recent article in the Washington Post<\/a>. \u00a0It looks like a tacit admission that commercial pressure is a primary consideration in the FDA’s decisions. \u00a0Could it be that the FDA and public health officials are finally considering the idea that reducing smoking related deaths may be a good idea even if pharmaceuticals\u00a0aren’t\u00a0involved?<\/p>\nThe article goes on to mention electronic cigarettes specifically and \u00a0the fact that in the first quarter of 2013, ecigs have resulted in cigarette volume reductions of “about 600 million cigarettes, or about 1 percent,\u201d according to tobacco industry executives. \u00a0That works out to about 333,000 pack-a-day smokers. \u00a0The tobacco industry was never that worried about the patch or Chantix, were they?<\/p>\n
Electronic cigarette users have long ago accepted the idea that the technology represents a safer alternative to tobacco smoking. \u00a0Could the FDA finally be accepting the idea? \u00a0According to Zeller, the head of the FDA\u2019s Center for Tobacco Products, public health agencies have been left with\u00a0\u201cno choice but to grapple with the issues and the questions of harm reduction.\u201d \u00a0I’m glad to hear they’re reconsidering their stance, but it is still aggravating to know that it takes this much market pressure to force what should be a simple, logical discussion.<\/p>\n
The closing line of the article is also irritating in what it indicates about public health policy. \u00a0“Public health officials say the safety of e-cigarettes and their effectiveness in helping people quit regular smokes haven\u2019t been fully studied.” \u00a0So, for 4 years we have been hearing negative “facts” about electronic cigarettes from the anti-smoking crusaders, yet now they admit that they should be studied? \u00a0What exactly were the previous conclusions based on? \u00a0One is nearly forced to assume that pharmaceutical industry contributions were a large influence.<\/p>\n
It’s way too early for optimism, but this is certainly better than hearing another rehash of that 2009 study.<\/p>\n
<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
For too long now, the stance of the FDA and public health groups has largely been negative towards electronic cigarettes. \u00a0Anyone who has spent a minimum of time looking into ecigs has found the same old flawed 2009 study regurgitated over and over again. \u00a0Some recent statements by Mitch Zeller, the head of the FDA\u2019s […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29,32],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4409"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4409"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4409\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4417,"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4409\/revisions\/4417"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4409"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4409"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/vapingguides.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4409"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}