Keep E-Cigaretts Free from Regulation

I respond to the editorial “E-cigarettes need careful analysis” by Bloomberg View in the Aug. 22Dispatch.

The American Association of Public Health Physicians views electronic cigarettes as similar to other nicotine-replacement therapy and recommends them as a harm-reduction method for those who have failed to quit by other means.

Other means of smoking-cessation aids (nicotine replacement therapy devices) such as gum, lozenges, patches, inhalers and sprays are on the market and readily available to those who want to quit smoking. All these contain nicotine, but none are regulated as tobacco products.

So why should the e-cigarette by treated differently?

The perception that e-cigarettes should be considered a tobacco product because “they look like the real thing” is not a valid measuring stick by which to pass judgment. It’s a plastic tube with a battery on one end and a liquid-filled cartridge on the other.

There is no tobacco, no fire, no tar, no burning paper, no odor, no non-biodegradable butts, no dirty ashtrays, no harsh chemicals and no second-hand smoke.

There is vapor, but it is more steam than smoke. Other than appearance, there is very little comparison.

My suggestion, then, is that we rename the e-cigarette an electronic personal vaporizer and refashion it to resemble a Pez dispenser.

If these devices no longer look like a tobacco cigarette, perhaps others will realize there is no comparison, and all the confusion and controversy over electronic cigarettes will be put to rest.

JANIS SHARP

From The Columbus Dispatch, Sept. 5, 2013

Keep E-Cigaretts Free from Regulation