January 8, 2015

Stanton A. Glantz, PhD

San Francisco launches e-cig public education campaign

The City and County of San Francisco has joined the State of Alaska in mounting a public education campaign on e-cigarettes.
The campaign includes ads on the sides of over 130 San Francisco (Muni) buses as well as over 130 BART/Muni station railside wall ads, and 750 cards on the interior of buses where riders can see them while they stand/sit and commute. 
Several of the ads are  in Chinese and Spanish to reach a larger segment of San Francisco’s diverse population.

The advertising campaign, called #CurbIt includes a social media component (Twitter @sftobaccofree Instagram @sftobaccofree or Facebook www.facebook.com/sftobaccofree) and so, predictably, is being Twitter bombed by e-cig advocates. 
#CurbIt has three main aims:

  1. To educate San Francisco and beyond about the harms of e-cigarettes and the connection between e-cigs and the tobacco industry
  2. To inform San Franciscans about a new law that treats e-cigarettes identically to cigarettes, and reinforcing the many laws restricting smoking/vaping to a very limited number of spaces (hence the #CurbIt message)
  3. To encourage smokers and vapors to kick the nicotine habit, and #CurbIt once and for all!

Their new website is www.sftobaccofree.org
The #CurbIt campaign splash page is http://sanfranciscotobaccofreeproject.org/curbit-campaign-2/ and all the ads in distribution are at http://sanfranciscotobaccofreeproject.org/all-curbit-ads/
They are also using the hashtags #CurbIt #NotWaterVapor #EcigsAreCigs #ToxicVapor #SmokelessNotHarmless



However, here: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2015/01/alaska-health-department-a...
Professor Seigel makes some extraordinary and misleading statements about the recent Alaska material, and will no doubt soon comment similarly about the San Fransico site. He states that:
 “The Alaska state health department also provides a http://alaskaquitline.com/faq/" target="_blank";fact sheet which implies that electronic cigarettes are no safer than real cigarettes. The health department justifies this conclusion based on a single study, which tested the effect of electronic cigarette vapor on bronchial cells in cell culture.”
 This is the paper: http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/20/2_Supplement/B16.abstra...
http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/20/2_Supplement/B16.abstra... yes: it should concern all, when a preliminary study links e-cigarette vapour with lung cancer.He states that the fact sheet:
 “ . . .is designed to scare people so much about the health effects of vaping”.
 No it is not: it is clearly warning about the potential risk of these unregulated and under-tested devices about their risk to youth. The sheet concludes clearly: “but we can take steps today to protect our young people.” It further correctly points out that:
 “The FDA has not approved e-cigarettes as an effective method to help smokers quit. o FDA-approved tobacco cessation products provide controlled doses of nicotine and have been tested and regulated as cessation products.”
This is hardly “pro-smoking” material.
Professor Seigel states that:
“There is absolutely no evidence that electronic cigarettes cause asthma”
This is totally erroneous.  At the European Respiratory Society Conference last Fall, this abstract was reviewed, indicating evidence in experiments in mice that electronic cigarettes vapours can induce both asthma and emphysema:
and helps to further evidence the Society’s precautionary stance on these devices.
 He further states that:
“Telling the public that electronic cigarettes contain embalming fluid and nail polish remover is misleading because it belies the fact that e-cigarettes merely contain small amounts of the main components of those products.”
This is also erroneous. Examples such as this from Kosmider, Goneiwicz et al here http://ntr.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/05/14/ntr.ntu078.full";... and this from Bekki et al http://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/11/11/11192/htm";http://www.mdpi.com/1660-..., which is a paper “Externally Edited” by no less than Dr Farsalinos himself, demonstrates levels of carbonyls including Formaldejyde and Acetone (cited in the advert that Seigel critiques): at the same levels or possibly higher than found in tobacco smoke (formed from the thermal decomposition of solvents). Hence, Bekki, Farsalinos et al state that:
“In some cases, extremely high concentrations of these carbonyl compounds are generated, and may contribute to various health effects. Suppliers, risk management organizations, and users of e-cigarettes should be aware of this phenomenon.”
Seigel’s statement:
“Someone who uses an electronic cigarette is not inhaling embalming fluid any more than someone who purchases a new sofa is inhaling embalming fluid.”
is therefore erroneous and misleading. I have also not met too many people who wrap their mouths around new sofas, and inhale deeply, in order to get any kind of psychotrophic effect. His statement is irrelevant.  He further states:
“To demonstrate how misleading and damaging this commercial is, consider the very same commercial applied to nicotine gum:<EM;"What's in nicotine gum? ... Nicotine, just like cigarettes. And 4-(methylnitro-samino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone, a powerful carcinogen that causes lung cancer. N-Nitrosonornicotine. Doesn't that cause esophageal cancer? Don't let Big Pharma cloud your judgment."</em;
I believe I can name the number of flavours of nicotine gum on one hand. There are not 7000 – 8000 competing flavours as per here:
and subsequently manufacturers of nicotine gum do not warn parents that:
“Kids may be particularly vulnerable to trying e-cigarettes due to an abundance of fun flavours such as cherry, vanilla, pina-colada and berry”
as Lorillard do here http://www.realparentsrealanswers.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-e-ciga...
Oh, and they also claim in that link that e-cigarettes produce just plain old: “water vapour”.
This is: erroneous, misleading and dangerous therefore to the health of youth.Seigel continues:
“Now consider the very same commercial applied to the nicotine inhaler:<EM;"What's in a nicotine inhaler? ... Nicotine, just like cigarettes. Nickel, a metal which has been shown to cause cancer, respiratory failure, and heart disorders. Lead. Doesn't that cause brain damage? Don't let Big Pharma cloud your judgment." </em;
Talking of lung disorders, one of the largest ENDS manufacturers in the world here <EM;http://ecig.co/important-information/";http://ecig.co/important-informat... &nbsp;</em;tell potential buyers that:
“E-cigarettes are for smokers 18 years and older. ECIG products are not intended to help you quit smoking traditional cigarettes.
ECIG products can be purchased by and should only be used by anyone who is 18 years of age or older depending on local laws. ECIG products should not be used by children; pregnant or breast feeding women; people with heart disease, high blood pressure, or diabetes; or people taking medicines for asthma or depression. Our products and the statements made in this website have not been evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration or any other international health or regulatory authority, unless otherwise noted. These statements and our products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any condition, disorder, disease or physical or mental conditions and should not be used as a substitute for your own physician’s advice. Consult your physician before using any electronic cigarette product.
CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 65: Warning: This product contains nicotine, a chemical known to the state of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm.”
No doubt, Professor Seigel’s statement in his blog entry, with regard to this Industry warning, might be:
“However, I can't possibly condone a warning that lies to the public, significantly misleads its audience, undermines years of public education about the health hazards of smoking, and has the effect of promoting smoking by discouraging smokers who would otherwise have quit using e-cigarettes not to do so.”
Seems a little incongruous to me . . . .
David Bareham.&nbsp;

Add new comment

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.