Martha Coakley tries to take credit for regulating E-cigs. The problem? They are already set to be regulated by the FDA.

Recently, Martha Coakley, Massachusetts Attorney General and Governor wanna-be, issued a statement along with 38 other Attorney Generals to pressure the FDA to regulate e-cigs. 

You can read that article here: http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/blogs/white-coat-notes/2013/09/24/mass-martha-coakley-urges-feds-regulate-cigarettes/WavUyqJpW98YpxcnbdgmmK/blog.html


The Problem? As we all know, the FDA has been working on regulation for 2 years and announced their intention to announce Proposed Rule in October. I will be posting more about this shortly in another article which should be finished soon. So what exactly is Coakley trying to accomplish here? It seems to be that she is trying to create a narrative for her run for Governor that she was successful in getting e-cigs regulated at the national level, which will be a complete lie.

Electronic cigarettes have been on the FDA's radar for the 5ish years that they have been in existence. They announced last month, in August, that they were finally ready to issue Proposed Rule in October and have been meeting with various interested parties, both pro Harm Reduction and Anti-Harm Reduction. Martha Coakley had *nothing* to do with the inevitable regulation of the Electronic Cigarette. Her only accomplishment here is jumping on the Anti-Harm Reduction bandwagon on the Eve of "success" - a success she had no involvement with.

After reading some of the comments on Boston.com, I see that there are still some misconception of E-cigs, or vaporizers as we prefer to call them. I will very curtly address some of them:

1. We know exactly what is in e-cigs.

There are 3-4 ingredients. (See and/or clause)

Propolyene Gycol and or Vegetable Gyclerin - both completely safe and used in Asthma inhalors and fog machines. Propolyene Gycol, while sounding like a scary name, has been studied extensively and actually shown to prevent lung infection, used in fog machines and pumped into Hospital air systems. Oh, and it is in your toothpaste - go ahead, take a look.

Nicotine Extract. Yes, this is extracted from the tobacco plant, but it is not tobacco, just as vanilla extract is not a vanilla bean. Nicotine, by itself, meaning, unattached from a burning cigarette *IS* relatively harmless, with addiction properties that resemble caffeine.

Flavoring: These are the same flavors that are in every single flavored food product we have on the market and FDA approved (though not specifically for inhalation).

2. Adults do in fact, like flavors. We are quitting a habit of bringing a burning, stinky, tar-filled cigarette up to our mouths for inhalation every hour on the hour. Quite simply, we are slowly suffocating ourselves with Carbon Monoxide poisoning while offending others wherever we are. When quitting, we want something that is enticing - something that does not taste like that burning, stinky cigarette. It seems to me that the public would want this for us....and for them. For every adult smoker who chooses e-cigs, the public is no longer exposed to offending stinky smoke.

3. Since e-cigs came to market, they have been studied extensively. We are however, in need of more studies, especially peer-reviewed. That said, every study has come back positive, with very few negatives. This is were 'Harm Reduction comes in. We know they are not completely safe. We want regulation that brings quality control along with efforts to make e-cigs as safe as possible. Despite what  Martha and other Anti-Harm Reductionists say, they are, with 100 percent certainty, a *safer alternative* to smoking cancer sticks. Regulate e-cigs out of adults hands and all you do is keep the population smoking traditional cigarettes, killing themselves and polluting your air. Give them a safer alternative that does not involve burning tar-filled smoke, and we have the biggest public health win of the century.