You pelican....My self and 60 minuets seem to be the only ones that thinks. Have you been watching:)

Oh dear.

LEA

What I cannot understand is the harsh reaction of Australian State Governments to electronic cigarettes. Despite there being hundreds of thousands of users worldwide, there is no evidence that the electronic cigarette has yet caused a death or is more harmful than other nicotine replacement therapies. This would mean that they would cause less than 2% of the deaths compared to conventional products, perhaps much less than 2%. Yet paradoxically governments are banning them because of the risk that the nicotine poses.

The concern about the toxicity of the nicotine contained in e-cigarettes is the motivation for categorising them as restricted poisons, which includes cyanide and strychnine. This is especially ironic as the Therapeutic Goods Administration is moving to remove restriction on nicotine containing products for the purpose of reducing tobacco usage. In fact, at least one major retailer is now running full page advertisements for 4mg nicotine gum: Three pieces of 4mg gum would contain enough nicotine to kill a small child.

The more I look at the treatment of e-cigarettes, the less I think it possible that a decision to ban them has been made on the basis of either evidence or logic.

disclosure: I dont smoke and have never suffered the misfortune of nicotine addiction.