Tag Archives: e-cigs

Attack of the Vapers: Happy Vapoversary!

VapoversaryVB

Despite conflicting arguments, bad press, and junk science working against the movement, more and more people are switching to vaping and electronic cigarettes. I have to loudly say, “Congratulations!” to all of those who have chosen to make a better choice for their health (Action on Smoking and Health, 2014) and their finances by switching from combustible toxicants to vaping and electronic cigarettes. So, good job to all of you!

We just attended the one-year vapoversary of a local establishment, Vapor Boss. I’ve not been to a vast number of vaping events, but I was truly impressed with the turn out for this one. It also made me happy because the folks who own and run this store (and a large portion of their regular patrons) are part of what I consider the responsible voices and presence in the world of vaping and electronic cigarettes.

As it happens this particular vapoversary corresponds with what will be a year free of combustible tobacco in my own home. Since that time, I have watched people I never expected to switch over move from trying to vaping occasionally to even becoming vaping enthusiasts and advocates. I’ve watched social media participants and interest groups become well-informed and take action to make vaping responsible and keep it viable. I have seen vapers and vendors alike become more knowledgeable and resources to their peers and customers. By no means have all obstacles and outcomes been measured, but I have truly been pleased with the fact that vaping has not been a trend or a fad but a true lifestyle change for a lot of people… and one that has been positive for the majority.

What are some of the contributing factors to vaping success?

Technology. Just from my own observation, I would have to say that one of the biggest contributing factors is that the technology has evolved… a lot… in a hurry… and continues to do so. Nothing keeps the modern day internet-and-tech-loving human connected to a trend like the advent of newer and better toys. I’m not kidding, and I don’t mean that in any way as a negative commentary. I’m pretty certain that the advances in mods (mechanical and digital), tanks, and drippers that not only improve the quality of vapor but also engage the ingenuity of the person vaping (not to mention the “shiny” factor) has kept many a dabbler interested long enough to become a full-time vaper. If everyone was still stuck with only the PG (propylene glycol)/PEG (polyethylene glycol) cartridge style e-cigs with no other option, I would bet my favorite mod that the people who have switched to full-time vape would probably be back on their combustible tobacco. No offense to the look-a-likes, but the quality of those original e-cigarettes was deplorable, and without the improvements that the industry has made, I seriously doubt that vapers would be at the 2.7 million strong population in the United States (not counting other countries that have also embraced the vape) that last tallies estimated (Statistic Brain, 2015).

E-juices. This is another area where innovation and human creativity/ingenuity has improved quality and made the industry more viable and given more longevity to the efforts of those making the choice to switch over to what proposes to be a healthier alternative to combustible tobacco. The elimination of PEG has improved quality and decreased some of the identified hazards of the initial electronic nicotine delivery systems. Flavor options, VG (vegetable glycerin) increase, and improved distilling have opened up new options for people and have given those starting on the vaping journey better and more varied choices to help them find what fits their tastes. Additionally, the fact that there are many creative vendors creating new flavors and custom blends has been a boon to the market and kept many a die-hard cigarette user from returning to the ashtray.

Responsibility. For all that people were up in arms about the government sticking their nose into their vaping lounges and taking away their right to flavors, so far, it has not happened. That is not to say that there will not ever be an imposed FDA regulation. It is likely that at some point, the federal government at the behest of lobbyists from the moneybags of corporate America (like big tobacco and big pharmacology) will start to impose tariffs and restrictions on the local markets and small businesses that may sting (a lot). However, one of the major movements that has probably staved off the “big brother” invasion for the time being is self-regulation by the vaping community. Responsible vendors and advocates have recognized that while most of the adult vaping community might be trusted to act in an appropriate way, not everyone who choses vaping for their nicotine delivery system is a responsible adult. As I said to another friend at the vapoversary today, “Irresponsible people are why we can’t have nice things.” (I might have used different words than “irresponsible people” but we won’t go into that.) What has truly been inspiring is how the vaping community has stepped up to self-regulate things like underage sale bans, the use of appropriate e-liquid containers, normalization of content and warning labels, and customer education. Organizations such as TSFA (TN Smoke-Free Association), CASAA (Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association), and The Vaping Militia have stepped forward with other organizations to provide a voice of reason and advocacy by promoting safe practices and responsibility in the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems. Are there still disreputable vendors out there who don’t care what the sell or whether anyone gets injured/ill from their products so long as they make a profit? Of course there are, but the community as a whole has stepped up in providing education and those types of businesses are starving out little by little as the customer base starts recognizing who they can and cannot trust.

Community support. Humans are social creatures, and whether we admit it or not (excepting, of course, certain antisocial or avoidant elements of society), we all appreciate a little peer support now and again. The prevalence of social media groups, local meet-ups, local and state advocacy groups, and YouTube channels have allowed for vapers to connect with each other for support, education, and organization. People are able to find out from other vapers the do’s and don’ts, vendors that can be trusted (and those who really shouldn’t be), the safety concerns of particular devices or practices, “cloud-chasing” tricks, and the latest concerns about “big brother.” That connection has helped spread the word and helped vaping be safer and more reputable. It has served to provide forum for all the previously mentioned factors.

So, my parting shot for this AOTV post is: Keep up the good work, vaping community! Congratulations to all of you who have done your homework and made informed choices. And last, but certainly not least… Happy Vapoversary!

Action on Smoking and Health. (November, 2014). Electronic cigarettes. http://www.ash.org.uk/files/documents/ASH_715.pdf

Statistic Brain. (February, 2015). Electronic Cigarette Statistics. http://www.statisticbrain.com/electronic-cigarette-statistics/

Attack of the Vapers, Part duh… The Empire Strikes Back

My apologies for the long delay in what I thought would be a quick follow up to the first Attack of the Vapers (AOTV). However, if you have been reading along with the program, you have seen that there has been a big dust up recently with the proposed regulations and legal ramifications of using alternative nicotine delivery systems. However, given the timeline of the Federal Food and Drug Administration decisions, I decided to stop procrastinating and get this out there to maybe provide some information and encourage individuals in the vaping community to use their voices to impact the future of the phenomenon while there is still time to do so.

First, I will start by saying that there are a lot… let me repeat that… a LOT of rumors and speculations flying about the internet and the various vaping shops. Everyone has a perspective and a perception. I am going to give you my best, objective summary, and I am going to give you a bit of my opinion (as well as some I have gotten speaking with shop owners and enthusiasts in my local area). However, I am also going to provide you with a list of my references with links. Read what is available, and not from only one source. Educate yourself, and be knowledgeable about what is being proposed. Then, get involved. And now, I’m getting ahead of myself.

What Is Going On?

Since the first patent on the electronic nicotine delivery system in 1963, there has been resurgence in the evolution of the electronic cigarette. Since 2008, the number of electronic nicotine delivery system users has increase exponentially. In part, this is due to the indoor clean air regulations and non-smoker rights activists. There are fewer and fewer places for smokers to light up. People turned to alternative methods of acquiring nicotine. In 2009, the FDA was allowed by law to regulate tobacco products. However, that did not apply to electronic cigarettes. Additionally, the regulations imposed by the FDA were targeted to prevent smoking in the youth population of the country. Tobacco companies were restricted from using pretty colors, cartoon characters, and “candy” flavors that were seen as marketing to a younger user (Whitcomb & Gorman, 2014).

Tobacco companies complied. However, with the change to the cigarette prices, flavors, and restrictions, adults sought other ways of meeting their nicotine and behavioral desires. The original e-cigarettes were cartomizers with primarily propylene glycol and polyethylene glycol and tobacco flavoring in a system looking much like a cigarette. Many former smokers tried these, but in truth, they were found by and large to be a poor substitute to the smoking ritual and flavor. However, innovation is fed by deficits in the system, and smokers can be very innovative about getting their nicotine. While some chose to use the smoking cessation alternatives, the gum, patch, and medication routes were successful in approximately 6% of the population. Additionally, not every smoker actually wants to quit. That generally comes as a shock to the anti-smokers of the world, but some people enjoy their smoke. That being said, the removal of some of the flavors allegedly used to market to children was essentially punishing adults who may also enjoy flavored cigarettes, cigars, pipes, and now, vapors. In response, nicotine vapor alternatives became more and more prevalent, and they grew in popularity.

Several things occurred. Cigarette sales decreased as more smokers switched over to electronic nicotine delivery. Vaping does not carry the same taxes as the tobacco products, and there was a decrease in tax revenue as smokers switched to the less expensive vaping options. Anti-smoking activists were alarmed by the increased number of people mimicking smoking behavior regardless that it merely produced water vapor. Public health concerns about the long term effects were raised. Because there were no regulations, there were significant concerns about sales to minors. Lawmakers claim that e-cigarettes are a gateway drug to draw children and teens into smoking (Hunt, 2014; Moskowitz, 2014). Complaints are that marketing uses celebrity status to make e-cigarettes attractive. Additionally, free trial offers and samples concern critics. Critics also claim that e-cigarettes keep people from “quitting altogether,” neglecting to acknowledge the fact that people may not want to quit (Moskowitz, 2014).

What Does the Law Say?

Initially, the regulation and ban of vaping indoors was left to individual businesses, but more broad legislation has been proposed and ratified to restrict vaping indoors (Opfer, 2013). Currently, there are precious few clearly stated laws about vaping, but that is changing with each passing cloud of fragrant water vapor. In March of this year, Los Angeles joined New York, Boston, and Chicago in banning vaping from public venues such as restaurants, bars, and nightclubs (Whitcomb & Corman, 2014). The map of legislation is currently in flux. More and more states are scrambling to understand the phenomenon and regulate use in a meaningful way. There are varying laws in the U.S. restricting sales and use of e-cigarettes and their vaporizing counterparts, but there are still surprisingly few that forbid sale to minors (License to Vape, 2014). There are no regulations on the chemicals used or the disclosure of ingredients that could be potentially dangerous to vapers. However, beware vapers! A man in New York received a citation for vaping while driving. New York has a law that prohibits the use of electronic devices. Though electronic cigarettes are not specifically named in the law defining the devices, the judge ruled he had violated the law (Sherwood, 2014). We won’t actually discuss how distracting dropping a lit cigarette in the crotch is while driving, but apparently that is still legal.

What Is Proposed By the FDA?

The FDA proposed regulation April 24th, 2014, that while not as restrictive as feared (Craver, 2014; Sullum, 2014), still concerns many in the vaping community. The released proposal expands the definition of tobacco products to include electronic cigarettes, pipe tobacco, hookah tobacco, dissolvables, gels, and some cigars. It also covers products that could be considered paraphernalia, such as papers, tubes, charcoals, and hookah flavor enhancers (Langley, 2014). The FDA is proposing required health warnings on products (including addictive properties of nicotine), ban on sale to minors, prohibition of free samples, and disclosure of chemicals used in e-cigarettes (Burton & Esterl, 2014). Additionally, the FDA proposed that manufacturers of e-cigarettes will have to substantiate claims that they are safer than traditional cigarettes. Manufacturers may be required to register with the FDA for products and submit to premarket ingredient review, inspection, and approval (Devaney, 2014; Langley, 2014). Though Senate Health Committee Chair Tom Harkin is pushing to ban “candy” flavors, claiming it is marketing to children, the FDA stopped short of banning sweet flavors (Moskowitz, 2014). The primary focus of the language in the proposed regulations appears to be the e-cigarette devices of the cartomizer variety, such as Blu, NJOY, Logic, CB, and Nicotek (Burton & Esterl, 2014; Craver, 2014).

What Is Tennessee Proposing?

According to CASAA (2014), Tennessee is proposing a bill that would identify vapor products (e-cigarettes, vape pens, etc.) as non-tobacco, and therefore not taxed as such. They would also not be subject to the Tennessee Clean Indoor Air Act. This means that while smoking in certain indoor venues is banned, vapers would still be free to puff away. While the vaping community would be pleased with this outcome, the non-vapers and anti-smoking activists in Knoxville have expressed displeasure. Some people are still very sensitive to the residual PG or nicotine in some of the high nicotine vapor expressed by those using devices, and some are merely fearful believing that the water vapor is “just like smoke.” The bill proposed in Tennessee legislature mirrors one proposed in Oklahoma on April 16th, 2014. The law would also prevent proposed “sin” taxes such as that attempted by Vermont on April 7th, 2014 for 92% (honestvape, 2013). The proposed Tennessee law has met with some opposition from tobacco lobbyists for revenue and tax concerns, according to local vape vendors in Knoxville and e-cigarette enthusiasts.

Arguments Get Heated

Electronic cigarette companies such as NJOY expressed concern that a push to ban vaping is a deterrent to individuals switching from combustible tobacco. Instead of changing over to electronic cigarettes or their vape counterparts, people may choose to continue smoking rather than quit (Whitcomb & Gorman, 2014). The claims that strict regulations will encourage people to quit nicotine entirely ignores the fact that some people still enjoy their vaping after tapering down to zero nicotine. Critics feel that the FDA is not aggressive enough (Burton & Esterl, 2014). Many critics still feel that the flavors, ads and internet sales are a targeted marketing towards children and teens, again neglecting to recognize that adults favor flavors in their e-liquids much like they do flavored beverages.

Vendors, manufacturers, and enthusiasts are concerned that innovation and industry growth will be stifled in the newly regulated market (Craver, 2014). Individual manufacturers, such as small to mid-sized companies will be unable to afford staying in business and “Big Tobacco” and pharmaceutical companies will be the only entities capable of paying for required approvals (Craver, 2014; Moskowitz, 2014; Opfer, 2013). Without the ability to expand and the creativity of the community with the ability to experiment, devices proposed by medical and technology professionals inspired by the new vaper devices for smoking cessation and abuse resistant medication delivery devices may never come to light (Clark, 2014).

One of the proposed regulations is that the FDA would require proof of claims that there are health benefits to switching to e-cigarettes from traditional combustible tobacco (Burton & Esterl, 2014). Currently, the FDA claims there is no substantiation for claims that vaping is healthier than smoking. However, the FDA arguments appear to be primarily founded on first generation devices, and enthusiasts and vendors feel that there is more current research that shows the positive impact of vaporizing devices over combustible tobacco with regards carcinogen production and combustible toxicants (Toole, 2014). Anecdotal evidence from those who have switched indicates improved taste and smell, becoming less winded after activity, and overall feeling better (Moskowitz, 2014). These narrative reports from vapers are supported by positive evaluations from medical professionals that indicated not only are those who switch over feeling better, they have measurably increased lung capacity (Toole, 2014). Contrary to arguments to the contrary, e-vapor appears to be less addictive than the smoke of traditional cigarettes, as vapers tend to decrease their nicotine levels over time, often continuing to vape at zero nicotine levels (Craver, 2014). Oliver Kershaw of the E-Cigarette Forum worries about the selection and availability of products for vapers in future as he believes most of the current products will not qualify with the FDA approval requirements (Sullum, 2014). Public health professionals indicated that the FDA proposals are a victory for “Big Tobacco” as smaller players in the market could be driven out of business due to cost of earning approval for any new or existing products, and individuals losing their flavor options and expense benefits may return to combustible tobacco products (Craver, 2014; Moskowitz; 2014, Sullum, 2014). Still, the proposed regulations seem to be of little concern to the “Big Three” tobacco companies who have their own foot in the door of the electronic cigarette market (Mangan, 2014). The new federal regulations are not expected to make any impact on the expanding e-cigarette phenomenon. Industry giants acquiring existing lines may be the only way for certain juices and devices to stay on the market (Moskowitz, 2014). Bill Godshall of Smokefree Pennsylvania says, “What it will do is effectively give the entire industry to big tobacco,” (Opfer, 2013).

Safety is the biggest consideration in the argument for regulation. Spot tests conducted by the FDA claim to have found that nicotine levels and labels were vastly inconsistent with zero nicotine liquids still showing evidence of nicotine content (FDA, 2014). Many distributors refuse to disclose their ingredients claiming proprietary recipes. For people with allergies, this is a red flag and possibly a deterrent to purchase from said vendor. Strangely enough, the FDA is not trying to ban traditional cigarettes which have been shown to be far more dangerous (Sullum, 2014). The FDA and public health officials claim that “we just don’t know the long term effects of electronic cigarettes.” Well, we didn’t know about cigarettes for 20 years either, but they haven’t banned them yet. By the same logic, nicotine gum, dissolvables, patches, and inhalers are still on the market, despite somewhat poor outcomes for smoking cessation, and they are already approved and regulated by the FDA as pharmaceuticals (Sullum, 2014).

There are hopes that FDA regulations with “spike the guns” of various states imposing much stricter regulations (Craver, 2014). With broader federal guidelines, it would normalize the laws across the board and give less opportunity for wide variance of infraction from state to state.

Word On the Street

Local vendors and customers alike are worried about what the proposed regulations will do to their ability to vape inexpensively and have access to the same quality of products to which they have become accustomed.

One patron of Knoxville Vapors stated that government involvement will reduce options and access to quality e-juices and increase the cost. He agreed that regulation is needed to prevent sale to minors, but he is concerned that regulation won’t prevent unscrupulous vendors from selling to whomever they please. “It will only be the good folks who wouldn’t sell to kids in the first place who will be hit, and we will all be hit in the wallet.”

Vintage Vapors Knoxville owner echoes the concern, elaborating that producers of their most popular juices cannot compete with the big companies with an added cost of FDA approval which can cost between $5000-$10,000 per flavor per nicotine level. “The only ones who can afford it will be Big Tobacco or Big Pharmacy.”

Where Does This Leave Us?

People are still woefully ignorant of the science and the proposed regulatory legislation. It is time to read up, people. There are 75 days from the time the FDA proposal was released during which arguments and public comments will be heard.

Regulation is needed to prevent poor quality, sale to people less than 18 years old, and preserve safety to end users. From my own perspective, I want to know what is in the e-juice. That doesn’t mean I want a detailed list of their “secret special recipes,” but knowing the percentages of VG or PG (which can aggravate respiratory conditions or other allergies) is important. I believe knowing what ingredients have contributed to the flavors is reasonable. Again, people have allergies! Health warning labels are always a good idea, and child-proof caps, PLEASE! Nicotine is still a poison, and no one wants a child accidentally exposed.

So, my suggestion? Get involved in your local vape community, organizations, online groups, etc. Get educated. Voice your opinions to the FDA and your government representatives. If you do not want the government or large corporate entities controlling your vape, you need to heed the call to action and speak up to the people making the decisions.

References

Burton, T., & Esterl, M. (April, 2014). E-cigarettes face first regulations. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304788404579520131790105314?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304788404579520131790105314.html

CASAA.org. (February, 2014). Call to Action! (UPDATED) SUPPORT Tennessee Bill that Excludes E-Cigarettes from Smoking Bans and Tobacco Taxes. Retrieved from http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-support-tennessee-bill.html

Clark, T. (May, 2014). E-cigarettes become an unlikely inspiration for new medical devices. Huffington Post Business. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/04/e-cigarette_n_5262520.html

Craver, R. (May, 2014). Reaction mixed to FDA e-cig regulations. Winston-Salem Journal. Retrieved from http://www.journalnow.com/business/business_news/local/reaction-mixed-to-fda-e-cig-regulations/article_e2e40682-36d6-5a8d-9ba5-73a4d7663904.html

Devaney, T. (April, 2014). FDA proposes regulations for e-cigarettes. The Hill. Retrieved from http://thehill.com/regulation/healthcare/204258-fda-proposes-e-cig-regs

FDA. (April, 2014). E-cigarettes: Questions and answers. Retrived from http://www.fda.gov/forconsumers/consumerupdates/ucm225210.htm

honestvape. (August, 2013). E-cig state laws: Current and pending. License to Vape. Retrieved from http://www.licensetovape.com/e-cigarette-state-laws-guide/

Hunt, A. (April, 2014) Marketing rules too lax on e-cigarettes critics say. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/04/27/federal-regulation-e-cigarettes/8231849/

Langley, A. (April, 2014). New FDA regulations affect vape pens, e-cigarettes and other smoking products. Summit Daily. Retrieved from http://www.summitdaily.com/news/11188069-113/tobacco-cigarettes-products-fda

Mangan, D. (April, 2014). E-cig makers say proposed FDA regs should keep sales smoking. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/e-cig-makers-say-proposed-fda-regs-should-keep-sales-n88936

Moskowitz, E. (April, 2014). FDA e-cigarette plan brings complaints from both sides. The Boston Globe. Retrieved from http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/04/25/fda-cigarette-plan-brings-complaints-from-both-sides/1BuuMakxoOrn7XNdUW3LbM/story.html

Noll-Marsh, K. (April, 2014). FDA regulation of e-cigarettes: huge costs, little or no benefit, says CASAA. Retrieved from http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/fda-regulation-of-e-cigarettes-huge.html

Opfer, C. (November, 2013). Coming Soon to the E-Cigarette Regulation Debate: A Sliver of Clarity. The Atlantic Cities. Retrieved from http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2013/11/coming-soon-e-cigarette-regulation-debate-sliver-clarity/7517/

Sherwood, J. (March, 2014). Electronics cigarette lands a man a traffic ticket in Upstate New York. The Examiner. Retrived from http://www.examiner.com/article/electronics-cigarette-lands-man-a-traffic-ticket-upstate-new-york

Sullum, J. (May, 2014). Will FDA regulation preserve or destroy the e-cigarette industry? Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2014/05/01/will-fda-regulation-preserve-or-destroy-the-e-cigarette-industry/

Toole, J. (April, 2014). N.H. health officials pleased by U.S. regulation of e-cigarettes: E-cigarette regulation praised by health officials, questioned by retailers. Eagle-Tribune. Retrieved from http://www.eagletribune.com/latestnews/x2117353741/N-H-health-officials-pleased-by-U-S-regulation-of-e-cigarettes

Whitcomb, D., & Gorman, S. (March, 2014). Los Angeles moves to ban e-cigarettes, joining NY, others. Reuters U.S. edition. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/05/us-usa-ecigarettes-california-idUSBREA2324920140305

Honorable Mentions

Knoxville Vapors. http://knoxvapors.com/

Vintage Vapors Knoxville. http://www.vintagevapors.com/Knoxville-Location-s/1673.htm

Smokey Mountain Vapers. http://www.smokymountainvapers.com/

Vapor Boss. http://vapor-boss-inc.com/

An Attack of the Vapers… Er… Vapors?

Unless you have been a shut-in with a phobia of all forms of media, you will be aware of an up-ticking trend in nicotine use. It involves the use of the electronic cigarettes. There has been recently and increase in the debate concerning regulation and health concerns regarding the use of these alternatives to combustible tobacco use. Warning, dear readers, this may get “sciency”. I’m not going to apologize. In this particular issue, science is a significant player in the regulation debate. So, with the disclaimer out of the way, on with the show…

What Are Electronic Cigarettes?

The first electronic cigarette, vaporizer, or nicotine delivery system was patented in 1963 (Gilbert, 1965). The devices work by using an electric heating source to heat a solution to vapor state by which it can be inhaled (Czogala, et al., 2013). The liquid solution or “e-juice” is usually a mixture of propylene glycol (PG), vegetable glycerine (VG), and or polyethylene glycol (PEG). These chemicals are mixed with flavors and nicotine. These days, there are a wide variety of flavors. Additionally, not everyone is keen on PG and PEG to which many are allergic and/or it exacerbates asthmatic conditions. So, there are 100% VG versions that do not contain any PG or PEG. The solution of nicotine is also variable these days, generally from 24 mg down to 0 mg of nicotine. The user breathes in the vaporized solution, and exhales mostly water vapor. Unlike other smokeless nicotine delivery systems (gum or patch), the electronic cigarette more closely resembles the feeling of the physical and behavioral aspects of smoking.

With the expansion of non-smoking laws and limitations, the popularity of non-combustible tobacco options grew. There are a wide variety of electronic cigarettes that closely resemble traditional cigarettes. Some brands also have a glowing tip that mimics the fire of traditional cigarettes. There are disposable options. Other options have disposable cartridges that attach to rechargeable power sources. With the increasing popularity of the vaporizing trend, there are a wide variety of power sources (batteries) with varying power charge and time. More advanced options include ability to adjust power and delivery. With these new power options there are detachable tanks that run the gamut from disposable tanks to artisan crafted hand-blown reusable options.

As the number of electronic cigarette users increased, the language also expanded to incorporate new vocabulary associated with the trend. Because the mechanism is vaporizing the solution, the behavior has been labeled “vaping.” The devices have been called e-cigs, e-fags (U.K. primarily), e-hookahs, or hookah pens (Richtel, 2014; The Time Out London blog, 2014).

Why Are More People Vaping?

So, why the up-tick in the vaping trend? In four years, from 2008-2012, the number of e-cigarette sales increased by nearly 7000%. It seems that while the mere restriction on smoking in public places may have pushed traditional smokers to the non-combustible alternatives, this may not be the only reason for the increase in number of vapers. So what are the leading reasons for people to choose e-cigarettes?

  • Avoidance of smoke-free laws (Koch, 2012)
  • Convenience (Noguchi, 2014)
  • Smoking cessation (Pokhrel, et al., 2013)
  • Health concerns (Farsalinos & Polosa, 2014; Koch, 2012)
  • Financial (Koch, 2012)

The concern for environmental factors and second-hand smoke made more and more indoor environments become non-smoking. Smoking sections in restaurants, airplanes, hotels, and other facilities became a thing of the past. Smokers were relegated to outdoor designated areas. Complaints about non-smokers entering buildings through a cloud of second hand smoke, prompted building owners and businesses to post boundaries and zoning to bar smokers from proximity of the doors. However, more and more organizations, companies, etc. are moving towards the smoke-free environment entirely. The push has been for users to choose smoking cessation options, such as nicotine gum or the patch. However, the new prevalence of e-cig options have made vaping a more convenient option. Vapers can remain at their desks (in places where vaping indoors has not yet been banned) rather than being pushed into the weather for their break (Noguchi, 2014).

Some people saw the e-cigarette as an alternative to smoking cessation (Koch, 2012; Pokhrel, et al., 2013; Richtel, 2014). While there is a significant lack of evidence to support the efficacy of e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation intervention; people still believe that vaping is a viable alternative to nicotine gum, the patch, or other pharmaceutical options.

Even for those who do not desire abstinence from nicotine, there are aspects of vaping that have smokers switching in hopes of improving their health (Farasalinos & Polosa, 2014; Koch, 2012). Detractors have argued that there are still dangers and volatile chemicals associated with the vaping process that endanger the health of humans (Koch, 2012; Reasons Supporting Regulation of E-Cigarettes, n.d.). Additionally, nicotine is still a poison and can be dangerous to anyone inhaling, ingesting, or absorbing transdermally (Glatter, 2014). Nicotine toxicity is a concern for those handling the nicotine infused e-juices. Additionally, the risk to children who might mistakenly consider the intriguing smells and colors to be something edible supports the push for child-proof closures on e-juice containers. The detractors also are concerned with the second hand vapor expelled into the environment. However, much to the chagrin of those who want to claim harmful effects of vaping as being as dangerous as combustible tobacco, what little research is out there has shown that the negative effects of vaping on the primary user and the innocent bystander from second hand exposure are a fraction of what would be experienced with traditional smoking (McAuley, Hopke, Zhao, & Babaian, 2012; Noguchi, 2014). Studies have shown that there is still some nicotine expelled in the vapor resulting from e-cig use, but that it is ten times less than the amount found in traditional combustible cigarette smoke making it less harmful to those exposed second hand (Czogala, 2013). Additionally, there is none of the “side smoke” (fumes from the burning tip) that occurs with puffing a traditional cigarette. Goniewicz, et al. found in 2013 the levels of other toxicants to which vapers are exposed were 9-450 time lower than by traditional cigarette smoking. Most sources acknowledge that the research is just very limited at this time and more time and studies are needed to examine the long term effects.

There are many anecdotal accounts by former smokers who have reported that vaping has improved their own perceived health (Koch, 2012). Vapers indicate that the traditional “smokers’ cough” disappears after a short period. An unexpected development for some former smokers switching to vaping is a return of their olfactory sense. One former smoker/new vaper stated, “I went outside to sit and vape and smelled something. I couldn’t identify what it was, but it didn’t seem very pleasant. After looking around, it finally dawned on me… I was smelling the ash tray [that was still sitting on a table for smoking guests].” Because the oral behavior and nicotine are present, many report that they have not seen the weight gain that accompanies other types of nicotine replacement systems, and even though there is no current research supporting vaping as an effective smoking cessation method, the ability to step down the e-juice nicotine to zero might provide options for those who wish to break their nicotine addiction (especially for those to whom the “ritual” of smoking is as important as the actual chemical addiction).

One of the other major foci of the people against vaping has been the aspect of vaping as a gateway for young people and the behavioral aspects of the trend. Several outspoken antagonists of the vaping trend say that the “candy” flavors and colorful packaging target the young (Richtel, 2014). Additionally, the non-smoker rights movement have viewed the vaping trend as setting back smoke-free society by decades by “making smoking seem acceptable” again (Reasons Supporting Regulation of E-Cigarettes, n.d.). The argument is that the “mimic behavior” of vaping is just going to draw more people to the smoking behaviors, and nicotine addiction will keep them there. The lack of federal regulation leads detractors to fear the marketing of these items to teens and children.

Finally, the last reason on this list is the financial perspective. E-cigarettes present options that are far less expensive than smoking (Koch, 2012). With the cost of cigarettes and “sin tax” making the price of combustible tobacco rise astronomically, vaping provides a significantly less expensive alternative. Even with the cost of starting (purchase of power source, tanks, and e-juice), most vapers find that the choice to vape instead of smoke significantly decreases the amount of cash expenditure monthly. Let’s look at an example of an average user:

Assuming a moderate smoker as a pack of cigarettes per day use, this averages approximately a carton of cigarettes per week. Obviously, the cost of cigarettes varies significantly from state to state, but for this exercise, we will use the prices from Tennessee. Cartons of cigarettes vary in price. The range is somewhere between $36-70 depending on brand. Taking the cheapest option as the choice, a carton of cigarettes per week gives us about $156 per month or $1872 annually. This does not include accessory costs (lighters, lighter fluid, flints, etc.); or incidental costs of accidental burns in clothing or upholstery, smokers deposits (some rental agreements), and cleaning costs of ash and smoke in clothing and environment. For this case, we will calculate cost based on one of the mid-range electronic cigarettes known as the “hookah pen.” This particular model includes a battery with removable tank that charges using a USB connector. The basic start-up kit at the local vapor emporium includes one power source, charging adaptor, one disposable tank, and one 10 ml bottle of e-juice; all for $30. Disposable tanks cost $5 a piece and last between 10 and 30 days depending on intensity of use. However, there are alternatives. There are also rebuild tanks that cost $5 new and have replaceable coils for $2. Coils last about the same time as disposable tanks. The e-juice is the primary consumable in this process. From speaking with vendors and vapers, a 15 ml bottle of e-juice is the approximate equivalent of a carton of cigarettes. This amount varies person to person according to reports. Factors that impact usage are nicotine load in the e-juice, prior smoking rate before switching, and behavioral differences in drawing vapor/smoke. In general, the cost of e-juice runs $8-10 per 15 ml bottle. Right there, you have a comparison: One carton of cigarettes, $36; the equivalent amount of e-juice, $8. To take it a bit further, let’s follow our new vaper/former smoker for a year. At the end of a year, assuming the pattern above, the smoker would spend approximately $2000. For the equivalent vaper, the annual spend would be (including start-up, additional tank purchase, and coil replacement) $473. That is a difference of $1527.

Would it be an even greater savings to quit smoking or vaping all together? Of course it would. However, for those who do not want to stop the “ritual” or abstain from nicotine, vaping provides a fiscal alternative that is far less offensive to the bank account. Now, keep in mind, these things are not currently federally regulated or taxed. Some states are imposing their own taxes, and sales tax is definitely applicable (Koch, 2012). If regulations are implemented, it is possible that the cost of vaping may increase, especially if those already lobbying against vaping succeed in their efforts. The inexpensiveness is another point they make in the risk to teens and young people for whom the cost of cigarettes has exceeded their lack of adult income.

To Vape or Not To Vape… What Was the Question?

So, what is the conclusion? There is no doubt that more research is needed. The long term effects of vaping are, as yet, unknown. There may be health impacts that we have not seen. It is still not recommended to expose children or pregnant women to electronic cigarette vapors, actively or passively. Nicotine is still a poison, and unless you are using the zero nicotine e-juice, you are still inhaling this chemical. Additionally, the danger to anyone ingesting or transdermally absorbing the nicotine solution can be significant. E-juice should be kept away from children, and vapers should always wash their hands after filling tanks to prevent accidental overdose exposure. However, as noted in the studies mentioned here, the levels of carcinogens and harmful toxicants are significantly less for e-cigarette use than for combustible tobacco. The second hand risks and impact to the environment are also decreased. Financially, at least for now, vaping is less expensive than smoking. The trendiness of vaping, along with the flavor and color associated may draw younger people. However, as with all trends, the potential for long term use may be less as the newness wears off. Since it is possible to vape without any nicotine in the e-juice, those choosing to vape initially as opposed to switching from traditional cigarettes do not face addiction risk in the same way. Also, with the capability of stepping nicotine down, it is possible for former smokers to break their own addiction to nicotine while still participating in the behavioral “ritual” of smoking. The biggest deterrent for anyone considering vaping is that there really is just not enough research to indicate what the risks and benefits might be.

Bottom line is that for those who do not smoke, vaping is an unnecessary habit to form. For those who smoke, weigh the pros and cons and do your research (there are articles listed in the references as well as links for organizations that have more scientific research to offer). Think about your reasons for switching. If it is for health reasons, set yourself a timeframe and think about the step down process. Keep a calendar and stick to it. Remember that nicotine is a poison. Keep e-juice out of reach of children and pets. For those who are looking at the financials, watch the news and be aware that regulations may decrease the fiscal benefits of vaping. Also, watch out for the “shiny” aspects. There are a lot of toys, gizmos, accessories, and flavors of e-juices that go with vaping. You aren’t saving if you are buying all the latest “shiny” new things.

Examining all the various arguments for and against as well as observing the phenomenon first hand, my own leaning is that vaping is positive option for smokers. It can save money. Vapers smell better (both the individuals and their own olfactory sense). Until research proves otherwise, I believe that this new trend is a better option for those who are forced or would like to avoid combustible tobacco but aren’t ready to let go of the “ritual.” For those who do not need the “ritual” but want to quit, there are viable options in the form of gum, patches, and pharmaceuticals. And for those who are just fine with their tobacco in fiery form, enjoy while you can as the non-smoker rights advocates chase you from pillar to post.

I know that this has been a very long post, but I hope that it has presented useful information that will help any of those teetering on the brink of decision.

References

Czogala, J., Goniewicz, M., Fidelus, B., Zielinska-Danch, W., Travers, M., & Sobczak, A. (2013). Secondhand exposure to vapors from electronic cigarettes. Oxford Journals: Nicotine & Tobacco Research, doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntt203

Farsalinos, K., & Polosa, R. (2014). Safety evaluation and risk assessment of electronic cigarettes as tobacco cigarette substitutes: a systematic review. Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety, 5(2), 67-86.

Gilbert, H. (August, 1965). Smokeless non-tobacco cigarette US Patent 3200819 A. Gilbert Herbert A. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/patents/US3200819

Glatter, R. (2014). The real dangers of liquid nicotine. Forbes (online). Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertglatter/2014/03/24/the-real-danger-of-liquid-nicotine/

Goniewicz, M., Knysak, J., Gawron, M., Kosmider, L., Sobczak, A., Kurek, J., Prokopowicz, A., Jablonska-Czapla, M., Rosik-Dulewska, C., Havel, C., Jacob, P., & Benowitz, N. (ABSTRACT, 2013). Levels of selected carcinogens and toxicants in vapour from electronic cigarettes. Tobacco Control, doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2012-050859 Retrieved from http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2013/03/05/tobaccocontrol-2012-050859.abstract

E-cigarettes and coffee at London’s Vape Bar. (March, 2014). The Time Out London blog: your daily guide to city life, news and culture. Retrieved from http://now-here-this.timeout.com/2014/03/26/e-cigarettes-and-coffee-at-londons-vape-bar/

Koch, W. (September, 2012). E-cigarettes: No smoke, but fiery debate over safety. USA Today. Retrieved from http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-08-18/electronic-cigarettes-smokeless-vaping-risks/57121894/1

McAuley, T., Hopke, P., Zhao, J., & Babaian, S. (2012). Comparison of the effects of e-cigarette vapor and cigarette smoke on indoor air quality. Inhalation Toxicology, 24(1), 850-857.

Noguchi, Y. (March, 2014). Ok to vape in the office? Cities, feds and firms still deciding. NPR Shots. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/03/21/291139371/ok-to-vape-in-the-office-cities-feds-and-firms-still-deciding

Pokhrel, P., Fagan, P., Little, M., Kawamoto, C., & Herzog, T. (2013). Smokers who try e-cigarettes to quit smoking: Findings from a multiethnic study in Hawaii. American Journal of Public Health, 103(9), e57-e62.

Reasons Supporting Regulation of E-Cigarettes (n.d.) Retrieved from http://tobaccofree.ucsc.edu/pdf-only/regulating_ecigarettes.pdf

Richtel, M. (March, 2014). E-cigarettes, by other names, lure young and worry experts. The New York Times (online). Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/05/business/e-cigarettes-under-aliases-elude-the-authorities.html?_r=0

More Resources

Scientific and Medical Information on Electronic Cigarettes, National Vapers Club – http://www.vapersclub.com/science.php

Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Association (SFATA) http://www.sfata.org