Let's start with the date of their testing: May 4th, 2009. Hmmm - the last time I looked at a calander, it was July 24th, a full 2 months and change from their report. Why did they suppress this information for all this time? Why bring it out now? If they had concerns over this product, don't you think they would have made this announcement then? After all, they are supposed to be concerned over the greater public health.
Now, let's take a closer look at a couple of the statements in their press release, which, coming from the FDA, went country-wide within hours of its release:
These products are marketed and sold to young people and are readily available
online and in shopping malls. In addition, these products do not contain any
health warnings comparable to FDA-approved nicotine replacement products or
conventional cigarettes. They are also available in different flavors, such as
chocolate and mint, which may appeal to young people.
Ah, yes, the good old "think of the Children" arguement..... tired old tripe. Personally, I would like to see some hard facts that prove their accusation here. I can show you some cold, hard facts that disuade their arguement - NJoy, one of the larger retailers of E-Cigs in the US, conducted a survey of their consumers, and they came up with a median age of 40, committed smokers all, for their consumer base - a far cry from "marketing to children." And, chocolate and mint flavors? Hmmm - I like chocolate, I like mint, and I'm right in NJoy's median age. These are nothing but poor, shoddy arguements engendered to produce hysteria and breed mistrust of these products in the general population.
The FDA’s Division of Pharmaceutical Analysis analyzed the ingredients in a
small sample of cartridges from two leading brands of electronic cigarettes. In
one sample, the FDA’s analyses detected diethylene glycol, a chemical used in
antifreeze that is toxic to humans, and in several other samples, the FDA
analyses detected carcinogens, including nitrosamines. These tests indicate that
these products contained detectable levels of known carcinogens and toxic
chemicals to which users could potentially be exposed.
Taken at beginning face value, with just a quick scan and not a lot of time to analyze it, this statement should send shivers down your spine. Ooooo - scary. They're vaping antifreeze! Toxic! Carcinogens! But think..... look....... read between the lines of this statement. Note how limited this is - and how misleading. Here is, to quote a famous orator, the rest of the story..
diethylene glycol, a chemical used in antifreeze that is toxic to humans
What they fail to mention is that in their testing, they found only 1 out of the 19 cartridges sampled to be contaminated with this particular compound, and then, the concentration was less than 1%. Further, they also fail to mention that DEG is occasionally found in trace amounts in PG, the bulk of what's in the nicotine juice. This has not effected the FDA's label of "Genenrally Regarded as Safe" on PG.
This is called spin. The careful crafting of a statement designed to lead the reader to an opinion that you, the writer or producer of the statement, wish them to have.
the FDA analyses detected carcinogens, including nitrosamines.
And the rest of the story on this comment? If you were to test the FDA-approved NRT gums, lozenges, and patches, you would find comparable concentrations of the same nitrosamines, because the nicotine comes from the same source - tobacco.
Can anyone say double-standard? Methinks I smell a rat.
And, doing further research, the control subject they used in these tests? They used the Nicotrol inhaler as their control subject - a product designed by big Pharma, intended for short term use only, and only available by prescription. Not, in my opinion, a comparable control. Instead, logically, I would think the control subject, the product that the PV should be compared against, is the product it is designed to replace......cigarettes. Is that too much to ask for?
Face it, America.... the regulatory agency that is responsible for your health and well-being in regards to the foods you eat and the drugs you take, who is supposed to be a neutral, "justice is blind" kind of agency, is using deceptive and manipulative practices to sway your opinion to one they wish you to have, just like the big corporations in their advertising practices. They are NOT acting in the best interest of public health, irregardless of what the "company line" may be. That begs the question of who's interests they ARE protecting.
To say that I am disgusted with my government at this point would be an understatement. To say that the FDA has an irrational fear of the E-Cig, and an unspecified, unstated goal to an unnamed entity is as clear as the writing on this page to me. This blatent skewing of available data, of suppressing accurate information to allow the American Consumers to make quality, informed decisions, is as irresponsible and dangerous as yelling "fire" in a crowded theatre.