E-cigarettes: The next best thing to quitting

  • Article by: AMY L. FAIRCHILD and JAMES COLGROVE
  • Updated: December 9, 2013 - 6:04 PM

That’s important, and it should dissuade us from banning the product based on its perceived ills.

  • 54
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
mlaudenslageDec. 9, 13 6:40 PM

Well thought out article. It's difficult when groups argure irrationally based on fear or "appearance". I also dislike when the work "gateway" somehow justifies an irrational stance. Good work Amy and James!

32
1
rlundl02Dec. 9, 13 6:46 PM

I don't see a problem with these things. There's no odor, so no one will crinkle their little nose at the presence of one of them and there's no harmful smoke. What's the big deal?

37
12
rnvhillDec. 9, 13 9:29 PM

Does nicotine exist in the exhalations? If so then they ware to be considered just like combustables - a harm to non smokers around them. This arguement os why you do not see cities lookimg at wearing a patch or chewing nocotine gum inside as a problem, no collateral harm.

12
22
davehougDec. 9, 1310:25 PM

So what exactly is the reason behind banning e-cigs if there is no public safety concern?????

21
2
rshacklefordDec. 9, 1310:45 PM

(rnvhill wrote): "Does nicotine exist in the exhalations? If so then they ware to be considered just like combustables - a harm to non smokers around them." ---- A very good question. Please go to your doc and get a nicotine level test as a baseline for your system. Then, spend an hour sitting next to a person who is using an e-cig. Go back to your doc for another blood test. Let us know the result. A forewarning: not once have I seen ANY of these anti-smoking-nicotine-tobacco people provide scientific proof from an objective testing protocol such as that. You would think if the proof did exist, they would state it at each and every opportunity. Also, after spending decades in smoky bars and then, bam, no more smoking at all, I should have gone into at least some tiny bit of withdrawal but that did not happen. Face it - the "anti" group made the rules and got beat.

24
12
Mark27Dec. 9, 1311:05 PM

The authors are attempting to make a rational argument here but they don't seem to appreciate that e-cigarettes' critics have no interest in rational arguments. The people freaking out about electronic cigarettes are people fearful that they're about to lose their meal ticket made possible by a three-decade campaign of hate and discrimination directed at smokers, paid for with "sin tax" blood money from the very people they're mercilessly persecuting. Be sure that anytime you hear somebody hyperventilating about the dangers of e-cigarette water vapor, it's because their paycheck depends upon continued robust sales of conventional tobacco cigarettes and keeping alive this subterfuge against low-income and mentally ill smokers that has been such a gold mine for them for so long. And I'm not just talking about the board of directors for "Clearway Minnesota" and "Just Eliminate Lies", I'm talking about the political leaders who have been mugging smokers to pay for every imaginable cost of government for a generation now, with a particularly rising tide of tobacco tax gluttony in the last few years earmarking cigarette tax money towards everything from children's health care to universal preschool to new professional sports playparks. Politicians and antismoking advocates alike are petrified that the racket may almost be up, so they're twisting themselves into pretzels to manufacture reasons why e-cigarettes should be treated the same as conventional cigarettes, even though it exposes them as filthy frauds. Undoubtedly, the authors of this article who are approaching this issue in good faith must be scratching their heads about the e-cigarette freakout in the political world, but if they bothered to follow the money associated with tobacco taxes keeping America's lights on over the past generation, they'd realize how deadly it would be to the power brokers if they lost this leverage to extract scores of billions of dollars a year of path-of-least-resistance revenue from society's weakest and least empowered demographic.

28
13
crystalbayDec. 10, 13 2:28 AM

Wow, Mark! From your emotional rant, I take it that you're a smoker? I have no particular quibble with E cigs - and it sure beats actually smoking - but I do wonder how doing the very same hand-to-mouth, inhaling, exhaling, as actually smoking might keep the behavioral aspect of smoking alive. People trying to quit are always told to put new behaviors in place and refrain from anything which was paired up with smoking. This would appear to keep the behaviors going but without the carbon monoxide and tars.

10
23
fatredneckDec. 10, 13 6:03 AM

E-cigs made it possible for me to quit a 35 year long tobacco cigarette habit. Patches and gum are laughable as an alternative and don't even come close to minimizing cravings. The first day I started using e-cigs was the last day I smoked tobacco cigarettes. Unfortunately the government will justify some reason to tax e-cigs to the hilt. Right now they are more than affordable. My 1/2 a pack a day cigarette habit cost me about $24 a week. E-cigs, after a small initial investment, are costing me less than $20 a month!

28
2
owatonnabillDec. 10, 13 6:11 AM

"The people freaking out about electronic cigarettes are people fearful that they're about to lose their meal ticket made possible by a three-decade campaign of hate and discrimination directed at smokers, paid for with "sin tax" blood money from the very people they're mercilessly persecuting." ............... Bingo! This isn't about health. It is all about the left being terrified of the prospect that the goose (tobacco) will be laying fewer golden eggs if E-cigs are allowed to exist and proliferate. Can't allow ANYTHING to get in the way of the silly pork-barrel vote-buying that the cigarette taxes are responsible for, yanno. Look for one of two things to happen: either an outright ban on E-cigs, or a tax so ruinous that it will make actual tobacco cigarettes the cheaper alternative. Far too many votes will be lost, otherwise.

19
15
jimjimjimjimDec. 10, 13 6:20 AM

Until the government can figure out how to tax these e-cigs to compensate for the dollars lost from people quitting cigarettes they will make it difficult for people to use the e device. This is all about money. If cigarettes were as bad as government tells us they would ban them. Government is addicted to cigarette taxes as much as people are addicted to nicotine.

23
8

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT