I was quite taken aback by your Sept. 15 front-page public health article on e-cigarettes, “State to regulate electronic smoking devices,” because it did not contain the word "cancer" anywhere.
Cigarettes are regulated because they cause cancer, not because they are addictive. Nicotine does not cause cancer, and nicotine is only slightly addictive — and not as addictive as caffeine. Cigarette companies put additives into the cigarettes to make them more addictive. These chemicals are what cause cancer. Nicotine, in my opinion, is not a gateway drug.
I have been a substance abuse counselor for 15 years and a proud member of AA for 20-plus years. I was also a former smoker and quit successfully using e-cigarettes three years ago. It was the only way I could quit smoking, and it was successful. This took me two years, gradually reducing the nicotine content in my electronic cigarette each month. The second year I was using 0 percent nicotine and was inhaling only water vapor. I carried around the e-cig as a crutch. I also took the store’s advice to use liquid that did not remind me of a cigarette or menthol. Liquid comes in hundreds of flavors. Yes, some are fruity, but not with the intention of targeting children. Unfortunately, I am addicted now to watermelon and chew bubble gum constantly, but this is neither a health risk nor a cause of cancer.
Massachusetts is trying to be on the forefront of the e-cigarette regulations. The fact is, e-cigarettes have been around for five or six years in Florida and other states. It is so popular that one rarely sees anyone smoking normal, cancer-causing cigarettes. After a nominal investment ($50), vaping costs about $10 per month for e-liquid refills. These kits are available for sale on the Internet, with no age restrictions for purchase.
The federal government is just now studying the effects of inhaled water vapor. Massachusetts is late to the party. Mass Health regulators are trying to educate themselves and desperately catch up to save embarrassment. As a leader in health care advocacy, Massachusetts has dropped the ball on this issue. It is scrambling to get it right and is getting it all wrong.
E-cigarettes are the best thing to come along to combat smoking and should be promoted, not discouraged and regulated. The state should go ahead if it must and regulate the nicotine liquid, but putting restrictions on a device that turns water into vapor? That is like banning all teapots and electric humidifiers.
For the edification of lobbyists against secondhand smoking, vaping is just water vapor. It has no harmful ingredients, it does not have an odor, and it dissipates into the air within seconds. Airlines have now caved in and banned vaping from airplanes. I also suggest a rally to ban perfumes and colognes. My throat starts to tighten and my eyes water when I am around it. Might as well ban all candles and incense from the mall stores, too — and the smell of fresh-baked cookies!
Cigarettes are regulated because they cause cancer, not because they are addictive. Nicotine does not cause cancer, and nicotine is only slightly addictive — and not as addictive as caffeine. Cigarette companies put additives into the cigarettes to make them more addictive. These chemicals are what cause cancer. Nicotine, in my opinion, is not a gateway drug.
I have been a substance abuse counselor for 15 years and a proud member of AA for 20-plus years. I was also a former smoker and quit successfully using e-cigarettes three years ago. It was the only way I could quit smoking, and it was successful. This took me two years, gradually reducing the nicotine content in my electronic cigarette each month. The second year I was using 0 percent nicotine and was inhaling only water vapor. I carried around the e-cig as a crutch. I also took the store’s advice to use liquid that did not remind me of a cigarette or menthol. Liquid comes in hundreds of flavors. Yes, some are fruity, but not with the intention of targeting children. Unfortunately, I am addicted now to watermelon and chew bubble gum constantly, but this is neither a health risk nor a cause of cancer.
Massachusetts is trying to be on the forefront of the e-cigarette regulations. The fact is, e-cigarettes have been around for five or six years in Florida and other states. It is so popular that one rarely sees anyone smoking normal, cancer-causing cigarettes. After a nominal investment ($50), vaping costs about $10 per month for e-liquid refills. These kits are available for sale on the Internet, with no age restrictions for purchase.
The federal government is just now studying the effects of inhaled water vapor. Massachusetts is late to the party. Mass Health regulators are trying to educate themselves and desperately catch up to save embarrassment. As a leader in health care advocacy, Massachusetts has dropped the ball on this issue. It is scrambling to get it right and is getting it all wrong.
E-cigarettes are the best thing to come along to combat smoking and should be promoted, not discouraged and regulated. The state should go ahead if it must and regulate the nicotine liquid, but putting restrictions on a device that turns water into vapor? That is like banning all teapots and electric humidifiers.
For the edification of lobbyists against secondhand smoking, vaping is just water vapor. It has no harmful ingredients, it does not have an odor, and it dissipates into the air within seconds. Airlines have now caved in and banned vaping from airplanes. I also suggest a rally to ban perfumes and colognes. My throat starts to tighten and my eyes water when I am around it. Might as well ban all candles and incense from the mall stores, too — and the smell of fresh-baked cookies!
Source : http://www.capecodtimes.com
No comments:
Post a Comment