110 Comments Add a Comment
linkicon reporticon emailicon
David_Johnston says:
As usual, the media gives these devices a one sided story. A doctor in a $2500 suit that claimed when asked if ecigs are safe? "We don't know. We don't think so".

He stated tey weren't FDA approved, but all ingredients in the product are FDA approved food ingredients. You eat, drink, and breathe these products every day in the food and beverages you consume!

The exsmoking journalist on the segment took a drag, and make a face that showed he obviously didn't like the taste. In fairness they should have had a smoker try it and give their opinion also if they let him make his point the way he did!

What basis is he using for "we don't think so" part? Did he or the university he workd for do any testing to substanciate his claim? I'm sure the answer is no, or they would have presented this in their biased, one sided interview! Ruyan Group should file a huge lawsuit against CBS, the doctor and the university he represents for slander until they can prove his statements are factual! There was noone present to defend the product. Was the manufacturer contacted before this interview and offered equal time to defend the product? Doubtful!

The facts are that testing has been done on this product by independent labs, with results showing the inhaled and exhaled vapor is harmless. I have personally used thid device successfully, going from a 1.5-2 pack a day smoker, to using the device only. I feel better, don't get winded, don't stink, and have saved over $200/month since starting it!

In conclusion, I would like to ask CBS why when I put "electronic cigarettes" into the search engine on their site, what pops up with the link to the story? 3 ads for sites you can buy electronic cigarettes! If they're going to air negative, one sided stories about a product, then they shouldn't accept money from these sites to advertise. Those companies should dump and boycott CBS and it's affiliates from their promotions!
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
terrielamoria says:
Just wanted to comment about my own personal experience with electronic cigarettes. I was a smoker for over 30 years. Smoked 2+ packs per day. Over the years I've tried patches, gum,etc. but nothing ever worked for me. I started using an electronic cigarette about 5 weeks ago, and have not had a real tobacco cigarette since. I can now breath better, and I am no longer suffering from smoker's cough and chest pains. My family is happy too. They say that they can not even smell anything when I am using my e-cig. I realize that these devices have not been officially tested and I agree that is something that needs to be done. But in the meantime I am willing to take the risk, because I feel my only other option at this point is regular tobacco cigarettes, which HAVE been tested and proven to cause cancer and health problems.
I also would like to say that I personally have not seen any indications of these products being aimed at adolescents. Many of the websites selling these devices clearly state that they will not sell to anyone under the age of 18, and that they are not recommended for non-smokers.
I just feel that your review of these devices seemed a bit one-sided. It did not appear that you had done much research on the subject at all. And you had a non-smoker trying out the product on your show. How could he possibly give an honest opinion on the performance of an item that is used as a "smoking alternative"?
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
jondeak says:
An other case of poor news reporting. The truth is that they have been tested by many companys and the vapor is harmless, matter of fact the main ingrediant propylene glycol is FDA approved and can be found in most foods, tooth pastes, etc that we use daily. I smell cigarette lobbyist is this article and they stink like smoke. If it wasnt for The Safe Cig Electronic cigarette I would probably have king cancer today. It saved my life and I thank god for The Safe Cig Everyday. The safe cig is a Philadelphia based company with several stores in local malls. They sell the best electronic cigarette on the market today. Check out their website. I 100% recommend them. God Bless !

www.thesafecig.com
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
rru2s says:
This is a very unusual string of comments for CBSNEWS.COM. I would agree the the subject interview was overstating the potential uncertainty, but that goes with the territory for government toxicologists and some doctors as well.

The facts are, this product contains chiefly nicotine and nontoxic substances. The other components are very nontoxic. The dose of nicotine to the lungs may be different to the lungs than with real cigarettes because of the manner in which tar acts as a trap for all organic compounds entering the lungs. So it is concievable that more nicotine could be delivered to the bloodstream than with cigarettes. That might be the most important aspect that needs to be studied.

However, one cannot argue against the facts that toxicology has demonstrated that the carcinogens in tar are what contributes to the major aspect of risks with cigarettes. So a consumer who already smokes has 3 choices: (1) continuing to smoke; (2) using a patch or other method and quitting smoking; or (3) using the E-cig. Due to the dangers of tars in cigarettes, no toxicologist in their right mind would attempt to argue that option (3) is more dangerous than option (1). And if a person has already tried option (2), then it would be worthy of a serious effort to try the E-cig as a way to reduce their respiratory risks. As to the population that has never smoked, there are two concerns: (1) Does this product get people hooked on nicotine who may never have otherwise tried real cigarettes, and (2) is the E-cig harmful in and of itself. Perhaps the best manner to control E-cig would be to have a doctor oversee treatment, and ensure that E-cig is only given to those who already have a problem by smoking real cigarettes. Simple answer, but due to the FDA's long and complicated approval process, doctors could not prescribe this substance, even if clinical studies were started tomorrow, for roughly 5 to 10 years. But the effort is worth the trouble. Meanwhile, I'd say smokers that have tried to quit and haven't had luck through other methods, give this one a try. My son is using this product now, although he still smokes real cigarettes on top of it, which defeats the purpose.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Sun-- says:
This is a rank use of using due dillegence in a news story as you should have interviewed a doctor that had facts--not someone who made misrepresentation and did not know what where talking about. It is readily known and available knowledge that Ruyan just had Pony Testing do a full work up on their e-cigarette and found nothing harmful at all
:
PONY TEST(Short for PONY TESTing International Group),the leading testing organization, has qualification of the CNAS and CMA, gets mutually recognized agreement including USA, UK, Germany etc. 58 countries and regions. As a large comprehensive testing organization which runs on the basis of ISO/IEC 17925, the report provided by PONY TEST obtain international approval and international notarization & credit. Up to now, we have set up 4 large laboratories in China, 6 branches and 21 offices in UK, HK etc., formed an international testing network. In 2007, it honored "Deloitte Technology Fast 50 China" and "Deloitte Technology Fast 500 Asia Pacific". See http://www.ponytest.com/about-en.html

Here are the four new reported test results performed for Ryan by Pony and they are very encouraging. Note. Click on the photo after opening to enlarge the photo. So lets get some accuracy in your reporting please?--Sun

Results For Propylene Glycol
http://www.ruyan.com.cn/UploadFile/20081120052241578.jpg
Results For Chemical Reaction When Cartridge is Atomized
http://www.ruyan.com.cn/UploadFile/20081120052835906.jpg
Results For Zero Nicotine Cartridge and Temperature
http://www.ruyan.com.cn/UploadFile/20081120051915593.jpg
Results For Nicotine in Cartridges
http://www.ruyan.com.cn/UploadFile/20081120052713875.jpg
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
NonSmoker8 says:
As a non smoker I have a choice to put up with, or not, second hand smoke. How many millions ... from new born, adolescents & on up ... do not have this choice.

There are adolescents who will find ways to smoke these e-cigs just as they find ways to smoke tobacco & drink liquor (lower the legal age debate) regardless of efforts to curb the use of the latter 2 ... both of the latter proven to kill millions, either directly or indirectly.

I understand that: 1. the nicotine in these cigs comes from vegetables ... not tobacco. Healthier - my bet is Yes! 2. No known health related carcinogens like those found in tobacco related cigs. Healthier for all walks of life - my bet is Yes!

Should there be studies on the e-cig ... YOU BET ... however they should be done by laboratories that cannot be lobbied by the 'Tobacco industries' Lobbyists' so that the consumer can be assured of a true picture.

In all walks of life there are those who do not concern themselves with whom they sell stuff to, or who buys their product, ie: tobacco & liquor industries to name a couple.

My wife smokes an e-cig & I think its great ... no smell on her clothes, no smell on her hair, no smokers breath ... better for kissing :-) ... less coughing & I'm sure better for her health now that all those cancer & other related illness causing carcinogens are not being inhaled into her body.

It's bad enough that we inhale so much other pollution on a daily basis!!

To A Better Life
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
Ecopuff says:
I am outraged!

This Dr. is obviously associated with the pharmacudical companies and upset that this is cutting into their profits from other NRT's. He was even allowed to "plug" his prefered PATCHES and GUM methods of quitting.

We don't know the contents of the vapor. This has not been studied," Whiteson said. ...WRONG!!! http://www.healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf

"Are they safe?" Chen asked.

"We don't know, but we don't think so," Whiteson said. ...Operative word here is "think", ...You're SPECULATING!!!

So does this mean it could be worse for you than cigarettes?" Chen asked.

"It could be. The manufacturers think it's safer, but it could be worse. We just don't know at this time," Whiteson said. ...If you have no idea, why are you being allowed to so adimately voice your disapproval??? What makes you the expert on these devices???

Ms. Chen- I am highly dissappointed at you as a reporter to involve someone so uninformed and biased to do a peice that could be so vitally important to so many.

Dr. Jonathan Whiteson- Please don't bad-mouth something you know absolutely nothing about and take away some peoples only chance of ever quitting cigarettes. Your "gum and patches" are being challenged by something that actually works. Get over it!

CBS-You need to do your homework before airing a peice such as this!
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
logginscbs says:
There are reliable test reports on the content and ingredients (see www.healthnz.co.nz). Until there are clinical studies that test these devices as smoking cessation methods they remain "scientifically" unproven despite the significant anecdotal evidence. This is just a matter of time.

There are people who, for whatever reason, have not been able to quit. This device addresses their needs quite well. Marketing to underage folks and non-smokers is unconscionable. Nicotine addiction is one of, if not the most difficult to end or control. I don't think any one would say, as this doctor has said, that one puff will get you hooked. There are also many doctors who have recommended that their patients who cannot stop switch to this device.

The doctor on the show also contradicts a 2006 NYC study which shows that the majority of smokers in NYC are between the ages of 25 and 44 (531,000) and not those 18-24 (119,000). In general the press needs to do a comprehensive report on this and not little sound bytes which appear as sarcastic, campy fun moments for the reporters while suspending all rules of fair journalism.

Regulations are a big issue. First, their are quality control issues with knock-offs in China and there is no real legal oversight in a country rife with corruption. That is a tremendous problem with Chinese products in general. The original patent holder in China was somewhat successful last month in getting a court order for some of these knockoff manufacturers to cease and desist and even destroy inventory, but alas China is not like the US in terms of justice and enforcement.

The FDA, which has been in jurisdictional limbo regarding tobacco products in general, needs to review the published studies and have a certification process for these devices as well as specifiy the warnings to under-agers, non-smokers, pregnant women, people with heart disease, etc. They need to initiate a program of testing, controls and recommendations for this device to be effective and attempt to eliminate the Chinese black and grey markets. Ideally the products would be manufactured in the USA under strict ISO-2001 type of Quality Assurance Process Control Methodology and Implementation.

With 45 million smokers in the USA - the USA should have been on the case and taken this ball to a touchdown already. Especially with all the growing government awaremness and ($$$) available to provide incentives for such smoking cessation programs. I agree if this remains uncontrolled, like any other black or grey or even so called legitimate Chinese products (we are all well aware of the Chinese lead in children's toys and chemicals in Chinese toothpaste that hit the headlines recently) this is a big problem. If the FDA and other certified labs/agencies would look at this in a rational manner and could gain regulatory and enforcement control this would go a long way to reducing the negatives and could be a great health benefit for millions of smokers who have difficulty with the programs available to date.

The responsible thing to do would be for the USA to recognize the existing test reports, acknowledge the Chinese patents (2 of them) and work with those manufacturers to legally import an approved product (one of which was granted a USA Patent). Of course ideally this manufacturing capability should be moved to the US (but alas we live in the grim aftermath of a "Global Economy"). With outsourcing and off-shore services and manufacturing so prevalent that may not be economically viable (read greed profitable).
In any case, at this stage of the game there is a tremendous demand for this type of device and it is growing by leaps and bounds (to the point where it is finally getting the attention it should have had months, if not years ago).

By working with the legitimate patent holders and putting process controls in place, this could be a boon for the buyers and sellers. Even better would be for an approved product to be manufactured here in the good old USA, make it work by controlling the quality and safety issues and embrace it's huge potential health and business benefits. As the doctor on the show said, it is safer, there are no carcinogens.

Despite the snake-oil marketing and black market moves by the profit greedy this is a product with some compelling positives and great potential. There are manufacturers and vendors who are willing and eager to play by the rules, now and in the future.

Consumers with some grass-roots experience with these devices have identified the legitimate patented products with great difficulty having to sort through the many thousands of "illegal" products out there over the last two years.

This could work if we really want it to. We just need to be responsible across the board.
Is that possible in our business and culture today? That remains to be seen, even with compelling evidence of the benefits.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
idontsmokeivape says:
Today marks three weeks that I have been smoke-free after buying an ecig. And I don't miss them one bit. I don't smell like an ashtray anymore. I don't have to go outside and freeze to get my fix, and I don't have to worry about harming anyone else with second-hand smoke. I agree that testing needs to be done on any new product, but if the FDA approves of cigarettes and not this, I really don't care what the FDA says. People with an addiction to nicotine are finding an alternative that could be better for them. How can anyone say it could be worse? I tell every one I know about it. I've already gotten a few converts. And as far as teenage marketing goes, real cigarettes are much easier for them to come by and marketed for them much more than an ecig. I have a teenager, and even though I've told him all his life not to ever start smoking, if God forbid he does, I would much rather he use an ecig than traditional tobacco cigarettes.
reply
linkicon reporticon emailicon
weatherhells says:
nordeck52: Not all electronic cigarettes contain nicotine. The liquids I use with mine contain either propylene glycol (the same stuff they use in fog machines at concerts) or food-grade vegetable glycerin to produce the vapor, plus natural and artificial flavoring, citric acid, lemon juice, vinegar and distilled water. And it's made in the USA. (In fact, it's something I could make in my own kitchen, if I didn't prefer the convenience of having it premixed and shipped to me.)

It's available with nicotine, but since I kicked the nicotine addiction, I don't need it. What I DO need is something that gives me the pleasure I got from smoking. The electronic cigarette does that. I no longer have to fight the urge to take up smoking again.

(I also think that saying nicotine is "bad for you no matter what" might be overstating things a bit....)
reply
8/10