Research Shows E-Cigs Might Be As Good For Quitting As Nicotine Patches

"Taking a drag from an e-cigarette may be just as safe and effective as slapping on a nicotine patch for smokers struggling to quit, according to the first physician-run trial to compare the two products." That's according to research recently published in The Lancet (PDF) and reported by Bloomberg. Why is this significant? From the article: "If European and U.S. regulators treat e-cigarettes as medical devices, yet leave cigarettes on general sale, tobacco makers 'will retain their market monopoly, and we will never learn whether e-cigarettes would replace traditional cigarettes if allowed to continue evolving and competing with smoked tobacco on even terms,' [wrote clinical psychology professor Peter Hajek]. The results will also be presented today at the European Respiratory Society’s annual meeting in Barcelona. E-cigarettes have taken Europe and the U.S. by storm. In France, there are more than 1 million regular users, according to a government-commissioned report published in May. Sales worldwide will probably approach $2 billion by the end of this year and top $10 billion by 2017, according to a forecast by Wells Fargo & Co."

Re:Might be?

[girlintraining]

So that's not quite a successful quit yet, but in terms of harm reduction it's looking good so far. Since I can control the strength of the liquid by mixing it myself, I'm working on a very long, gentle taper down.

SINNER! Repent and accept our righteous anti-smoker ways! You're polluting us! You smell bad! People like you are scummy addicts who should be locked away in jail!

Or something. Look... the fact is, the anti-smoker contingent is trying to ban e-cigs and government is trying to tax the hell out of them because they look at it as people 'escaping' their 'public health' tax... so it's a match made in heaven.

What's really telling is that I was sucking on an e-cig in a hospital... and no doctor or nurse said a word. Wanna know why? Because it's not harmful to them or their patients... and it's no worse than a patch. They want people to quit. The jury's still out on whether e-cigs help with that, but they clearly don't hurt... and from a harm reduction standpoint, they're about a hundred times better.

But... no matter. You are a sinner, a scumbag... an addicted fool we need to tax every penny from... for your own good of course!

The reasons are multifarious

[stoploss]

I started smoking at age 20. Deliberately. Of my own volition. Primarily for the stimulant effect and secondarily to defy the goddamn anti-smoking meddlers... their disingenuous, logical fallacy-laden TV commercials really induced my rage.

I collected approximately nine pack-years of cigarette smoking.

I broke the nicotine physical addiction several times over those years (zero nicotine intake for 3+ weeks); however, what kept dragging me back to smoking was the fact that I mentally identified myself as a smoker. Smoking was part of my identity, which meant that cessation was always in dichotomous tension between "health" and "self". To put it in perspective, I likely self-identified more strongly with the term "smoker" than the term "American".

I quit my smoking habit permanently the day I had my first e-cig delivered in 2009. A few months later I tried a single cigarette, found the taste revolting, and haven't smoked since then. Smoking is unwieldy and a serious inconvenience during the winter (I never smoked inside my domicile). Downsides of quitting smoking included having my sense of taste/smell return... the world is revolting and ignorance is bliss.

Notwithstanding, after several years of "vaping" e-cigs inside our home no one has ever been able to tell—my life partner would tell me, because she hates the smell of cigarettes and always comments whenever we are near someone who recently smoked.

I have given e-cigs to all my smoker friends and relatives. All of these people have subsequently quit smoking (some of these smokers had been engaged in the habit for 30+ years). In fact, they all quit using nicotine altogether, leaving me as the sole remaining individual in my monkeysphere who cultivates a nicotine addiction.

Re:second hand e-smoke

[budgenator]

If your going to troll as an AC, don't Preveiw under your UID then post Anonymously, because your sig is inserted into the post,

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:second hand e-smoke

[drinkypoo]

second hand nicotine was never an issue (and propylene glycol is recognized as safe, and even used in many asthma inhalers). The harm from second hand smoke comes from the smoke particles, something that's not present in e-cig vapor.

Safe in asthma inhaler != safe when heated. The asthma inhalant is delivered by pressure. And there is still plenty of argument over the safety of both propylene glycol and ethylene glycol when heated, and both are used in e-cigs. As well, nicotine and tar will build up on surfaces from smoking and will transfer by touch.

Re:second hand e-smoke

[Tyler Eaves]

Is it? Is there any *real* evidence that pure nicotine, in these sort of doses, is actually harmful for you, when not associated with tars, benzene, and all the other nasties in cig smoke? Or is it more like caffeine, where it might exactly be "healthy", but the real risk at typical usage levels is miniscule.

Re:Not Intended for Quitting

[Anonymous Coward]

2. You don't smell like burnt paper, and don't make you smell like burnt paper for the rest of the day. Pretty self-explanatory.

Smokers don't smell like burnt paper. Burnt paper is actually rather pleasant compared to what smokers smell like. Especially at the end of a long day. That's one of the problems with smokers, they don't realize how bad they smell because they're supressing their sense of smell. Then they get mad at people who can't stand the disgusting smell.

I completely agree that all smokers should, if they can, switch to the e-cigarettes and that they shouldn't have any restrcitions on them that tobacco products don't have. It doesn't matter if they don't lead to quitting, they're so much better for the smokers and the people around them. Not to mention the decrease in house fires and forest fires.

Re:second hand e-smoke

[RussR42]

Huh. I thought the real point was to at least avoid the harm of smoking tobacco. Even if I never quit the ecig, I think I've still done something very, very good for my health.

Re:second hand e-smoke

[RussR42]

Your post is very disingenuous. The article itself says "3 out of 10" are found to contain acrolein and formaldehyde. For 10 bonus points, explain why they contain it and the others don't. I find it very odd that some ecigs are able to synthesize these two chemicals from the 3 main ingredients of eliquid and others don't. Perhaps what you mean to say is "A study found that if you put similar levels of formaldehyde and acrolein in you liquid mixtures as found in regular cigarettes, then they will contain similar levels of..." you get the point.

Re:second hand e-smoke

[yotto]

Well if you don't mind being addicted and the costs related to it, then go ahead and do it.

I don't mind it with coffee, so why should it be any different with e-cigarettes? I think this is a great idea if there truly are no secondhand issues.

ecigs not really a good thing...

[Eric Damron]

I understand that e-cigarettes may be able to be used to kick an addictive habit that has horrific health risks. However, it is another addictive pastime that probably has health risks of its own.

It has the potential of becoming a fad which would hook millions who believe it to be safe into a dangerous and expensive habit. Something the corporate powers would relish being that they consider this a real cash cow and anyone hooked a mere crop to be cultivated.

If I didnâ(TM)t have morals and I controlled an evil tobacco company I would endeavor to gain control of the e-cigarette market so that I could manipulate the price of both products. That way if tobacco sales started to fall off I could raise the price of e-cigarettes enough to drive customers to the more affordable tobacco products. Back and forth I would cultivate my crops.

Re:second hand e-smoke

[mjwx]

Is it? Is there any *real* evidence that pure nicotine, in these sort of doses, is actually harmful for you, when not associated with tars, benzene, and all the other nasties in cig smoke? Or is it more like caffeine, where it might exactly be "healthy", but the real risk at typical usage levels is miniscule.

I dont think it would be healthy per se, but definitely not worse than the other crap we're legally using (alcohol, pain killers, apple products). The big problem with Tobacco is not nicotine, but the other carcinogenic chemicals included as you pointed out.

The problem we have with Nicotine is that its addictive, but considering E-Cigs are an attempt to wean tobacco addicts onto a less dangerous product I'd say it's a huge step in the right direction.

Re:It's not the "tobacco industry" any more

[dryeo]

Caffeine is pretty addicting and routinely targeted at kids and sold most everywhere in one form or another.

as a non-smoker

[Tom]

I really, really welcome them.

I frankly don't care if you want to kill yourself, now or over time with smoking. But you are poisoning the same air I am breathing and that bothers me. And anything that can solve that is fantastic.

I really don't believe this

[DrXym]

The problem at this moment is they are being sold as a glamorous replacement for conventional cigarettes. Sexy people looking cool with their e-cigarette in their hands, attractive packaging, celebrity endorsements and all the rest. It's quite obvious they are being promoted much the same way cigarettes used to be as a lifestyle thing not as a smoking cessation product. From a marketing perspective this makes sense - the product is addictive and companies want their marketshare to grow, not be self-limited. But it's not acceptable from a public health perspective.

I think e-cigarettes *could* be as good as nicotine patches for smoking cessation *if* they were promoted and regulated in the same way. But they're not. At least not yet. I expect most countries will crack down on them in due course.