The E-Cigarette Industry, Waiting to Exhale

Well, most medicines could be considered medically toxic. It's just a matter of dosing and whether their desired effect outweighs any risk (whether negligible or non-negligible) of adverse reactions[0].

LD50 is only one of many ways to express toxicity; water can be considered toxic under some circumstances as well. It all depends on the context in which we're discussing the usage.

We don't say that Advil is "harmless", or aspirin, or caffeine, or any other substance, even in normal dosage. We simply say that any risk of harm is sufficiently small as to fall within tolerable limits, given the expected benefit of using that substance. But we can't say that about e-cigarettes - at least not yet.

In short, the medical impacts of drugs are difficult to predict, and oftentimes counter-intuitive. I'm just rather tired of the refrain that "e-cigarettes are harmless", because frankly,

(A) we don't have sufficient evidence-based research either to support or to reject that claim, and

(B) extrapolating based on existing evidence-based research and fundamental medical principles suggests that e-cigarettes are not "harmless".

Whether they are less harmful than cigarettes is a separate question, as is whether they are harmful enough to recommend avoiding usage (or regulation, or what have you) is a separate question.

I don't object to any logical arguments surrounding either of those two questions; I just object to fallacious interpretations of medical research to support illogical arguments.

[0] Unlike the word "toxic", I do not use the word "adverse" in the medical sense, which also has a very precise definition - I use it in the colloquial sense.

Excuse me for not accepting the pseudo-science weasel word "toxic". Vitamin C is toxic at certain levels. If you do not bring in more specifics, then what you are saying is meaningless. Just saying "I choose to reserve judgement, but have a gut feeling that it will be shown to be more harmful than cigarettes" is about as far as strong a claim you can make based on the evidence you have presented.

They have these too. Look for the '4mg nicotine mini lozenge' made by Nicorette and generic by many companies. Unfortunately they're expensive and you need to use 2 or 3 (8-12mg) to really get effect from it. Also, they are slightly irritating to the mouth at times (but much less so than nicotine gum or any tobacco).

> The whole e-cig thing is trying to re-build the signalling [...]

That's an interesting point. I think you're right on that for the companies like Njoy and Blu, which are imitating the feel of real cigarettes. They're tapping into the smokers' rebellious psyche but interestingly, it's because those smokers are generally too self-conscious to use an e-cig with a giant battery and refillable tank that looks odd. Essentially, smokers feel (perhaps rightly) that smoking is accepted on some level, but people definitely do find it strange seeing someone inhale from a giant piece of metal that many might assume is some kind of hard drug.

However, as a result of their design concerns (to look like a real cigarette... or 'analog cig' as many say) they've sacrificed on tech specs and also on price. It's much more cost effective and also an overall better experience to buy an e-cig with a large battery and refillable tanks to hold the liquid. But Blu and others do not offer this. Compare their $7.99 e-cig that is equivalent to 20 cigarettes to the $7.99 10ml bottle of e-liquid for refillable e-cigs which will last at least a week (probably equivalent to 200 cigarettes), and batteries that last upwards of 1-2 days between charges. Some Blue e-cigs aren't re-chargeable and the ones that are run of out charge after a few hours of use. Also, Blu does not deliver the amount of nicotine to the user that a refillable tank + large battery can (which is bad b/c then smokers don't feel satisfied).

So, if smokers can find the self-confidence to vape on the most effective device (regardless of its appearance) then they'll save lots of money, get a better nicotine experience, and thus be much less likely to return to smoking.

It's exactly this kind of thinking that started and perpetuates the pernicious war on drugs. It's the root of the (proven false) "gateway drug" phenomenon.

The "thing" by the way is the fact that they don't do any harm. How absurd and ridiculous ..