the Public Health (Wales) Bill, opted to vote against the partial ban after Public Services Minister Leighton Andrews called those of its AMs prepared to vote with the government “a cheap date”.

If passed, the Bill would become a UK first and would restrict the use of nicotine inhaling devices in certain public places - such as schools and on public transport

The vote on the Bill was tied at 26 votes each, but following convention Presiding Officer Dame Rosemary Butler used her casting vote against it.

Emergency group meeting

Health Minister Mark Drakeford had originally wanted an all-encompassing ban on “vaping” in indoor public places, but scaled down his proposal when it became clear that it would not get through the Assembly.

Several Plaid Cymru AMs were persuaded to back a more modest measure banning e-cigs in places where children could be present.

But after Mr Andrews’ comment, Plaid AMs held an emergency group meeting and changed their position.

Using the discretion allowed to them by a free vote, Plaid health spokeswoman Elin Jones and senior colleague Llyr Gruffydd had intended to vote for the “vaping” partial ban, allowing it to pass.

Ms Jones, the AM for Ceredigion, had been involved with brokering the compromise deal with the government.

But after the group meeting, a Plaid spokeswoman said: “On the very last day of the Assembly, Leighton Andrews has shown a disrespect for parties and individual AMs seeking to create a consensus across political divides.

“He chose to belittle co-operation and put his own Government’s legislation in jeopardy.

“This afternoon, Plaid Cymru proposed to the Welsh Government that the Bill should be withdrawn before the vote and that the Assembly should be reconvened immediately after Easter to vote on a Bill with all sections on e-cigarettes removed.

“Plaid Cymru would have supported that legislation.”

‘Important new health measures’

But a Labour source said: “The decision from Plaid today smacks of a party unfit for Government.

“The only thing that has changed since last week’s Stage 3 vote on the Public Health Bill is a single off-the-cuff remark in a jokey final plenary session.

“To vote down an important Bill on this basis alone simply brings the entire institution into disrepute.

“People in Wales have just lost a series of important new health measures, which had been worked upon for years.

“We could have broken the pairing agreement to get this through, but that is not the way we do business.

“Elin Jones has clearly been put in an impossible position by her group and that is deeply regrettable as she has done so much to shape the final proposals.”

Both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, who opposed any ban on e-cigarettes, expressed delight that the proposal had failed.

Shadow Health Minister Darren Millar, said: “I have long argued that introducing this ban would be a huge step backwards for smoking cessation and efforts to improve public health, and I’m delighted that pressure from the Welsh Conservatives and other opposition parties yielded results in the end.”

‘Welcome u-turn’

Welsh Liberal Democrat leader Kirsty Williams said: “This is a decision that will affect thousands of people, yet Plaid decided to vote based on whether they were a ‘cheap date’ or not.

“While that is utterly bizarre and somewhat farcical, I of course welcome their u-turn.

“Labour’s illiberal plan flew in the face of medical evidence.

“E-cigarettes are a useful way for smokers to give up on tobacco and there is no doubt they have saved lives.”

Mr Drakeford is concerned that “vaping” in public places could re-normalise smoking and encourage young people in particular to smoke tobacco.

“He is also worried about the potential health risks involved in ingesting nicotine from e-cigarettes.

Source: http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/ministers-cheap-date-jibe-scuppers-11052412

Innokin and Nerudia Announce TPD Compliance Partnership

Leading vape device manufacturer Innokin have today announced a strategic partnership with Nerudia focused on ensuring that some of the world’s most popular e-cigarettes and and vaporizers achieve compliance with the EU Tobacco Products Directive.

Nerudia will begin work immediately on preparing a TPD notification for the Innokin Endura T18, which is a simple, high performance device. The two companies will continue to update the market on the progress of this notification so as to ensure wholesalers and distributors can buy the product with confidence.

Nerudia will also audit the Innokin manufacturing facilities and help the manufacturer ensure that its production meets the stringent requirements of the Directive; and monitor its compliance with the body of European law that already applies to vaping products.

The New Enduraendura2

David Lawson, Nerudia Chief Regulatory Officer, said: “We are delighted to be working in partnership with Innokin, who have made some fantastic devices that have helped to shape the vaping industry as we know it. Nerudia looks forward to helping Innokin grow by making sure that they continue to lead the field when TPD comes into force”.

James Li, General Manager of Innokin, said: “When we chose our TPD Compliance partner, Nerudia really stood out. They offer a service that is more robust than any other we have seen in the market, and we are confident that they will lead us to a successful future in this newly regulated market”.

For more information on Innokin and Endura T18, please visit:





FDA Reveals First Wave of E-Cig, Tobacco Study

Results show little evidence of consistent electronic cigarette use

CHICAGO — Last week’s Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco Conference included numerous tobacco and nicotine-related presentations, most notably select data from the first wave of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and National Institute of Health’s Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study.

E-cigarettes were a big topic in the PATH study, along with many other presentations, as the regulatory and scientific communities try to get a better grasp of the implications from this innovation, Vivien Azer, a tobacco analyst at the New York-based Cowen Group, wrote in a research note.

FDA Reveals First Wave of E-Cig, Tobacco Study

PATH is a longitudinal study, first mandated in 2011, in order for the FDA to gain a better understanding of tobacco use. About 46,000 U.S. tobacco and nontobacco users participate, all above the age of 12. The first wave of the study began in 2013 and was presented at the conference.

The data suggested regular use of electronic cigarettes is still very low, with just 5.5% of adults and 3.1% of 12- to 17-year-olds having used e-cigs in the past month. Azer added that daily e-cig users make up a very small percentage of these 30-day e-cig users.

“In fact, among current adult e-cig users, more than 40% had only used an e-cig less than three times in the past 30 days,” she said. “We believe [this] points to the continued lack of consumer adoption of the products.”

The data also seemed to dispute claims that e-cigs act as a gateway to other tobacco products, as the majority of e-cig users in the study were already consumers of other tobacco products.

“Overall, 15.9% of adult current e-cig users were nicotine naive,” Azer said. “While a smaller 8.5% of daily e-cig users had not previously used tobacco.”

In terms of flavors in vaporizers and other tobacco products, PATH researchers found the use of flavors was most prominent in e-cig users across the board. For e-cig consumers 25 years and older, 63% reported using flavors, while 85% of e-cig users ages 12 to 17 reported using flavors (though Azer noted this youth group exhibited a strong flavor preference across all tobacco categories).

Azer said the Wave 1 database is currently only available for restricted use, but full dataset will be available later this year. The second wave of data is currently being reviewed, and Wave 3 is 40% complete. PATH researchers announced last week that the study will be extended four years and will now include seven waves, with the final wave set to be completed in 2022.

“We view the extension of the study as a positive (given the agency will take time to evaluate findings from the study and could potentially push back any incremental regulations),” Azer said.

Source: http://www.cspnet.com/category-news/tobacco/articles/fda-reveals-first-wave-e-cig-tobacco-study

E-cigarettes, the most Popular Alternative to Smoking

Before the invention of e-cigarettes, the majority of smokers used nicotine patches or gum in attempt to quit smoking. However, these tools were highly ineffective as it had a relatively low success rate compared to the amount of smokers. Then came e-cigarettes. It was a mind blowing device that gave a sensation that was similar to smoking and yet contained no tobacco. As Lexi Finnigan on The Telegraph says,
“E-cigarettes are now the most popular form of support to stop smoking, overtaking nicotine gum and skin patches, researchers have said.
More than one million smokers in England used an electronic cigarette in a bid to kick the habit last year, according to academics at University College London (UCL).

E-cigarettes_the most Popular Alternative to Smoking
They estimated that 2.6 million of England’s eight million smokers tried to quit last year. Two fifths of those who tried to quit used an e-cigarette compared with 26% who used a licensed nicotine product in their attempt.
“E-cigarettes have overtaken more traditional methods as the most widely used support for smokers wanting to quit,” said Robert West, professor of health psychology at UCL.
“Their impact on public health at present comes from attracting people who would otherwise have tried to stop without any useful form of support.
“We estimate that e-cigarettes have probably helped around 20,000 smokers to quit each year, that wouldn’t have otherwise.”
Mike Knapton, associate medical director at the British Heart Foundation, added: “Although e-cigarettes are much less harmful than smoking cigarettes, there is no doubt that more research is needed into the potential long term effects of the use of them.
“This unique study shines a light on just how popular e-cigarettes have become as an aid for smokers trying to quit and we need to listen to what is helping people the most on their path to a smoke free life.”” (Lexi Finnigan, article available)
Though some may hate to admit it, e-cigarettes are helping thousands of people to quit smoking. Researchers and e-cigarette industries are constantly working to make safer, more advanced products that their customers may rely on. Incorporation of high technology, e-cigarettes continue to become more reliable devices. However, precaution still needs to be taken and these devise must always be used in a proper manner.
The invention of e-cigarettes may be the key to solving the problem of smoking. Smoking has now existed for many years and yet no solution has been reached on how to solve this hazardous problem. Smoking, rated as the number one most preventable death still claims thousands of lives every year. Finally an effective alternative has been presented to our society. However, there are still many who are working to make regulations that may lead to the extinction of e-cigarettes. Though the degree of how much these devices are regulated differ from nation to nation, more countries are acting to regulate e-cigarettes. Some question this action and claim that banning people from using these devices is unethical as those who were able to quit through e-cigarettes would most likely go back to their old habit of smoking. By taking away e-cigarettes, anti-vapers may actually be promoting the use of traditional cigarettes. Why else were people unable to quit smoking before? It was because it is highly addictive and uneasy to quit. It was because e-cigarettes give the users a similar sensation that e-cigarettes are able to have a higher success rate in aiding smokers to quit. E-cigarettes have the potential to save millions of lives. Let’s not take this away from those trying to quit smoking.

The Perspective of Both Sides

It is now grounded that there are two sides battling out to determine whether e-cigarettes are safe or not. While some researchers and doctors believe vaporizers to be the key in solving tobacco related issues, others believe that e-cigarettes may actually cause more problems. Both sides have expressed their ideas on the web and now the readers are caught in the middle, many of them not knowing what to believe. Guy Bentley on The Daily Caller (article title: “Survey Shows Doctors Are Split On E-Cig Benefits” ) says that
“Physicians are split on the benefits of using e-cigarettes as a tool for reducing smoking-related harms, according to a study from the Saint Louis University School of Medicine.
Researchers sent an anonymous online questionnaire to faculty, residents and fellows in the university’s departments of internal medicine and surgery — receiving responses from 51 percent.

The Perspective of Both Sides

“With easy access and over the counter availability, many patients consider using e-cigarettes for smoking cessation. Few studies have looked at long-term safety and efficacy of e-cigarettes,” writes Venkatkiran Kanchustambham, of Saint Louis University School of Medicine.
The findings presented at the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology Annual Meeting from March 4-7 also found that more than a quarter of respondents were unfamiliar with what “vaping” meant.
Half of those polled worried e-cigarettes would prove tempting to non-smokers despite data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) showing that just 0.4 percent of never-smokers are current vapers.
There were slight majorities in favor of tighter e-cigarette regulations and warnings on vapor products, similar to those on tobacco, and 36 percent supported advertising restrictions.
“Further research is needed to assess whether e-cigarettes could be an effective smoking cessation tool,” said Kanchustambham. “There is an apparent knowledge gap among physicians and an urgent need for evidence-based guidelines to aid with advising smokers enquiring about e-cigarettes.”
The medical profession’s attitude toward e-cigarettes is wildly different that in the United Kingdom, where they have been classified as medical devices. The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) said e-cigarettes could be marketed as smoking cessation aids, opening the way for prescription use by Britain’s National Health Service.
Prior to MHRA’s decision, e-cigarettes could not be recommended by general practitioners because they were not licensed. Now, e-cigarettes will be able to more fully compete with traditional quitting remedies such as nicotine gum and patches.
The U.K. has been one of the most bullish countries on the public health benefits of e-cigarettes, with an independent study from Public Health England claiming they are 95 percent safer than tobacco.” (Guy Bentley, The Daily Caller)
One critical factor that may be a cause for this divide is because of the research that is being done. In the case of the U.K., Public Health England has been an advocate for e-cigarettes carrying out research that shows e-cigarettes to be 95% less dangerous than smoking. On the other hand, other researchers have made studies that show e-cigarettes to be just as dangerous as or even more dangerous than smoking. However, the claims that have been going against the use of e-cigarettes are slowly starting to be proved wrong.
Many studies have been exaggerated to make e-cigarettes look more dangerous than it really is. A key example could be about the statement that e-cigarettes are just as dangerous as smoking. After this study was released to the public, investigation into this study was made and it was found out that when experimenting, the researchers used unrealistically high concentrations of vapor (not even the heaviest vapers used concentrations to this level). It was also found that even when using high concentrations of vapor, smoking still showed to be more dangerous than vaping. Though both sides have been expressing their stance on this issue, only the correct information should be provided to the public to avoid any misunderstandings.

Vaping is not Smoking

There has often been a misconception where people group e-cigarettes together with traditional cigarettes. It was quite ironic when people grouped e-cigarettes as the same tobacco product as that of traditional cigarettes even though it does not require any combustion and does not contain any tobacco. Nevertheless, many still label e-cigarettes as a tobacco product and claim that vaporizers should be further regulated. However, the New York Court has announced this year that e-cigarettes are not the same as traditional cigarettes. Jimmy Hafrey provides insight into this event as he states that “It was bound to come down to a judge’s ruling eventually, but we didn’t know it would happen this soon. In New York, a judge just ruled that vaping is not smoking and the two words cannot be used interchangeably. New York currently bans smoking in most public areas, but according to the judge that doesn’t mean vaping is automatically banned as well.

Vaping is not Smoking

After a vaper was cited for using his device on a subway platform, he challenged the issue in court. In “People vs. Thomas”, the judge said that New York law defines smoking as “the burning of a lighted cigar, cigarette, pipe or any other matter or substance which contains tobacco”. However, the court said that this definition excluded vapor devices.
“An electronic cigarette neither burns nor contains tobacco,” the court noted. “Instead, the use of such a device, which is commonly referred to as ‘vaping,’ involves the inhalation of vaporized e-cigarette liquid consisting of water, nicotine, a base of propylene glycol or vegetable glycerin and occasionally, flavoring.”
During the case, the state argued that the ban on vaping should be understood and there was no need for a specific prohibition on vapor devices because “the courts of New York have yet to make a determination as to whether electronic cigarettes are to be viewed any differently under these sections than tobacco cigarettes.”
However, the judge ruled that this argument was invalid. After all, vapor devices just do not match up with the state’s current definition of “smoking” and cannot be treated as tobacco products if they contain no tobacco.” (Jimmy Hafrey, ChurnMag.com, article: “New York Court Rules that Vaping Is Not Smoking”)
At least in New York, it is now recognized that e-cigarettes are not the same as traditional cigarettes. It makes no sense to treat vaping the same as smoking. It was because of this difference between the two that e-cigarettes were able to become so popular in the first place. It grabbed the attention of the thousands of smokers who were looking for a way to quit smoking. E-cigarettes were brought about and have been marketed as an alternative to smoking from the start. It was an attempt to provide people unable to quit smoking with an alternative that would actually work. So far, vaporizers have already helped thousands of people quit smoking (at least one year). Many of these people say they would not have been able to quit had it not been for e-cigarettes.
E-cigarettes are holding up their reputation as an alternative to smoking. Though many have been able to quit through e-cigarettes, many are still demanding that e-cigarettes be treated the same as that of tobacco products. Things have gotten tangled up and many are now striving to regulate or trying to ban these products. Even though most recognize that e-cigarettes do have the potential to save thousands of lives, they still ban vaporizers on the basis that not enough research has been done on these devices to declare them as being completely safe. As of now, intensive research needs to be done and the correct information needs to be published to bring about an increased awareness of the effectiveness of e-cigarettes.

New Study: Electronic Cigarettes Vapor Has NO Toxic Effect

In a recent study, scientists have found electronic cigarette vapor has NO toxic effect on the cells found in human lungs. Fresh research, funded by British American Tobacco (BAT), suggested inhaling nicotine vapor could be as safe as breathing air.
To perform these experiments, the tobacco giant teamed up with the MatTek Corporation, maker of human cell models used in “in vitro” laboratory experiments. Scientists then used a “smoking robot” to expose these lung cell replicas to tobacco smoke, two different brands of e-cig vapor, and plain old air.

New Study-Electronic Cigarettes Vapor Has NO Toxic Effect

After being exposed to old-fashioned smoke for six (6) hours, the cells died. However, after subjecting the cells to an “aggressive and continuous” dose of e-cig vapor, researchers claimed the damage to the airway tissue was “similar to that of air”. BAT spokesperson, Dr Marina Murphy, stated “by employing a combination of a smoking robot and a lab-based test using respiratory tissue, it was possible to demonstrate…. the e-cigarette aerosols used in this study have no [toxic] effect on human airway tissue.”
There are plans to tests a wider variety of e-cigs, to prove its results. “Currently there are no standards concerning the ‘in vitro’ testing of electronic cigarette aerosols,” said Marina Trani, ‎Group Head Scientific Product Stewardship at British American Tobacco. “Our protocol could prove very useful in helping the process by which these guidelines might progress.”
The debate about e-cigarette safety has been raging for several years. Study after study have highlighted health risks, although most experts agree vaping is much safer than smoking cigarettes. Dr Michael Siegel, professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences at Boston University’s School of Public Health, welcomed the latest study as evidence of the safety of electronic cigarettes; stating “Despite the limitations of the research, it adds additional evidence to support the contention that vaping is a lot safer than smoking.”
He called on public health bodies and anti-tobacco groups alike to encourage smokers to swap to vaping; a step which would “transform the nicotine market and achieve a huge public health victory.” going on to proclaim, “Such a phenomenon would result in the greatest public health miracle of our lifetimes.”
However, the health expert warned overheating liquid nicotine could produce dangerous toxins. Personally, overheating e-juice taste horrible and should be avoided for that reason alone. Vaping advocates claimed the previously research results, which found e-cigs vapor held dangerous chemicals, were false due to the nicotine liquid being exposed to high temperatures.
Earlier this year, British American Tobacco announced the release of a device called Voke, not currently available on the market, which is licensed as a medicine and produces no heat, working more like an asthma inhaler than an electronic cigarette.
Tom Pruen, Chief Scientific Officer of the Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Association, stated he was satisfied the latest research was accurate. “While I’m sure that for many the source of the research will be a problem, of recent years the science conducted by the tobacco industry has been of very good quality, and despite the historic issues I wouldn’t view it with any greater skepticism than research conducted elsewhere,” he said. He went on to add, “the results are not unexpected. Not only are the components of an e-cig aerosol expected to be of low toxicity, based on a large number of analytical studies, but this research broadly agrees with a previous study.”

Source: http://ejuiceologist.com/new-study-shows-electronic-cigarettes-have-no-toxic-effect/

Helping Smokers Quit

The effectiveness of e-cigarettes as an alternative can be measured by how many people have been able to quit through the use of vaporizers. E-cigarettes as an alternative to smoking has been a large part in the reason for the rise in its popularity. However, many have claimed that e-cigarettes are actually not effective in helping people quit smoking and actually leads more people to start smoking. Stone Hearth News has published an article that touches upon the effectiveness of e-cigarettes by saying,

Helping Smokers Quit
“Researchers from University College London estimate that use of e-cigarettes produced 16K-22K additional long-term quitters in England in 2014.1 A long-term quitter is someone who has not smoked for at least one year.
The UCL team has been tracking the rapid rise in use of e-cigarettes using monthly national surveys and estimates that in 2014 almost 900,000 smokers used one of these products to try to quit (see “Electronic cigarettes in England – latest trends” (ref STS140122)).
Previous research has found that when used in this way, e-cigarettes increase the chances of success by around 50% compared with using no support or one of the traditional nicotine products such as gum or skin patch bought from a shop.2,3 This raises the long-term success rates from around 5% to around 7½%. The increased success rate amounts to an additional 22K people stopping who would otherwise have continued smoking. Some of these people may have used an e-cigarette instead of one of the more established aids to cessation such as the Stop-Smoking Services. Adjusting for this, the number helped by e-cigarettes may be somewhat lower, at 16K.
Professor Robert West, who led the research team, said “E-cigarettes appear to be helping a significant number of smokers to stop who would not have done otherwise – not as many as some e-cigarette enthusiasts claim, but a substantial number nonetheless.”
Professor West added, “There have been claims by some public health researchers that e-cigarettes undermine quitting if smokers use them just to cut down, and that they act as a gateway into smoking. These claims stem from a misunderstanding of what the evidence can tell us at this stage, but this is clearly something we need to watch carefully.” (article available)
The point that I would like to highlight is that though e-cigarettes may not work for everyone, it is still helping thousands to quit smoking. Researchers are continuously studying e-cigarettes to test whether these devices can be deemed safe or not. Though more research may be needed, information gathered thus far indicates e-cigarettes to be less hazardous compared to smoking. In such a case, those several thousand people in England who were able to quit, are now using a device that could save their lives and also of those around them who are exposed to second hand smoking.
Data points out that e-cigarettes are playing a role in reducing the number of smokers in our society. The majority of people who smoke already know that smoking kills but are unable to quit because they are already addicted. That is probably why e-cigarettes were able to become so popular. Many smokers have been looking for an alternative that could help them quit. Before e-cigarettes, other smoking cessation tools had a relatively low success rate.
However, the dynamics of e-cigarettes are quickly changing as many are working towards regulating and banning these devices. The year 2016 is a crucial year that may determine the future of e-cigarettes in various countries. The question that I really want to ask is, what will happen to those who have been able to quit through the use of e-cigarettes if vaporizers were to be banned?