EDITORIAL: Smokers, beware: A movement is afoot that will keep you toking out in the cold while everything you wear continues to smell like an ashtray.
Yes, no sooner has someone devised a way of dealing with your addiction without hurting anyone else than self-appointed behavior police want to erect a mammoth obstacle to smokeless nicotine dispensers -- with their lipstick traces on it.
Bergen' freeholders were to vote today on whether to establish fines of up to $1,000 for inhaling from e-cigarettes in county buildings, public parks -- even in vehicles.
Similar campaigns are under way in Connecticut, California, and Oregon. Lawmakers in Suffolk County, N.Y., have already instituted an indoor ban against the smokeless lookalikes.
Imported from China, it's a simple device, really, with a replaceable cartridge and battery you can charge in a wall outlet, in your car, even through a USB cable.
When the user inhales, a water vapor containing a dose of nicotine is heated and released. Thus, a craving is satisfied. The smoker gets the oral fix, as well as the tactile feel of the e-cig between the fingers (And in case you're wondering: They do come in menthol, not to mention vanilla, caramel and coffee).
No value judgment, mind you. Even better: No carcinogens.
No preservatives. No whiffs, ash or butts.
NO CARBON MONOXIDE.
Actually, a better delivery system for society at large -- one that allows you to ingest nicotine without the toxic equivalent of sucking on an exhaust pipe AND eliminates second-hand smoke.
So when someone finally invents this marvelous little smoke on the water, what happens?
The Puritans line up alongside the tobacconists, just like they did in the 1700s.
Yes, there are risks -- namely propylene glycol, more commonly found in antifreeze, which is used as a propellant. The World Health Organization last year gave the e-cig the thumbs down, saying no proof exists of the producer's claim that it helps people quit smoking.
A quick analysis by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration earlier this year found enough traces of carcinogens and toxic chemicals in some e-cigarette cartridges to warrant further study.
Maybe the FDA should jump in with both feet before anyone starts firing up premature bans. Then again, that just might stir up the tobacco lobby.
Speaking of lobbies, you wanna take that outside, buddy?
(ED. NOTE: A New Jersey legislator has vowed to draft a measure sometime next month to cover the entire state; if/when it happens, we'll report it.)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Gina Gaffney
said:
 |
... As a long-time smoker (I know...ugh), I have tried everything out there to try to quit. I thought that e-cigs would be promising because, in theory, I'd still be getting my nic fix, without all the "bad" stuff that cigarettes have. I'm just about to purchase the e-cigarette, and I hear about how communities already want to ban them. They may have a point when it comes to public buildings, but....my car??? I don't think so. |
Patricia Clewell
said:
 |
... Thank you for this. I switched to an e-cig 7 months ago after smoking for more than 30 years--it's been a near miracle for me. The proposed ban on e-cigs has nothing to do with health or science and everything to do with an irrational and invasive moral crusade. If those who claim to be concerned with public health actually *were* concerned with public health, they'd be singing the e-cig's praises--not condemning it because it looks too much like smoking for their delicate emotional sensibilities. There's no secondhand smoke here, folks! No smoke at all, in fact! No smoke, no unpleasant odor, no ashes, no butts! This shouldn't even be an issue.... |
