This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jun/16/strong-rhetoric-ecigarettes-debate-tobacco-quit

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Strong rhetoric on both sides of e-cigarettes debate – but little evidence Strong rhetoric on both sides of e-cigarettes debate – but little evidence
(about 9 hours later)
E-cigarettes are either going to save millions of lives by helping people to quit smoking or they are going to destroy millions of lives by luring children and young people into the habit. It is very hard for the onlooker to know what to believe, when the rhetoric is flying in both directions from very eminent people who all have a passionate commitment to public health.E-cigarettes are either going to save millions of lives by helping people to quit smoking or they are going to destroy millions of lives by luring children and young people into the habit. It is very hard for the onlooker to know what to believe, when the rhetoric is flying in both directions from very eminent people who all have a passionate commitment to public health.
The latest letter to Margaret Chan, director general of the World Health Organisation, swings the pendulum firmly back to the position of the opponents of a free market in e-cigarettes. The language is tough and uncompromising. It is signed by those who fear, based on decades of evidence of bad behaviour, that the tobacco companies are getting involved in the nicotine delivery devices in order to undermine bans on cigarette advertising and smoking in public places. The latest letter to Margaret Chan, director general of the World Health Organisation, swings the pendulum firmly back to the position of the opponents of a free market in e-cigarettes.
The language is tough and uncompromising. It is signed by those who fear, based on decades of evidence of bad behaviour, that the tobacco companies are getting involved in the nicotine delivery devices in order to undermine bans on cigarette advertising and smoking in public places.
The letter is a response to one from 53 scientists to Chan, sent on 3 June, which said in no less direct language that treating e-cigarettes like tobacco would deprive smokers of a new and increasingly popular way to quit. E-cigarettes, the scientists say, are a very useful harm reduction tool, allowing smokers to get their nicotine fix without the deadly tar in cigarettes. Among those who signed the earlier letter were Professor Gerry Stimson, of Imperial College, who has been at the forefront of harm reduction advocacy in drugs; the former government drugs adviser David Nutt; and Michel Kazatchkine, ex-head of the Global Fund, whose primary interest is HIV.The letter is a response to one from 53 scientists to Chan, sent on 3 June, which said in no less direct language that treating e-cigarettes like tobacco would deprive smokers of a new and increasingly popular way to quit. E-cigarettes, the scientists say, are a very useful harm reduction tool, allowing smokers to get their nicotine fix without the deadly tar in cigarettes. Among those who signed the earlier letter were Professor Gerry Stimson, of Imperial College, who has been at the forefront of harm reduction advocacy in drugs; the former government drugs adviser David Nutt; and Michel Kazatchkine, ex-head of the Global Fund, whose primary interest is HIV.
The opposing letter has twice the number of signatories, from all over the world. They fear a comeback by Big Tobacco, which is becoming the biggest player in the e-cigarette market. They do not believe claims that the industry wants to diversify. E-cigarettes may prove to be a profitable market, but globally tobacco is enormous, and growing in the developing world. Why would Big Tobacco support e-cigarettes if they are likely to shrink that market, the opponents ask.The opposing letter has twice the number of signatories, from all over the world. They fear a comeback by Big Tobacco, which is becoming the biggest player in the e-cigarette market. They do not believe claims that the industry wants to diversify. E-cigarettes may prove to be a profitable market, but globally tobacco is enormous, and growing in the developing world. Why would Big Tobacco support e-cigarettes if they are likely to shrink that market, the opponents ask.
The WHO has been moving in their direction. Some smaller European countries, such as Slovenia, have been asking for advice, and there are stories of e-cigarette shops opening outside schools. In October, the WHO will meet to discuss whether to bring e-cigarettes into the framework convention on tobacco control, one of the proudest achievements of the WHO, although the man who played the lead role in its development while at the WHO, Derek Yach, now of the Vitality Institute in New York, is one of the 53 signatories opposing that. The WHO has been moving in their direction. Some smaller European countries, such as Slovenia, have been asking for advice, and there are stories of e-cigarette shops opening outside schools. In October the WHO will meet to discuss whether to bring e-cigarettes into the framework convention on tobacco control, one of the proudest achievements of the WHO, although the man who played the lead role in its development while at the WHO, Derek Yach, now of the Vitality Institute in New York, is one of the 53 signatories opposing that.
There are thought to be two million people using e-cigarettes in the UK, and many of them say they have managed to stop smoking as a result. Many argue passionately that they have been rescued from harm and that everybody should have a right to use them if they want to. Strong feelings have led to outbursts of anger and even vitriol on Twitter, and some public health doctors say they have been threatened. That has increased their own conviction that malign forces – in the shape of the tobacco industry – must be pulling the strings.There are thought to be two million people using e-cigarettes in the UK, and many of them say they have managed to stop smoking as a result. Many argue passionately that they have been rescued from harm and that everybody should have a right to use them if they want to. Strong feelings have led to outbursts of anger and even vitriol on Twitter, and some public health doctors say they have been threatened. That has increased their own conviction that malign forces – in the shape of the tobacco industry – must be pulling the strings.
In the end, only good scientific evidence will persuade the critics of e-cigarettes that they are not a danger. The studies that have been done, such as a recent one by Professor Robert West, from University College London, which showed that e-cigarettes were more effective than nicotine replacement therapy in helping people quit smoking, are not enough, opponents say. Their argument is that, until we know, we should opt to be safe rather than sorry.In the end, only good scientific evidence will persuade the critics of e-cigarettes that they are not a danger. The studies that have been done, such as a recent one by Professor Robert West, from University College London, which showed that e-cigarettes were more effective than nicotine replacement therapy in helping people quit smoking, are not enough, opponents say. Their argument is that, until we know, we should opt to be safe rather than sorry.