American’s For Non-Smoker’s Rights, the American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, Action on Smoking and Health, and the Center for Tobacco-Free Kids. What do all of these groups have in common? The obvious answer would be that they are all groups that have a vested interest in ending the worldwide devastation caused by tobacco. But they all have another thing in common: they are staunch electronic cigarette prohibitionists. Each of these groups have stated that they are completely against the entire idea of electronic cigarettes, even as a smoking cessation tool. Yes, that’s right, these groups are staunchly against a product that has almost limitless potential to end the very enemy they are working so hard to destroy.  

The views of these groups in regard to e-smoking can be summed up by this recent press release by the Americans for Non-Smoker’s Rights. This press release is a heap of hypocritical vitriol that vilifies electronic cigarettes, their suppliers and their supporters. Their claims are that the electronic cigarette world is misleading the public by telling them that e-cigarettes are a viable option for smoking cessation. They cite both a lack of scientific studies to support e-cigarettes and an abundance of studies to denounce them. They claim that not only is the safety of electronic cigarettes unproven, but that it has already been disproved by a number of studies.

Not only is their report full of holes, omissions, and exaggerations, but it seems to stomp on the very purpose of their organization. Nietzche once said, “Be careful when you fight the monsters, lest you become one.” This quote rings ever so true when it comes to the battle over electronic cigarettes. Groups that have so ardently fought the tobacco monster are now taking sides with Big Tobacco itself, attempting to squash an idea that could end the death-mongering industry forever. What are their motivations? Why a vehement opposition rather than a passive one?

The main issue for these groups when it comes to electronic cigarettes are lack of proper research. For example, the press release mentioned earlier states that electronic cigarettes are promoted as smoking cessation tools “despite a lack of independent peer-reviewed scientific evidence demonstrating the safety or efficacy of the products for smoking cessation.” ANR, much like most anti-tobacco organizations, continues to cite complete lack of evidence, despite the fact that there exists a relatively large body of research to support e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool.

For example, ANR completely overlooked the wildly important Polosa study, which found that 9 out of 40 smokers were able to completely quit smoking tobacco purely through use of electronic cigarettes. That’s a 22.5% success rate, a number that is almost inconceivable through any other method of smoking cessation. They also seem to ignore the testimonials of thousands of ex-smokers across the web who found relief through e-smoking.

But extreme omission of scientific evidence is not the only libel committed by the ANR, they also resort to sensationalism in regards to the studies they did choose to reference. For example, they stated, “In July 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released results of its preliminary analysis of several electronic cigarettes, which found that the cartridges contain carcinogens, including nitrosamines, and toxic chemicals such as diethylene glycol, a component of antifreeze. ” However, they fail to note that these carcinogens found in the vapor were almost negligible and far, far below the levels found in tobacco smoke.

This report, and many reports like it, use extreme omission and exaggeration to drive their point home. When they say that there “are no studies”, they’re ignoring the fact that there are. When they do cite a study, they do so with a complete lack of contextualization. In the end, the claim that “Proponents of electronic cigarettes, commonly known as “e-cigarettes,” are misleading the public about these products through paid press releases, advertorials, and online social media” is almost laughable in its hypocrisy.