Safety and responsibility go hand in hand.  As a responsible distributor of the electronic cigarette we want to make it clear that inLife does not make any health or cessation claims nor will we sell our product to minors.  In addition, inLife does not compare our product to the nicotine patch or gum.   We are not trying to be a cessation product.  Our products have not been evaluated by the FDA and we will not make any claims to that effect.  inLife has been proactive with our responsible marketing approach and has been very clear regarding the product safety concerns and labeling.  Any IDs who markets or sells our products to minors or who make any health or cessation claims will be terminated and immediately dissociated with our company.

A responsible policy as indicated above, lays the proper foundation for those who wish to market the electronic cigarette.  Further to that, there have also been independent, third party studies conducted that point to the safety of the Electronic Cigarette.  In addition, we can point to several health professionals who have positive things to say about the e-cig.  We will let their own words speak for themselves.

On his website http://www.tobaccoharmreduction.org/faq/ecigs.htm Dr. Carl Phillips of the University of Alberta – School of Public Health makes the following statement regarding the electronic cigarette,

“Almost anything else that is not acutely toxic (and we know the e-cigs are not) will be safer. Even if e-cigs are about ten times as harmful as smokeless tobacco, that still makes them about 1/10th as harmful as smoking. Smoking is just that bad.”

Dr. Phillips also refers the reader to a  recent study conducted by Dr. Murray Laugesen of Health New Zealand , who was contracted by one of the e-cig manufacturers to conduct a study on the safety of that manufacturers e-cigarette.  The study concluded that the e-cig posses no specific health risks to humans.  The report states,

"It is very safe relative to cigarettes, and also safe in absolute terms on all measurements we have applied." 

A copy of the report can be found at: http://healthnz.co.nz/RuyanCartridgeReport30-Oct-08.pdf

Dr. Joel Nitzkin, Chair of the Tobacco Control Task Force for the American Association of Public Health Physicians states:

"...we have every reason to believe that the hazard posed by e-cigarettes would be much lower than one percent. So if we can figure that the nicotine in the e-cigarettes is basically a generic version of the same nicotine that is in prescription (NRT) products, we have every reason to believe that the hazard posed by e-cigarettes would be much lower than one percent, probably much lower than one tenth of one percent of the hazard posed by regular cigarettes."

Dr. Michael Siegel of Tobacco Analysis seems to also support the electronic cigarette.  He recently stated on his blog: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/

“I find it to be a joke that the FDA is making a huge deal out of the finding that there may be some small risk associated with electronic cigarettes at the same time it is poised to start approving a product that we know is going to kill more than 400,000 people over the next year.”

Ongoing studies are currently underway that continue to bolster the reports that finds the electronic cigarette posing no significant health risks to humans and is a viable alternative to dangerous, tobacco smoking. 

A recent lawsuit was filed against the FDA by two Electronic Cigarette distributors in the United States alleging that FDA does not have the jurisdiction to regulate their activity.  The FDA contends that at least one of these manufacturers has allegedly made claims of cessation and other health benefits.  It is also alleged that the offering of flavors "might"  encourage children to try the nicotine versions of the product..   The FDA maintains that marketing claims of cessation or other health benefits must be substantiated by clinical trials and submitted to the FDA for approval before marketing and sale of the product.  Our regulatory advisors point out that there are no legal restrictions that exists in the US currently that would prohibit the sale of the electronic cigarette when they are marketed within the confines of the law.  In short, inLife does not make any claims of cessation or any claims of health benefits, nor do we offer our product to children.  In addition, we have made it a point never to target market the nicotine version of our products to any non smokers.

It is interesting to point out the FDA targeted these two particular distributors who are suing them and tested 18 of their cartridges.  The FDA held a press conference on July 22, 2009 and announced their findings stating, among other things, that they found traces of nitrosamines.  We point out that the general statement by FDA states this in no uncertain terms.  However, when you look at the actual report, it states that it found "very low levels" of the nitrosamines and other tobacco specific impurities.  Nitrosamines occur in a chemical reaction and cause cancer in experimental animals.  A look in Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nitrosamine) reveals that nitrosamines are found in food including fried bacon, cured meats, beer and nonfat dry milk. In addition, a testing of party balloons and condoms indicated that many of them released small amounts of nitrosamines.  It is also found in tobacco products.  The study also found Diethylene Glycol (DEG) in just one of the cartridges from one of the distributors.  DEG is an ingredient used in antifreeze and considered as toxic.  The distributor that provided that particular cartridge (which was one out of 9) does not utilize the same, reliable manufacturer that is contracted with inLife, LLC.  Looking at the test results a bit more closely reveals the cartridges that were tested differ from one manufacturer to another.

.  

Other concerns were voiced by the FDA that indicate the products sold by these distributors "do not contain any health warnings comparable to FDA-approved nicotine replacement products or conventional cigarettes."  Concerns about nicotine levels were also raised.

It is interesting to point out that there seems to be a mystery regarding the actual levels of chemicals the FDA found in their test results.   The ECA (Electronic Cigarette Association) is working to push the FDA to admit to the levels that they found in the cartridges they tested. 

In addition, Dr. Michael Siegel of Tobacco Analysis makes the following claim in his blog: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/

“What the FDA did not tell the media or the public, and what the American Lung Association failed to express alarm over, is the fact that nicotine replacement products themselves have been found to have detectable levels of tobacco-specific nitrosamines, including 4-(methylnirosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK) and N'-nitrosonornicotine (NNN). Both of these chemicals are consistently carcinogenic in laboratory animals and are widely recognized as carcinogens present in tobacco products

Given the finding that nicotine replacement products and electronic cigarettes both contain carcinogens, why is it that the American Lung Association is only calling for the recall of electronic cigarettes, not other nicotine replacement products? Shouldn't the ALA also express concern about nicotine replacement medications due to the fact that they create documented exposure to carcinogens and that there is therefore no safe level of exposure to nicotine replacement products?”

No where in the reports or press release does the FDA assert that the product should be banned.  Our opinion on the matter is that the FDA is embroiled in a law suit with these two distributors and all parties are in it to win.  In short, the gloves are off.  We point out that the findings of the FDA were  based upon the products of other distributors and not of inLife product. 

The electronic cigarette represents the biggest paradigm shift in a 100 billion dollar industry.   It is going to ruffle some very powerful feathers.  In spite of this, inLife absolutely embraces the idea to regulate ALL e-cigarettes from a health and safety standpoint.  It is far to an important breakthrough.  Just look at the advantages over dangerous and harmful cigarettes that they offer:

A.      Far Less harmful substances

B.     Four basic elements - Propylene Glycol, Glycerol, Nicotine and  flavoring vs. traditional cigarettes  which embodies over 4000 chemical, over 40 which are carcinogenic

C.     Cigarettes cause over 400,000 preventable deaths in the world each year - e-cigs do not

D.     Cigarettes create billions of dollars of fire damage each year - e-cigs do not

E.     Cigarettes seriously litter our highways, parks, beaches and neighborhoods - e-cigs do not

F.      Cigarettes create second hand smoke that kills millions undetected - e-cigs do not

G.     Cigarettes smell terrible and infect clothes, homes, cars - anywhere they are used - e-cigs do not.

The choice is yours - cigarettes - or the inLife Alternative Smoking Device!