The unscientists at the FDA are proposing national regulation discouraging the use of e-cigarettes that deliver nicotine without the cancer causing smoke.
Back in 1997, when Journalists still presented both sides of an issue, the NY Times investigated whether the rush to kill tobacco smoking was overlooking the health benefits from nicotine, which are many.
While there are good affects of nicotine on the health of smokers there is something else, “Smoking is a major cause of cancer and a host of cardiovascular and other diseases that cause millions of deaths each year….”
That said, can anyone cite a study that compares tobacco smoke from cigarettes produced by the Big Tobacco companies and natural tobacco smoke that has NOT been treated with a reported 600 carcinogens used in the tobacco products of Big Tobacco?
No? I didn’t think so.
The FDA just announced today that they decided to expand their charter and regulate vapor products because they have the word “cig” in the name e-cig. (more my analysis than their actual statement as to why)
It is only a matter of time before the e-cig needs to be wifi connected so that they can tax you on how much vapor you use… but will you be taxed at a higher rate than cow flatulence?
That was why I brought this up.
By mid day, the FDA had switched their rationale from health to “there are reports of devices exploding when plugged into the wall”. With that rationale, the FDA can claim jurisdiction over iPhones.
It is sad, but CC has it right. The FTC/FDA will move right in and regulate (read: tax) anything even slightly resembling tobacco. I did an informal survey here at work and I was amazed at how many people with neurological issues use e-cigs. The interesting part is they didn’t do it because of the nicotine, so they can’t know about any “benefits”.
There was someone on TV this morning saying that when flying recently, he/she was seated next to a passenger “smoking” an e-cig.
Evidently the FAA rules are against combustibles and this is about as combustible as a saline nose spray.
Look for the Feds to go on a hiring spree to restrict freedom here.
The NY Times article is very old but explains that research that nicotine might have positive effects was being ignored because of the connection with smoking.
The main things we know are it improves neurological functions as it mimics neurotransmitters. People’s ability to focus improves, and it reduces the symptoms of Parkinsons and Alzheimer’s. Smoking also speeds up metabolism, which is why people often gain a lot of weight when they stop smoking.
Camille Paglia was very brave today on a related topic – she said it is time to repeal the Federal law that forces states to set the legal drinking age at 21. I have said the same things in the past. This might be a good issue for Libertarians to use as an organizing vehicle on college campuses. The Religious Right and Statists within the Republican Party would be forced to show their actual motivations.
Paglia’s piece was pretty much spot on. I would point out that while the Republicans were largely complicit in raising the drinking age, it was Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) who did the bidding of MADD (Mother’s Against Drunk Driving) in introducing the legislation.
The world is a better place without Frank Lautenberg.
Once he raised the legal drinking age to 21 in 1984, the country saw an epidemic of ruined lives and crack/cocaine deaths and even some high profile ones such as college athlete Len Bias who was 20 in 1984 (but 22 when he died in 1986.)
BTW- If you ever take Amtrak or NJ Transit through NJ, there is a special place where you can think of Frank Lautenberg as you urinate (preferably after consuming an alcoholic beverage from Amtrak)
https://www.njtransit.com/tm/tm_servlet.srv?hdnPageAction=PressReleaseTo&PRESS_RELEASE_ID=670