Ok Smokey - Electronic Cigarettes & Accessories

Regulation of Electronic Cigarettes

Homepage > News > Regulation of Electronic Cigarettes

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Unedited letter to MHRA

The reasons for not imposing restrictive regulations of electronic cigarettes are numerous and I doubt if this proposal is based on logic or concern for public heath as anyone that uses them will testify that they are at least a useful aid to quit smoking and in many cases have been life changing.

Given that two out of three people who try to quit smoking end up back on cigarettes, electronic cigarettes eliminate the one most serious danger from smoking, that being the smoke itself.  Carbon monoxide, ammonia and thousands of other possible toxins are excluded much like an inhalator but in a form that satisfies the craving for nicotine without the dangers of passive smoking.

The E-cig trade as a whole is self-regulating as it is not in the interest of any traders to poison a customer and attract adverse publicity to a growing market and one that has done more to help ex-smokers than any patch, gum, tablet or inhalator.   This is not a trade selling dangerous toys or sweets to children it is sells results to adults.  The general public are not to be underestimated when it comes to wedeling out get rich quick companies prepared to endanger them with shoddy or dangerous goods as the regular stream of questions I receive every day will testify to.  Because this is essentially an internet based industry the customer has the means to find out for themselves the pros and cons and what companies offer the best and safest service.  The same cannot be said for dealers in tobacco and in many cases, nicotine replacement products.  Anyone my buy a mountain of gums and patches from one pound shops and these products are regulated.

Unlike cigarettes that are readily available to children from  vending machines or unscrupulous shopkeepers electronic cigarettes, accessories and liquids offer a much greater level of protection by virtue of the fact that a credit card needs to be used to make a purchase.

Unlike the large drug companies that charge what they want for their products the competitive nature of our industry results in the public getting the best possible products at the best prices.  If the multinational pharmaceutical giants had invented electronic cigarettes they would surely have been heralded as a cutting-edge miracle designed to help the chronic smoker and would, no doubt cost a small fortune. 

Such regulation has thousands of e-cig devotees very worried as they see an end to a device that has helped them health wise and financially.  Is this proposal designed to put the sale of these products into the hands of the pharmaceutical companies and therefore be taxed out of existence as, given the past performance of some of them I doubt that public safety is the main concern? 

There has been an inordinate amount of disinformation circulated about possible dangers of electronic cigarettes by people of corporate bodies who are prepared to overlook the fact that the real monsters are smoking products.  Millions of people die every year from cigarettes but it is a far safer pastime to berate e-cigs as potential killers because they are new and anything new is a fair target for the ill-informed or those who may have links to cigarette or drugs companies.

I have read documents stating that a child could die if they swallowed a cartridge.  What would happen if a child swallowed an inhalator refill or as happened recently, chewed a month’s supply of nicotine gum?

As an ex-smoker of fifty plus cigarettes per day I sell these devices because I believe in them and I haven't had a cigarette since December 2008.  My breathing has improved beyond expectation and I no longer pollute those around me.

In short, this is not a product or industry that requires regulation.  Not everything new is dangerous or evil and government bureaucracy will only stifle this exciting and helpful sector of the market and take away the benefits from those who most need it.

My comments are fairly straightforward. I agree with everything said in the letter. I stopped smoking by accident. I bought my first e-cig to beat the ban and nothing more. I found that I preferred ecigs, and any possible health benefits were an added bonus. I'm unemployed and the fact is, however little money I have, I would have been compelled to continue spending a large portion of my money on them. Giving up in such times, although practical financially, isn't realistic. My health has improved notably in the last 6 months since I made the switch, but sadly if I cannot source supplies of nicotine liquid, from June onwards, I'll probably be back on cigarettes, where both my health and finances will suffer.
I cannot see anything sensible about the Option 1 proposal at all.

I have been a tobacco smoker for well over 44 years but haven't smoked, or been tempted to smoke one cigarette since being given my first 'e-cigarette' on December 5th '09 and this, after trying every NRT product available, with no success; in fact I used these products and smoked cigarettes at the same time thus increasing my nicotine intake dramatically.

I agree that all nicotine products, whether for use for NRT or in an EN-I/vaporizer should be kept away from children and supplied in fully CHIP compliant packaging as are all those that I use.There are dangers in every household; bleach, drain cleaners and other commonly used cleaning products but their use is not regulated and they freely available.

None of the ingredients in the products I possess are known to be harmful - propylene glycol is a commonly used product and I've heard or read nothing to it's detriment other than PG 'might' cause respiratory infections; such infections can be caused in many ways, including walking along the street: Vegetable glycerine is frequently used also and is generally considered a safe product to use for many purposes including as a cooking ingredient.

Surely the use of an EN-I/vaporizer, together with tested liquid is far preferable to burning tobacco with all its well known adverse health effects? Over restriction of these products will likely mean the return to tobacco smoking for many such as I whose health has improved since moving away from that habit. I no longer cough, I sleep better at night and have more energy during my waking hours and have experienced no unpleasant side effects whatsoever from using my vapourizer/e-cigs.

Should I wish to stop 'vaping,' I have the option of reducing my nicotine intake by using weaker or even no-nicotine juice options but, at present, I'm happy to take my time and feel nothing of the pressure I did when using NRT products.

I hope that common sense will prevail and that the benefits of using the 'e-cigarette/EN-I/vaporizer' will be considered preferable to the smoking of tobacco that, although a proven killer, is not banned.

I have been using these products since February 2009 prior to this I smoked at least 20-25 cigarettes a day constantly since I was 15. I am now 51 I had no inclanation to give up smoking cigarettes until I came across e-ciggs, this appealed to me so I seriously gave this a chance and after nearly a year without having smoked a real cigarette I do not cough anymore or get out of breath from walking, my home does not smell of tobacco, my wife and children are extremely happy. I'm sure that a lot of people have used this method to give up actual cigarettes. If this act of stupidity becomes law and that e-smoking nicotine products are banned from sale, this will certainly give rise to people going back to the evils of smoking. This Government claims to ecourage smokers to give up but by passing this law there will be less avenues for people to give up in the future, thus creating more revenue for the government from the increase in sales from tobacco.
It is time for the government to take the view "If it aint broke don't fix it" and stop looking to dictate in every aspect of an adults life. This law to ban nocotine products should be scrapped if not then the sale of actual cigarettes should also come into question as well as the expensive nicotine gums and inhalors.
Finally the british companies who sell the e-cigg products responsibly online will be forced out of business for no good reason and the products from overseas companies will still be purchased here who may not be as honest, to the point of unsafe products being sold just like illeagal medicines sold online today.

This ban has nothing to do with concerns for the public health, it's about money pure and simple. The fat cat tobacco companies hate Electronic Cigarettes and the government misses out on the tax revenue.

Don't treat me like a child and tell me what is good for my health and what isn't. Whatever happened to freedom of choice?

If the government was concerned about our health, they would ban all normal cigarettes and tobacco products. But they won't. Too much money is involved.

E-Cigs are one of the best inventions for a long time and the government should be furthering it's development not banning it.

Here's to democracy and freedom of choice. Did someone say this is a free country? Welcome to Britain.

With a little investigation, instead of acting blindly,and without merit, you will find that electronic cigarettes, with all it's components, are a wonderful alternative to tobacco!!!!!!!
Leave it ALONE!

In e-cigarettes there is a real alternative to the dangerous chemicals contained in ordinary cigarette smoke, I believe it would be hypocritical for the government to ban the vapour liquid used in them. I have managed to stop smoking completely using this alternative, when all other attempts have failed. I would have to start smoking again and if I died from a smoking related disease because of the return, it should the governments responsibility to inform my next of kin - I am thinking of the television campaign they had a while back.

Hi, great letter, i do hope that they dont put a ban on e cigs, i was on 2x50g of drum a week and now all i smoke is the e cig, i think they will ban them just so they get more tax out of us, when we all have to go back on the fags.

Well, it is quite obvious that this is the result of the nicotine chewing gum producers lobbying to get rid of the competition. Nothing else. They are afraid of the competition from a much better product that’s all. Otherwise they should put a ban on nail polish removers, kerosene and similar chemical products and have sales banned in other stores than pharmacies since these products are far more toxic than nicotine.
It is so obvious that it’s just pathetic……
Noting but a fnk show.....

I absolutely agree with all the e-cig smokers above. The e cig has helped to make a great improvement in a huge number of peoples health and provided what I would imagine is a reasonable living for a lot of people. It must have helped ex smokers who want to fly out to conquer their nerves. We are not all superhuman!!

Smokers will agree that to a degree they are hooked on nicotine. In the past it was quite reasonable for people who did not smoke not to want to become affected by cigarettes. I have always thought this. The e cig harms (if that is the right word ) nobody else other than the person who smokes it and considering that the nicorette inhaler, which is very similar but in no way works as well as an e cig, is on sale in chemists. I believe on the continent e cigs are sold in pharmacies. It is understandable that the packaging has to be safe if children are around. I have realised that in a strange way, because of still taking in small levels of nicotine, an ex smokers weight does not balloon as is quite usual. Think of the millions of pounds the NHS and government now already spend on obesity problems (even in children). To me this attempted ban smacks of outside interests, including the government.

Surely if people are willing to purchase these even with a resulting 50% increase in their health, the government should not interfere. The e cig must have helped hundreds of people to cut right down or even give up smoking. I always use low refills now having started on high.

In an ideal world none of use would smoke or drink or overeat but it is not an ideal world and surely a small light in a lot of peoples lives should not be taken away.

Beryl Parker

I,ve tried them all to give it up and the only thing that has worked is my e cig,ban them and I will go back on the weed

I have been using an e cig for 5 weeks, 4 of which I haven't smoked at all. I have tried other methods of giving up smoking all of which have failed. I can't see the problem of e smoking, like the nicotine patches you can work you way down the nicotine strengths. This ban would be fatal to many people trying to reduce their intake and cigarettes. What are the government hoping to achieve. I am so disappointed.

If ecig liquid is to be banned i will start smoking again after 1 year and 9 months of
being tobacco free.
This will be a death sentence for me because of my poor health.
If you ban this then you must also ban everything containing nicotine as they all contain a threat if overdosed on.
Nicotine gum,inhalers,patches all share the same risk.Please don't be responsible for my death harsh words i know but true if tobacco was illegal my health would not be an issue as i would not started smoking in the first place.

what a great shame if we lose this very good product, both me and my wife had smoked for over thirty years. we both stopped smoking on a friday and started the e- smoking the next day. this has been a great success for both of us as we have not had a single cigarett for over a YEAR and and we dont want any cigs as long has we have our e-cigs to vape on. we have tried all the other NRT PRODUCTS.but this is the one that stopped us both smoking.we only use a couple of the internet sites for buying this product and have found the service and safety of the products too be of a very high standard.i feel we must stand up to this ban as so many people have stopped smoking as a result of this product.

Would the government rather pay out for treatment to people who smoke normal cigarrettes, taking in harmful chemicals,
than allow honest dealers like yourself help "smokers" to kick the habit using harmless products.
Another thing, the income the government would lose, are the MRHA in with the government to keep this income

By Peter Smith Feb: 11th.

I have no problem with suppliers having to join a "self regulating" association so that the consumer would know that their products are legitimate and there was an assurance of a reputable supplier.

However to regulate these products in line with the MRHA discussion document would only drive up the price, ergo driving people back to cigarettes costing the NHS millions.

Electronic Cigarettes work, and I have a number of colleagues who agree with me. It would be dreadful to have to go back to smoking cigarettes, but that is what would happen to me if I was unable to use my electronic cigarette.

I have been smoking for 37 years and I have been trying to quit for many years. I smoked around 30 cigarettes a day. I have tried all the nicotine replacement products and none of them has ever worked for me but since i purchased the e-cigarette I have not had a cigarette for 1 year and 4 months. Since using the e-cigarette i have had no cravings for real cigarettes and I have had no side affects like I was getting on the other nicotine replacement products.I no longer cough my lungs out every morning and my general health has improved immensely. The e-cigarette has saved my life, if it is banned I will go back to killing myself with real cigaretts.

The UK has far too many rules and regulations already. The last thing we need is another stumbling dinosaur bureaucracy interfering with the freedom of choice of adults. MHRA - get a life of your own and stop meddling with ours.

Surt for mine omgivelser, kone, børn, mig selv og alle andre hvis jeg begynder at ryge rigtig tobak igen !!
Har brug for en stimulans af en eller anden art og aner ikke hvad e-cigs skal erstattes med, men frygter selv for de alternativer jeg kan finde på !!

ELEC CIG VS KILLER CIG :

Lung saving : 1-0
Smell : 1-0
Cost : 1-0
Harm from 4000 chemicals : 1-0
Cancer : 1-0
Breathing : 1-0
Secondary smoke damage : 1-0
Discolouration of teeth : 1-0
Eating like a horse : 1-0 etc etc etc

Even Manchester United would struggle to score this many goals.

Dogs bark all the time George, just ignore them.

I will keep this short.

E-cigs save lives and more people discover this every day. I have not touched a real cigarette in nearly 1 year and have introduced a fair number of other smokers to this fantastic product.

For the love of god, see some sense for once and let us make our own decisions!!!

I live in Australia and our Govt bans everything that they cant make money out of! We have to get ours from overseas and risk getting into trouble doing so. An american put me onto e cigs and I have tried EVERYTHING!!! Every nicotine replacement product cost me more than smoking (I rolled my own) and left us struggling for money. AND THEY DIDNT WORK!!! I gave the e cigs a try and cant belive they do work. They dont cost an arm and a leg, dont need to be bought every week (and that money taken out of the grocery money for me as a single parent) and dont line the Govt's pocket with my hard earned dollars! Dont let Britain get like Australia where we only get a chance to try something like this many years after every other country in the world has!!!! LOBBY LOBBY LOBBY!!! This solution works!! The others dont and thats what it all boils down to!
Jinna from Australia

Agree with virtually everything said above. Since quitting tobacco about 7 months ago my previously frequent and severe attacks of angina have nearly disappeared & I have told my Doctor so. I have felt no adverse effects whatsoever from E-cigs and no longer hanker after tobacco.

I agree with the letter above. I have been using my Electronic Nicotine Inhaler for 1 week.
I originally bought it to get around the smoking ban at work, but since using it in work i have come accustomed to it and the benefits at home are more widespread than at work where i could quite easily join the 'Tobacco' smokers in the shelter. For instance... No cigarette ash floating around in the air, no cigarette butts or ash in the ashtray, infact ashtrays no longer required in our house, no harmful smoke lingering in the air, discolouring the ceilings, walls and curtains.
And in one week alone i have gone from 20 cigarettes a day to none with no problems.
This however is where i see a major problem, because as we all know the REAL reason they want to ban the sale of this product is because the taxman has nothing to gain from it..... YET!

I say ban tobacco, let's stop littering the outsides of working premises with cigarette butts and regulate nicotine liquids this would be the best/lucrative option. If only the government would admit it.

My Mum was diagnosed as suffering with emphysima (aka the smokers disease!).
The very same day, I ordered her an e-cigarette; from receipt of it (that was June 9th 09) She hasn't smoked a single cigarette!

A month later went to he Dr and he was amazed at the increase of her lung capacity!

I also bought myself an e-cig because I have chronic bronchitis and surprise, surprise I have also given up the cancer sticks!
If you regulate, or even outlaw nicotine liquids and cartriges - you will be sanctioning the death sentence on innocent Men and Women and also depriving their children of their loving Mum and Dad - will you ever be able to sleep peacefully, with that on your conscience. I doubt it very much!

If this regulation is about nicotine then you cannot exclude cigarettes. If it is about the delivery system, equally you cannot exclude cigarettes. Cigarettes are currently the largest provider of nicotine with the most dangerous (Documented) delivery system. If any other industry polluted the environment in this magnitude they would be shut down and forced to pay for the cleanup.
On the website about regulation they state some extraordinary savings that could be made by the health service should there be a reduction in smoking. Why not use these savings to determine the viability of NRT's. Increasing the cost to the consumer and reducing the availability of these products by regulation will only result in reducing the possible savings to the health service. Or perhaps the cause should be viewed as the source for financing any concerns the health department have. The tobacco industry are responsible for the current level of nicotine addiction it is they who should finance and support a cleanup of their mess.
Legislation will take no account of human nature. I have 3 shops and one supermarket, all selling cigarettes, closer to me than my nearest chemist selling NRTs. You might think that I would consider the implications and walk the extra and pay the extra. But no, I, like many others have not suffered that badly from my smoking habit. Only twenty or thirty years later when the true effect actually hits will I then wish differently, but for now and the immediate future I see no point in walking further and spending more when a perfectly legitimate source of nicotine such as cigarettes are available. Currently I have an inexpensive source of nicotine delivered to my home from the internet, the ecig, and I see no reason to buy cigarettes. Legislation on NRTs will make cigarettes more attractive to me and many others.
NRTs can easily be controlled and monitored using current consumer and trading standards legislation. Separating them out for special attention will only spell disaster for the nation’s health and ensure the continued dominance of cigarettes as a nicotine source

Quite the reverse. There should have been massive support for these things as not just a gadget fad but a serious, serious piece of giving up kit that they truly are. Patches, gum, cold turkey are completely insignificant compared to the E-Cig route. If they dont wipe out smoking instantly then they darn well reduces a real cig smokers intake dramatically.

Thoroughly pessimistic view to believe its a governemt sulk about the absence of tax but I just cant think of any other reason for this ill thought out proposal.

We have a total right to vape these things. Why does the human rights act only ever activate for criminals?

I have already left a comment on this, but the matter really pisses me off.

If we could all get together as a group and send a letter to Downing Street, stating that all the thousands of people who use Electronic Cigarettes would not vote for this Government if the ban goes through.

In this political climate, could the Government afford to lose that many votes? Just a thought.

If you ban the Electronic Cigarette you must ban normal cigarettes,patches,gum and all other nicotine products. It just does not make any sense. Due to this I have decided neither party in the general election will get mine or my wifes vote.

Writing from across The Pond...

It appears the USA is also determined to destroy this technology. I have received news of a new push by the FDA to destroy e-cigarettes in this country (I'm too depressed to read the report in full yet, in part because I see that the effort has the endorsement of a number of health organizations that have a lot of influence -- I suspect this means they will succeed, especially given the "radically transform EVERYTHING overnight" nature of the current administration -- and the president, of course, is a smoker and has probably benefited directly or indirectly from tobacco industry campaign contributions..."follow the money-trail").

Of course cigarettes, though heavily taxes and regulated, will not be banned. The tobacco industry's influence in our countries is so strong... and the lure of tobacco-tax revenues too strong for legislators to resist.

Sad days. As with Mr. Clark's April 17 comment: I am disinclined to vote now for either of our major parties; both dance the big-money dance with the tobacco pharma industries... and we must be realistically depressed (or depressedly realistic): no party cares whether or not a few unhappy e-smokers have decided not to vote for them. The issue is: will they get the tax revenue from the tobacco sales? Yes, they will...

I have recently discover e cigarettes following a health scare and the discovery that if I continue to smoke tobacco cigarettes I am basically commiting slow suicide. They have been invaluable in allowing me to continue a habit which quite frankly I don't wish to stop. I really, really enjoy the whole process of smoking. However I also quite enjoy living - some decisions make themselves. Now I discover that my freedom of choice is once again under attack by the 'moral police' and a greedy government who would really like to tax the air that we breath (and probably do!).

If ecigarettes become unavailable or too expensive I WILL return to smoking cigarettes, ecigs are the only thing that have worked for me. So basically the government will be responsible for my inevitable decline in health and ultimately my probable premature death. Sort of belies their claims of concern regarding public welfare doesn't it?

Today I signed an online petition re: UK regulation of electronic cigarettes at UKpetition@vapersnetwork.org and I urge vapers everywhere to do the same - but hurry - the deadline for objection to the proposed regulations is 2nd June 2010 (it was May 2010 but they postponed it due to the election). PLEASE DO IT TODAY!

Dear Sir/madam
I have now thanks to e-cigarettes, no longer smoke tobacco. After 20 years on 2 packs a day
I feel this has now changed my life.
No Saved my life.
Nicotine Replacement Therapy it is not .
It is a adult choice.
It's true e-liquid does contain Nicotine . But with your help and the help of the legal manufactures, in CHINA , USA , and UK of this product. You can save millions of lives , you will became HEROES of the next generation. If you put the cost on the NHS alone. My god just imagine that ..

There is no danger to myself and those around me. I understand the establishment __the "government" has fears about anything new/ untried/ untested/..

Given the matter of the Nicotine being sold to non-smokers or people under the age of responsibility,,That is your field of expertise.

But please don't punish me and everyone who has stubbed out there last fag out .. By forcing them back to the evil of tobacco smoke,. Be forward thinking please .
God bless you all, and thanks for listening
Ex smoker of analogues cigarettes of 20 years .. Smoker of Digital cigarettes of 2 years ..
John Bonneville age 35

i think the ecig is a fantastic idea i have certainly cut down and just smoke the ecig now it will be a terrible shame if this government bans the ecig

Ora ho conosciuto Ecig , i colleghi di lavoro da un mese ne fanno uso , mi confermano tutto quello che ho letto nel vostro forum , si fuma molto meno sigarette inizialmente , poi solo la sigaretta elettronica Ecig , io , ripeto ho conosciuto Ecig ora ,la ho accuistata subito tramite un collega che la ha da tempo , fin dal primo giorno " oggi " che l' ho ricevuta sono entusiasta , ho fumato solo 3 sigarette di tabacco , in casa non avrò più puzza di fumo , sono contento e vi terrò informato dei miei successi .

i bought my e cig a year ago because i was travelling to spain for a holiday i was worried about going without a cigarette for up to 8 hours giving that there are no smoking areas at aiports now i was a smoker for 38 years on 30 to 40 per day when i reached spain i did not go and buy cheap "fags" i stayed on my ecig and have done ever since i am no longer short of breath and do not cough my lungs up every morning as i did when i was smoking tobacco. It is obvious that the government does not want anyone to give up smoking as 8 million pound per day in tax is clawed in from cigarettes rolling tobacco and cigars currently the government earns none or very little from ecigs or ecigs liquids i wonder why they want to ban the sale??? make your own mind up i am a non smoker now i use an ecig i sayto the government leave well alone.