Panic: Ads for e-cigs not banned by tobacco regulations…because they’re not made of tobacco

posted at 9:21 pm on June 12, 2013 by Mary Katharine Ham

To her credit, CNN’s Erin McPike mostly avoids the standard “something must be done” tone characteristic of this type of report and just explains the facts. Basically, the anti-smoking brigades are annoyed that TV ads for e-cigarettes aren’t banned like ads for regular cigarettes. Why aren’t they banned? Because e-cigarettes aren’t made of, you know, tobacco— the substance that was the basis for banning tobacco product TV ads. The usual suspects claim e-cigarette commercials are intentionally glamorizing cigarette smoking to lure children, or something. It’s unclear to me how hiring a pitchman no one under 25 remembers because “S.F.W.” and “Blade” were before their time is a pander to kids, but details.

Click image to watch:

E-cigs

E-cigarettes are demonstrably and obviously safer than traditional cigarettes— they work without the ignition of paper and the transfer of many of the chemicals and tars that make cigarette smoking harmful—and I have more than one friend who’s been able to quit a serious smoking habit thanks to these satisfying substitutes. That would seem to be something we wouldn’t want to discourage, but anti-smoking absolutists and the FDA long to regulate and ban tobacco-less vapor just like they do everything else. Oh, how the FDA loves to go after stuff that might be harmful but probably not.

John Stossel, at Reason:

What could be wrong with that? Well, the FDA says e-cigarettes contain trace chemicals that “may” be “toxic.”

But most everything “may” be toxic. New York Times science columnist John Tierney writes: “The agency has never presented evidence that the trace amounts actually cause any harm, and it has neglected to mention that similar traces of these chemicals have been found in other FDA-approved products, including nicotine patches and gum. The agency’s methodology and warnings have been lambasted in scientific journals.”

Brad Rodu, a professor of medicine at the University of Louisville, concluded in the Harm Reduction Journal that the FDA results “are highly unlikely to have any possible significance to users” because it detected chemicals at “about 1 million times lower concentrations than are conceivably related to human health.”

Moreover, Michael Siegel, a professor at the Boston University School of Public Health, told Tierney: “It boggles my mind why there is a bias against e-cigarettes among antismoking groups” such as the American Cancer Society and the American Heart Association.

It boggles my mind, too, because as Tierney points out, e-cigarettes not only pose merely a hypothetical risk compared to real “cigarettes containing thousands of chemicals, including dozens of carcinogens and hundreds of toxins,” e-cigarettes also have been shown to be unusually successful in helping smokers quit. A new study from Italy found that after 24 weeks, half of all smokers using the e-cigarettes reduced their consumption of the real McCoy by 50 percent. A quarter gave up smoking altogether.

Jacob Sullum has been following the various banning and regulation attempts targeting this successful smoking cessation device. My favorite is the WHO declaring that e-cigs should be banned because they look like regular cigarettes.

Jacob Grier explains in this Cato video how the FDA’s rulemaking process actually creates a perverse incentive to keep healthier products for current tobacco users off the market based on fears that healthier products might counteract all the stigmatizing we’ve done of smoking over the years. Sorry, smokers! First, socially stigmatized and then nanny-stated out of products that could help you escape your social stigma!

Get ready for a ban near you.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

It’s unclear to me how hiring a pitchman no one under 25 remembers because “S.F.W.” and “Blade” were before their time is a pander to kids, but details.

Don’t forget Cecil B. Demented.

Masterpiece.

MadisonConservative on June 12, 2013 at 9:24 PM

….so!…they can ban 40 ounce cokes!

KOOLAID2 on June 12, 2013 at 9:25 PM

…I can smoke in my office again!

KOOLAID2 on June 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM

Yep, a perfect demonstration of the OCD compulsion to regulate, legislate, intimidate.

It’s cheaper too, barring the initial up-front cost, depending on the system/vaporizer you get.

That being said, look for someone to regulate them due to the battery types or the fact they use carbon-spewing electricity.

catmman on June 12, 2013 at 9:28 PM

I’m sure the anti-tobacco/pro-marijuana Nazis will find a way to get e-cigs banned. After all, they might make kids want a real cigarette. (but them smoking a joint is perfectly okay)

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 9:31 PM

Oh yeah, e-cigs are sooo much more harmful than the abortion pill that we will allow 5 year olds to buy over the counter. This country is so effed up it isn’t even funny anymore.

BeachBum on June 12, 2013 at 9:39 PM

I can smoke in my office again!

KOOLAID2 on June 12, 2013 at 9:26 PM

Keep your medical tobacco card handy, just in case the smoke Nazis show up.

antipc on June 12, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Hey little girls, you can’t watch commercials for fake cigarettes but you can buy Plan B birth control without your parents knowing it.

eMatters on June 12, 2013 at 9:39 PM

Starbucks banned e-cigs within 25 feet of their entrances cause their appearance seems to upset people. Either they hate seeing obvious smokers enjoying e-cigs…or they’re afraid of being contaminated by water vapors.

Society likes the taxes smokers pay but not so much alternatives that allow smokers to imbibe the nicotine and enjoy the benefits of either cutting down significantly or stopping cigarettes altogether.

For some smokers who can’t do patches or gum because of allergies etc. the e-cigs are a great option.

The Puritan Fascists get on my last nerve…

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 9:41 PM

It’s unclear to me how hiring a pitchman no one under 25 remembers because “S.F.W.” and “Blade” were before their time is a pander to kids, but details.

I guess I’m way before their time, then…because I only remember him from The Gate.

James on June 12, 2013 at 9:45 PM

Nannies on the Left say we can’t smoke cigarettes. Nannies on the Right say we can’t smoke joints. How about you butt-out of it?

John the Libertarian on June 12, 2013 at 9:47 PM

eCancer kills, you know

Ugly on June 12, 2013 at 9:47 PM

I’m sure the anti-tobacco/pro-marijuana Nazis will find a way to get e-cigs banned. After all, they might make kids want a real cigarette. (but them smoking a joint is perfectly okay)

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 9:31 PM

It’s too late for that…some young adults spend as much as $100.00 for elaborate e-cigs and buy flavors like candy as a sort of status thingy.

They aren’t habitual smokers really…but they like the nic.

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 9:47 PM

After all the smoking and cigarette advertising bans by various governments, entrepreneurs have persevered and created a successful product anyway. Obviously, they must be stopped–regulated out of existence!!!

Hey little girls, you can’t watch commercials for fake cigarettes but you can buy Plan B birth control without your parents knowing it.

eMatters on June 12, 2013 at 9:39 PM

I just thought this was worth repeating.

Jackalope on June 12, 2013 at 9:49 PM

They aren’t habitual smokers really…but they like the nic.

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 9:47 PM

I’ve been smoking for 40 years. I pay $4.35 tax per pack, and government is horrified that I an countless others might turn to e-cigs. Far as I know, Albany wants to tax e-cigs at the same rate, so they don’t ‘lose’ all that revenue. They’re more afraid of me quitting smoking than are the tobacco companies.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 9:51 PM

Nannies on the Left say we can’t smoke cigarettes. Nannies on the Right say we can’t smoke joints. How about you butt-out of it?

John the Libertarian on June 12, 2013 at 9:47 PM

Being a smokeless tobacco abuser I’m able to fly under the radar. Also comes in handy when busybodies start invading your space.

antipc on June 12, 2013 at 9:52 PM

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 9:51 PM

I also have smoked for 40 years and it is so obvious that the nannies may say they want me to quit smoking but at the same time need me to keep smoking … it’s for the children ya know.

BeachBum on June 12, 2013 at 9:56 PM

They aren’t habitual smokers really…but they like the nic.

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 9:47 PM

I’ve been smoking for 40 years. I pay $4.35 tax per pack, and government is horrified that I an countless others might turn to e-cigs. Far as I know, Albany wants to tax e-cigs at the same rate, so they don’t ‘lose’ all that revenue. They’re more afraid of me quitting smoking than are the tobacco companies.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 9:51 PM

Yep!

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 9:56 PM

France is trying to ban E-cigarettes, period. The reasoning is, predictably, inexplicable.

Why don’t they simply admit that, in their case, the whole problem is that E-cigarettes are not French.

“French” is basically all about wearing a beret and a striped “prison shirt” tee, while slouching in front of a sidewalk bistro on the left bank of the “lovely” river Seine, drinking cheap wine that wouldn’t even make good paint remover, with a limp Gauloise hanging out of the corner of your mouth, while you b***h about how… the rest of the world isn’t French, and doesn’t acknowledge your true greatness.

In short, it’s about like the reasoning shown here. Someone who perceives themselves as perfect being indignant that somebody else is rejecting their demands to be precisely like those self-defined perfect ones. And oh yes, bowing and scraping to them, as well.

It isn’t logical. Or rational. It is, however, the mindset that has caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in the history of creation.

/With the possible exception of the Babel fish.

clear ether

eon

eon on June 12, 2013 at 9:58 PM

it’s for the children ya know.

BeachBum on June 12, 2013 at 9:56 PM

In Oregon or Washington — I forget which — the state legislature just passed a bill making it illegal to smoke in your car when a child is present. The first fine is $250, and those after are $500. They intend to get money one way or another.

For the children(TM), like you said.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 9:59 PM

LOL watch them regulate the tar out of this… but its okay for a 9 YO girl to go to the local drug store and buy the plan B pill next to the toothpaste with no questions asked weekly or something.

watertown on June 12, 2013 at 10:01 PM

Maybe the nannies are afraid of second-hand nicotine or something. Nah — it must be they fear second-hand water vapor.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:03 PM

eCigs are permitted inside the Glade. Just don’t start any eFires by throwing your eButts on the ground.

/the eFire Marshall

SparkPlug on June 12, 2013 at 10:03 PM

That second-hand dihydrogen monoxide can be pretty dangerous stuff!

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:04 PM

Interesting that the new edition to the Psychiatric Association DSM classifies caffein withdrawal as a mental disorder.

So folks expect to see new regulations on coffee and class action law suits like the tobacco lawsuits of yesteryear with attendent suppression,stigmatization and loaded taxation…The moonbats are running out of target industries.

Cause coffee isn’t good for you…And besides these measures are for the children…

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:04 PM

In Oregon or Washington — I forget which — the state legislature just passed a bill making it illegal to smoke in your car when a child is present. The first fine is $250, and those after are $500. They intend to get money one way or another.

For the children(TM), like you said.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 9:59 PM

Yea I heard about that. Then I went on to wonder when its gonna be banned in the home too.

I said this before and will say it again, they got the crack in the door and now they have it all the way open.

I like the excuse they always use, its for the children. That is always the reasoning behind MORE regulations.

Then they go and spend making debt that the kids will never be able to repay. I think that is an angle that any conservatives should use when trying to explain about trying to get spending under control.

BTW, I am a former smoker. I also think that you have a right in your own property to do as you wish. I always wonder why its illegal to smoke in bars and such…if the smoke bothers people they can not go to that place, for its called free will. If the business think it would be a good move to allow/disallow such things that should be up to them, not the government.

watertown on June 12, 2013 at 10:06 PM

Maybe the nannies are afraid of second-hand nicotine or something. Nah — it must be they fear second-hand water vapor.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:03 PM

The e-cig brand Blue made the light blue cause people were freekin out in cafes over the orange light.

And whenever you see someone using an e-cig…Hide you wife…hide your sisters…

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:07 PM

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:04 PM

That’s funny. Caffeine ‘withdrawal’ has a classification but liberalism and chronic nannying don’t.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:07 PM

Moreover, Michael Siegel, a professor at the Boston University School of Public Health, told Tierney: “It boggles my mind why there is a bias against e-cigarettes among antismoking groups”

It’s simple – the anti-smoke nazis don’t hate smoke, they hate smokers. None of this has anything to do with tobacco but only with those who like tobacco. This is the old “hippy loser versus evil dad” thing. The hippies smoked pot and their parents smoked cigarettes, so the hippy losers hated everyone who smoked cigarettes.

It’s amazing that we have all these pushes for pot legalization as the anti-cigarette/anti-tobacco/anti-anything-that-reminds-them-of-cigarettes azzwipes gear up for cigarette prohibition. Pot smoking is far worse than cigarette smoke and yet every lefty douchebag you find will tell you that inhaling burning weed is not bad for you, at all, as if there’s some special black magic evil chemical in tobacco leaves that no other burning leaves emit. It would be funny if it weren’t so stupid, destructive and such infringements on our rights.

These same losers who complain about cigarette smoke also complain that they are being killed by the water vapor emanating from e-cigs. It’s all in their demented minds, obviously. Those minds need to be removed from civil society and placed in the sorts of hell-holes they are more comfortably at home in.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 12, 2013 at 10:08 PM

Nah — it must be they fear second-hand water vapor.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:03 PM

It is one of the dreaded greenhouse gases!

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 12, 2013 at 10:09 PM

For some smokers, e-cigarettes might be the best product ever made. I smoked 1 1/2 packs of cigarettes a day for 30 years. After using e-cigarettes for 2 weeks I was able to quit something that I never thought that I would do.

If you are trying to quit, try these before some busy body libs ban them.

jrgdds on June 12, 2013 at 10:10 PM

Then I went on to wonder when its gonna be banned in the home too.

watertown on June 12, 2013 at 10:06 PM

In some places in CA, it’s illegal to smoke in your apartment. So, the nannies are halfway there.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:10 PM

eon on June 12, 2013 at 9:58 PM

Tobacco isn’t French either…but I suppose the French are still butt hurt over the Louisiana Puchase and America bailing their vichy asses out from under Hitler’s boot.

I guess the only good fascist is a french fascist?

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:11 PM

It’s simple – the anti-smoke nazis don’t hate smoke, they hate smokers.
ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 12, 2013 at 10:08 PM

Yep!

Smoking is subversive…counter cultural.

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:14 PM

Pot smoking is far worse than cigarette smoke and yet every lefty douchebag you find will tell you that inhaling burning weed is not bad for you

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 12, 2013 at 10:08 PM

That is quite the comedy, isn’t it? Especially when you see a few people passing a joint, and they’re all coughing their heads off. Even as they’re holding in the smoke, their lungs are trying on their own to kick the smoke out.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:14 PM

I also think that you have a right in your own property to do as you wish. I always wonder why its illegal to smoke in bars and such…if the smoke bothers people they can not go to that place, for its called free will. If the business think it would be a good move to allow/disallow such things that should be up to them, not the government.

watertown on June 12, 2013 at 10:06 PM

The non-smoking bars and cafes couldn’t compete. No one really wanted to go there. Therefore the lefties had to ban smoking in all bars and restaurants so that the rabid anti-smokers wouldn’t feel like such losers. The arguments were varied, but mostly they hinged on the “unsafe workplace” bullsh#t. My answer to that was that if a waitress thought that smoke was deadly and she absolutely HAD to work at a smoking establishment, then she could have worn a gas mask to protect herself. After all, we have people working in coal mines but a smokey restaurant is far too dangerous a place for the lefties to allow …

Joints, of course, lefties think are fine to light up anywhere and at all times. I have no problem with that but the idea that pot smoke isn’t worse for you than cigarette smoke is laughable, at best. Lefties have actually gone so far as to claim that pot smoke is good for you! LOL.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 12, 2013 at 10:15 PM

That is quite the comedy, isn’t it? Especially when you see a few people passing a joint, and they’re all coughing their heads off. Even as they’re holding in the smoke, their lungs are trying on their own to kick the smoke out.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:14 PM

Yep. Lefties are so worried about health issues but they think that defecating in the public street is a basic human right. Nice …

To say that leftists disgust me would be an understatement of galactic proportions.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 12, 2013 at 10:18 PM

In some places in CA, it’s illegal to smoke in your apartment. So, the nannies are halfway there.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:10 PM

Yep getting there… sadly, it will be the feds that force it on the rest of the nation because I can not see every one going along with this.

On the other hand, once again I point to the owners of said apartments banning such things. That I am fine with. Of course the nannies said its for “safety” I am sure so to make it look good.

watertown on June 12, 2013 at 10:20 PM

My husband got a ticket once for lighting a cigarette at the top of the escalator at the exit of Penn Station. He went to court and fought it. They wanted to fine him $200 for the cigarette smoking…meanwhile, he saw people being fined for urinating and smoking pot in Penn Station. Those fines were $10!!! PS. He beat the fine…judge couldn’t determine if he was inside or outside.

BeachBum on June 12, 2013 at 10:21 PM

I bought one. They are pretty cool. I still smoke cigs, but a lot less.

They tax the heck out of that too, I’ll give up and get a medical marijuana card.

If the worlds going to burn, I might as well be stoned.

wolly4321 on June 12, 2013 at 10:22 PM

Starbucks banned e-cigs within 25 feet of their entrances cause their appearance seems to upset people.

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 9:41 PM

I thought the sidewalks were public grounds.
Can a business dictate that people not dressed to their liking cannot walk on the sidewalk past their business?
Idiocracy is here.

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:25 PM

BeachBum on June 12, 2013 at 10:21 PM

It’s all about the money. They won’t fine someone heavily for urinating in public, because most likely the person is homeless and can’t afford it. But, they figure, if you’re able to afford the tax on a pack of cigarettes you can afford to pay a hefty fine.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:29 PM

This handwringing has nothing to do with health and everything to do with taxes.

E-cigs are not (yet, anyway) regulated halfway to death, and in all likelihood will be harder to regulate in the same manner as regular cigarettes, because quite simply they are about as dangerous as coffee or a can of Mountain Dew. The effects of nicotine are similar to caffeine (the molecules are similar) and also, it’s not the nicotine in the cigarette that kills you, it’s the everything else. Take away the everything else, and you’re left with something pretty mild.

My prediction is they’ll slap a ton of taxes on the e-cigs in the next five years or so. I don’t think they’ll be able to ban advertising or anything along those lines. It won’t stick.

DangerHighVoltage on June 12, 2013 at 10:29 PM

I thought the sidewalks were public grounds.
Can a business dictate that people not dressed to their liking cannot walk on the sidewalk past their business?
Idiocracy is here.

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:25 PM

I think it depends on the city/state. At least where I’m from a lot of businesses will control part of the sidewalk (and they’ll put tables or sale racks out or something), and the other part is pedestrian free space.

DangerHighVoltage on June 12, 2013 at 10:31 PM

I thought the sidewalks were public grounds.
Can a business dictate that people not dressed to their liking cannot walk on the sidewalk past their business?
Idiocracy is here.

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:25 PM

In NY, it’s illegal to smoke within 25 feet of any entrance to a building. Even if you work there, you can’t smoke within 25 feet of the door, and the business as well as you can be fined.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:31 PM

For some smokers, e-cigarettes might be the best product ever made. I smoked 1 1/2 packs of cigarettes a day for 30 years. After using e-cigarettes for 2 weeks I was able to quit something that I never thought that I would do.

If you are trying to quit, try these before some busy body libs ban them.

jrgdds on June 12, 2013 at 10:10 PM

Some folks can’t do the nicotine gum (makes them sick to their stomachs) and some folks can’t do the patches either because of heart conditions (I know it doesn’t make sense but a patch is steady delivery of nicotine in the bloodstream) or they are allergic to the gum adhesive and get welts.

e-cigs is a better alternative…imho

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:38 PM

Anybody who still thinks smoking anything is safe? Anybody here enjoy licking an ashtray?

I support your right to be sold death sticks by a middle-aged has-been. Smoke clouds are no place to search for your lost youth and vigor.

Also, oral.

Capitalist Hog on June 12, 2013 at 10:41 PM

I think it depends on the city/state. At least where I’m from a lot of businesses will control part of the sidewalk (and they’ll put tables or sale racks out or something), and the other part is pedestrian free space.

DangerHighVoltage on June 12, 2013 at 10:31 PM

So a business could “ban” people exhibiting behavior they don’t approve of?
Interesting. I think that envelope should be pushed.

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:41 PM

Yep. Lefties are so worried about health issues but they think that defecating in the public street is a basic human right. Nice …

To say that leftists disgust me would be an understatement of galactic proportions.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 12, 2013 at 10:18 PM

well…is it defecating Defecating?

Whoopie wants to know.

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:42 PM

In NY, it’s illegal to smoke within 25 feet of any entrance to a building. Even if you work there, you can’t smoke within 25 feet of the door, and the business as well as you can be fined.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:31 PM

So it has nothing to do with Starbucks.
Why are they acting like they are special?

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:42 PM

Enough welfare for farmers.

Capitalist Hog on June 12, 2013 at 10:44 PM

people will freak out seeing people “suck” on these…similarly to the plastic dog turds and rubber barf used to play practical jokes. Well, don’t suck on those…that’s just weird.

kirkill on June 12, 2013 at 10:46 PM

thought the sidewalks were public grounds.
Can a business dictate that people not dressed to their liking cannot walk on the sidewalk past their business?
Idiocracy is here.

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:25 PM

I dunno but it makes me want to do something subversive…like whip out my industrial measuring tape…estimate the length from said starbucks door…purchase obvious cheap coffee in abhorrant incorrect styrofoam and park sitting in my car, blasting the Mormon Tabernacle Choir’s National Anthem…leaving the engine running while I chain smoke.

Walmartstyle Defiance…

*snicker*

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:50 PM

I’m mainly anti-smoking because of the stench. You have every right to destroy your lungs, but if you make my clothes stink like crap doing it, then I draw the line.

I’m all in favor of stinkless e-cigs.

kirkill on June 12, 2013 at 10:51 PM

So it has nothing to do with Starbucks.
Why are they acting like they are special?

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:42 PM

It’s likely an attempt to attract the PC crowd, as if it’s a big deal. Or to stop people who smoke from hovering around the door having a smoke and a cup of coffee.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:53 PM

So it has nothing to do with Starbucks.
Why are they acting like they are special?

Mimzey on June 12, 2013 at 10:42 PM

Starbucks banned e-cigs as well as cigarettes (on the patios) at all their US stores.

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:53 PM

I’m mainly anti-smoking because of the stench. You have every right to destroy your lungs, but if you make my clothes stink like crap doing it, then I draw the line.

I’m all in favor of stinkless e-cigs.

kirkill on June 12, 2013 at 10:51 PM

Fair enough…

I’m for banning all obnoxious perfumes on men and women that make my eyes sting.

I draw the line when my eyes sting…

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:56 PM

but anti-smoking absolutists and the FDA long to regulate and ban tobacco-less vapor just like they do everything else.

I think the tobacco companies have an equal stake in getting e-cig commercials banned.

eaglescout_1998 on June 12, 2013 at 10:56 PM

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:38 PM

This reminds me of the scene in the movie, Thank You For Smoking, where our Hero’s enemies tie him down and put Nicorette patches all over his body, intending to kill him with a nicotine overdose.

That would seem to be something we wouldn’t want to discourage, but anti-smoking absolutists and the FDA long to regulate and ban tobacco-less vapor just like they do everything else. Oh, how the FDA loves to go after stuff that might be harmful but probably not.

MKH, here is what I believe will happen eventually, in regards to proposed e-cig regulation (and taxes):

Currently, the e-cig model mirrors that of old quill and fountain pens, where the ink and writing implement were separate, one might have been able to make or stretch their own ink, and no company was in the business of manufacturing ink writing implements as such.

E-cigs are modularized, the units do not require replacing as a whole, and the “vape” fluid can be sourced from any number of manufacturers, or else you can whip up a batch of your own in your kitchen. It may or may not contain any nicotine whatsoever.

So if you want to regulate it and tax it, what exactly do you tax? The e-cig components, which are not disposable, or the fluid, which anyone can make for themselves – and where the fluid contains no nicotine or any other controlled chemical substance, the excuse to regulate and tax the vape fluid, well, it vanishes into regulatory thin air. And as you well know, unless your product gets you high or kills developing babies, we can’t have that, we must regulate and tax it…

But just as quills and old-fashioned fountain pens (the ones you had to manually refill) passed into history thanks to convenience, current e-cig units and separately-sourced vape fluid will also pass into history to satisfy regulators.

Draw the analogy of the modern cigarette to the disposable ball-point pen: mass-produced cigarettes are discrete units, entirely disposable, and the amount of nicotine in the tobacco (analogous to chemicals in the ink of a pen) are precisely controlled. Oh, and bonus? To mass-produce disposable e-cigs will require much larger factories, which (conveniently) the major producers of current cigarettes currently possess (e.g., those nice little facilities in places like Concord, NC).

A regulation/tax model for e-cigs requires that the product be produced in discrete, disposable units, where the vape fluid is sealed inside the unit and cannot be easily substituted with a home brew or other “unauthorized” version.

So my prediction is, future e-cigs will be like Bic disposable ball point pens, with the reason given that this is necessary for consumer safety. Because consumers must be kept safe…unless, of course, they want to kill their unborn children, but I digress…

(Profound apologies to referencing the abortion pill here, but the thought that a 12yro girl can buy this without anyone’s prior consent simply horrifies me.)

Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 10:59 PM

I think the tobacco companies have an equal stake in getting e-cig commercials banned.

eaglescout_1998 on June 12, 2013 at 10:56 PM

Why…They supply the nicotine

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:59 PM

I think the tobacco companies have an equal stake in getting e-cig commercials banned.

eaglescout_1998 on June 12, 2013 at 10:56 PM

I alluded to this in my previous post, but the point bears making: e-cigs will not only wreck the regulatory model, but they will eventually wreck much of the cigarette industry.

I’d be interested to find whether nicotine can be sourced or synthesized from sources other than tobacco plants. If the answer is “yes”, then add a lot of angry farmers to the mix as well.

One can tell when regulations become overbearing the moment their main purpose becomes to raise barriers to new competitor entry into established markets – or worse, to allow the prevention of creative destruction of legacy markets thanks to new product innovation. Cigarettes are a multi-billion dollar business and such wealth attracts a massive cover of lobbyists in the halls of government capitals, no matter how reviled such business may be by the ignorant masses.

Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 11:05 PM

It’s likely an attempt to attract the PC crowd, as if it’s a big deal. Or to stop people who smoke from hovering around the door having a smoke and a cup of coffee.

Liam on June 12, 2013 at 10:53 PM

I think it’s partly aimed at recovering addicts…a lot of them congregate at night at a local starbucks before or after they attend their meetings…a lot of them smoke and drink coffee.

Most people go to bars or home to their families on nights…recovering addicts might go to a Starbucks for a while…

It’s another way of saying we want your money to buy our coffee but don’t hang around outside…

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 11:09 PM

I’d be interested to find whether nicotine can be sourced or synthesized from sources other than tobacco plants. If the answer is “yes”, then add a lot of angry farmers to the mix as well.
Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 11:05 PM

“Nicotiana tabacum, or the tobacco plant, is a member of the nightshade family of plants. Tobacco produces by far the greatest quantity of nicotine of any plant source. The leaves of a typical tobacco plant may contain from 20,000 to 40,000 parts per million of nicotine. The nicotine content of tobacco constitutes about 0.3 percent to 0.5 percent of the plant when measured by dry weight. Close relatives of the common tobacco plant also contain nicotine in their leaves, including Aztec Tobacco (nicotiana rustica) and Tree Tobacco (nicotiana glauca)

Nightshade family

*

Other members of the nightshade family also produce small quantities of nicotine. Edible members of the nightshade family that contain very low amounts of nicotine include eggplants, potatoes, tomatoes, and sweet peppers. The level of nicotine found in these plants is not considered to present any substantial danger to human consumers.
*

Trace nicotine producers

*

Several other plants produce naturally-occuring nicotine in very small amounts. The common horsetail (equisetum arvense) is among the larger producer, containing approximately 0.4 parts per million nicotine throughout the body of the plant. Celery, papaya, jimsonweed, and milkweed are other common species that produce small amounts of nicotine throughout the plant.

Other plants produce nicotine only in the leaves of the plant. Plants with nicotine-bearing leaves include the English walnut, the coca plant, the belladonna, and the corkwood tree. Yet other plants only produce nicotine within their seeds, such as the velvetbean, or in their roots, such as the ashwagandha plant.”

Read more: Plant Sources of Nicotine | eHow http://www.ehow.com/list_6898161_plant-sources-nicotine.html#ixzz2W3vsWr3S

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 11:14 PM

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 10:59 PM

The value chain of cigarettes is not in the growing of tobacco, but mainly in the handling of the tobacco leaf by cigarette manufacturers, through the sale of the final product.

Oh, and because the market for cigarettes has such high regulatory barriers to entry, only no-name brands are new market entrants these days. Their products range from crappy Asian tobaccos to reconstituted tobacco dust (I’m not kidding) recovered from shredding pricier tobaccos. So as others have noted, a ban on advertising has the perverse outcome of favoring the majors, who now don’t have to spend tens of millions of dollars advertising their products anymore.

E-cigs, however, do not require fine tobaccos, nor do they currently require massive manufacturing plants or chemical factories to produce – all hallmarks of current cigarette manufacturing. All you need for current e-cigs is a small plastic injection molding facility and a liquid chemical and bottling facility for the vape fluid. Both of these can be easily sourced from Asia and no one will care. As I understand it, one can find recipes for making their own vape fluid on the interwebs.

Once someone seriously begins dropping advertising $$$ on cheap e-cigarette equipment and advertises the obvious benefits of using e-cigs over conventional cigarettes, there will be a rout as smokers convert over. When this happens, cigarette manufacturers will not be able to compete with their own advertising because, oops, their ads have been banned.

So cigarette industry lobbyists will be haunting the halls of state capitols and the FDA to get these evil e-cigs regulated into a disposable model (that they can then produce easily) as soon as possible.

Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 11:16 PM

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 11:14 PM

Thanks for that. What it tells me, though (if I understand correctly), is that if all you want is the nicotine itself, you don’t care much about the quality of the tobacco for conventional smoking purposes. Therefore, you can go to the crappiest, cheapest place on the planet to source crappy tobacco purely for nicotine chemistry, and you won’t have to pay premium prices for first world farming costs.

Once domestic US tobacco farmers realize this little fact, watch them scream bloody murder about the evils of e-cigs…

Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 11:21 PM

By the way, if I were advertising e-cigs, one line of ads would focus on Grandma falling asleep in bed while smoking an e-cig, vs falling asleep in bed while smoking a conventional cigarette. I’d then close the ad by quoting

Jeffrey Wigand

in regards to his work at Brown & Williamson to develop a smokeless cigarette so that fires could be prevented.

Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 11:25 PM

Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 11:21 PM

Tobacco sources:

Tobacco is grown in warm climates all over the world. It is a green, leafy plant.

In the United States the states where most tobacco is grown is within Virginia, Kentucky and central Tennessee.

Some examples of Types of tobacco and where they are grown:

Brightleaf tobacco, Brightleaf is commonly known as “Virginia tobacco”, often regardless of which state they are planted. Prior to the American Civil War, most tobacco grown in the US was fire-cured dark-leaf. This type of tobacco was planted in fertile lowlands, used a robust variety of leaf, and was either fire cured or air cured. Most Canadian cigarettes are made from 100% pure Virginia tobacco.

Perique, A farmer called Pierre Chenet is credited with first turning this local tobacco into the Perique in 1824 through the technique of pressure-fermentation. Considered the truffle of pipe tobaccos, it is used as a component in many blended pipe tobaccos, but is too strong to be smoked pure. At one time, the freshly moist Perique was also chewed, but none is now sold for this purpose. It is typically blended with pure Virginia to lend spice, strength, and coolness to the blend.

Oriental tobacco, is a sun-cured, highly aromatic, small-leafed variety (Nicotiana tabacum) that is grown in Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, and Macedonia. Oriental tobacco is frequently referred to as “Turkish tobacco”, as these regions were all historically part of the Ottoman Empire. Many of the early brands of cigarettes were made mostly or entirely of Oriental tobacco; today, its main use is in blends of pipe and especially cigarette tobacco (a typical American cigarette is a blend of bright Virginia, burley and Oriental).

Wild Tobacco, is native to the southwestern United States, Mexico, and parts of South America. Its botanical name is Nicotiana rustica.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Where_is_tobacco_grown

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 11:35 PM

Been vaping and cigarette free for over a year!

Keep your damn hands off my nic juice!

Oxymoron on June 12, 2013 at 11:39 PM

workingclass artist on June 12, 2013 at 11:35 PM

What you quoted makes my point, re the quality of tobaccos for smoking purposes. Remove smoking them from the equation and all you are left with is the cost/benefit analysis of harvesting plants for liquid nicotine production.

I believe there will always be a market for fine smoking tobaccos, regardless of e-cigarette use (as there will be people who choose to smoke fine cigarette tobaccos, cigars, and pipe tobaccos for the taste) but the current tobacco/cigarette production and sales market will be eviscerated – that is, unless e-cigarettes are regulated under a disposable unit model similar to disposable ball-point pens.

Oh, and under that disposable model, since manufacturers control what goes into the vape fluid, forget using e-cigs to wean yourself off the smoking habit. Of course, the industry does love its repeat customers, as do regulators…

Wanderlust on June 12, 2013 at 11:54 PM

MKH – nice SWF ref there … readers may not realize the fountainhead of talent in said film, among them Reese Witherspoon, Jake Busey and a post-Dazed Joey Lauren Adams. Good stuff, that one.

King B on June 12, 2013 at 11:58 PM

The FDA is working for the states and the tobacco lobby. Can’t collect tobacco taxes on these devices which compete with cigarettes.

aloysiusmiller on June 12, 2013 at 11:58 PM

Obviously we’re going to need a $50/unit e-cig tax if we’re going to get any money out of these filthy, selfish, non-carcinogenic smokers!

DarthBrooks on June 13, 2013 at 12:09 AM

I bought my first e-cig 3 1/2 years ago. That’s also when I quit my two pack a day habit.

Not only did I quit a 30 year cigarette habit, I have deprived the state and federal governments of thousands of dollars in taxes. Seems like a win/win to me.

Wendya on June 13, 2013 at 12:10 AM

I bought my first e-cig 3 1/2 years ago. That’s also when I quit my two pack a day habit.

Not only did I quit a 30 year cigarette habit, I have deprived the state and federal governments of thousands of dollars in taxes. Seems like a win/win to me.

Wendya on June 13, 2013 at 12:10 AM

Now you’re an enemy of the State. IRS audits are in your future!

Wanderlust on June 13, 2013 at 12:25 AM

I got me a nice battery last month along with several bottles of juice.
I cut my use of cigarettes by half within the first week.
I have no doubt that all of the politicians who claim to want to raise tobacco-taxes in order to “reduce smoking” will do whatever they can to equate any device that delivers nicotine to be the same as tobacco so they can shake you down for your money.

After all, It’s for the children…

The same people who claim to want to help people stop smoking will be the one’s who do their best to tax the best alternative available into oblivion.

shorebird on June 13, 2013 at 12:40 AM

Seems to me like a moral panic.

The anti-smoking groups are coming across hard as being more concerned about maintaining the designated stigmas than about actual health. Even if e-cigs aren’t completely harmless, they are a long sight better than conventional cigarettes.

Voyager on June 13, 2013 at 1:12 AM

Mary Katherine,

Tut-tut-tut. The nanny-staters are upset that you are typing about cigarettes while gestating. Babies are impressionable, even in the womb, and a child is never too young to begin their nanny-state education. Please strap some headphones on your belly and play a hacking cough for an hour to atone for your transgression.

(But just in case it’s a girl-baby, make sure to extol the virtues of buying Plan B over the counter at the age of 11. Cancer sticks….down twinkles! Reproductive freedom…up twinkles!)

Grace_is_sufficient on June 13, 2013 at 7:20 AM

I recently switched from analog cigarettes to the electronics about 1 month or so ago. I’ve smoked for more than 16yrs, I dipped for many years, I quit smoking and went to Snus for a while (but it irritated my stomach) wound up smoking again, and now finally I’ve kicked them. I love my e-cig (I use an eGo style kit – refillable and looks nothing like a cigarette). It has virtually no smell, tastes great (depending on fluid), lasts forever, and it’s not dangerous. I can literally slip off into a room of my house, have a few puffs, and return to playing with my kiddos without the stench or health troubles of cigarettes. Heck, I’ve even used it in my office before without notice. These things are definitely the way to go. I have no desire to pick up a cigarette. I can also have only a puff or two if I want instead of a whole cigarette. You can choose your nicotine levels as well. These things have been a god-send for me, and for anyone who wants to quit, I highly recommend them!!! (I’ve turned several co-workers already).

If you guys (or any looking to quit) have questions about how it works, best brands, fluids, etc… Feel free to ask. I’ve spent countless hours researching.

As for what is in them. Simple. Propylene Glycol, Vegetable Glycerin, L-Nicotine (lab grade), FDA approved flavoring. That’s it. (PG is the same stuff they use to make fake smoke, and it’s actually in many things that we eat — it’s FDA approved for consumption).

Passed on June 13, 2013 at 8:36 AM

havent smoked in 6 months thanks to E’s..sorry taxman, you aren’t getting paid no mo’…at least here.

ninjacoastie on June 13, 2013 at 9:05 AM

Used to smoke a half pack or so a day. After nearly a year on ecigs I can’t stand the smell of the real thing.

Pest on June 13, 2013 at 9:14 AM

Like toy guns are required to have neon orange nipples at the ends uf their barrels, require e-cigs to color their filters neon-pink.

That would decrease the male usage.

(why ban advertising a healthy alternative?)

socalcon on June 13, 2013 at 9:26 AM

I work as a tobacco treatment specialist and would welcome more positive use of e-cigs but the FDA is so freakin slow. It wasnt until just a month ago they finally approved NRT as a recommended treatment for smokeless tobacco users.

Imrahil on June 13, 2013 at 10:21 AM

I recently switched from analog cigarettes to the electronics

LOL, “Analog Cigarettes” CLASSIC!

JusDreamin on June 13, 2013 at 11:18 AM

I love my Ego-C with the Kanger Evod tank…

E-cigs are a Godsend.

Polish Rifle on June 13, 2013 at 11:32 AM

July 3rd of 2013 will be my 3rd anniversary of quitting regular….or what us e-cig users call analogs…cigarettes. I haven’t taken a single drag from an analog since. I go to concerts and go to the smoking areas with 100s smoking regular cigarettes and I’m not tempted what-so-ever to light one up. Even my husband still smokes cigarettes so I have them around me all the time. I had tried EVERYTHING before e-cigs to quit. I started with an e-cig at a higher nicotine level and over a period of a couple of months I gradually reduced the nicotine level to zero. That is what I use now. If cigarette companies would get smart…they could also do drop down levels in nicotine to help the people that WANT to quit.

I absolutely LOVE my e-cig. I can “smoke” almost any flavor I want to. It is no more dangerous than taking a shower as you are inhaling mostly steam. The flavors that are put in them are FDA approved food flavorings that you find in most products in your local grocery store. Is it 100% safe? Nothing is 100% safe. But in the last 3 years I haven’t inhaled 300-500 cancer causing chemicals. I haven’t been burning paper and tobacco and inhaling them. I’m not coughing and hacking and spitting up…you know. My taste returned and so did my energy level. I also haven’t had a cold or flu or respiratory issue in the last 3 years. And I’m not causing anyone’s medical insurance rates to go up.

Today I am “smoking” blueberry cotton candy and watermelon. You can also get bacon, many tobaccos flavors, fruits from citrus to melons to berries, Pepsi and 7up and Dr. Pepper, coffee, bubble gum, chocolate and so many other flavors. I don’t stink like an ashtray anymore and people actually ask me to “smoke” in their house because you can get a tiny hint of blueberry in the air.

I can’t say it enough…I absolutely LOVE my e-cigarette and would encourage anyone that wants to quit to at least try it. I have saved $1000s in the cost of cigarettes alone not including the medical costs. The Federal Government should be encouraging the use of e-cigs instead of trying to nanny us all into their master plan.

speppers69 on June 13, 2013 at 12:09 PM

Over four years tobacco free. I like the eGo-T battery, Kanger T2 Cartomizer and green apple flavor juice (24mg). I puff in the office … all the time. Just now in fact.

PoliTech on June 13, 2013 at 12:22 PM

This little article tells you absolutely everything you need to know about statism. Everything.

Xasprtr on June 13, 2013 at 1:52 PM

Panic: Ads for e-cigs not banned by tobacco regulations…because they’re not made of tobacco

Somehow I think this will be high on the Honey Do list when the next Congress meets.

Surely this is a top priority compared to all the other stuff that’s going on.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 13, 2013 at 2:14 PM