By Adam Tobias | Wisconsin Reporter

MADISON, Wis. — Christian Berkey could almost feel his jaw hit the ground when, almost two years ago, he was speaking with a health commissioner in New York about electronic cigarettes.

Berkey, founder and CEO of Johnson Creek Enterprises, the second-largest producer of e-liquid in the world, couldn’t believe the public official thought users lit the electronic devices and inhaled smoke just like traditional cigarettes.

That conversation took place, Berkey says, just an hour before the commissioner was supposed to vote on guidelines for e-cigarettes.

“It scared the hell out of me,” Berkey told Wisconsin Reporter. “Unfortunately, that kind of thing is not an isolated incident. There are staggering numbers of legislators who are perfectly willing to vote on measures concerning electronic cigarettes, when, in fact, they know next to nothing about them.”

Because the e-cigarette industry is still relatively new, scientific evidence regarding human health effects is limited. But that hasn’t stopped government officials from passing more than 450 state and local laws restricting the use of electronic nicotine delivery systems.

Now one of Berkey’s worst fears, something he calls sheer irresponsible lunacy, has come to his home state.

State Rep. Debra Kolste, D-Janesville, has introduced legislation adding e-cigarettes to the Wisconsin’s indoor smoking ban that was enacted in 2010.

But Kolste has admitted she doesn’t know if using e-cigarettes, also known as vaping, causes any health problems.

“There’s no research to tell us whether it’s safe or not,” Kolste told the Janesville Gazette. “There is no research that says these e-cigs are safe. It would be wrong to take a step back.”

Wisconsin Reporter contacted Kolste’s office four times last week to request an interview, but the lawmaker never responded.

“This is another example of, unfortunately, a movement that we’re starting to see more and more, which is legislating from fear and ignorance, instead of science and common sense,” Berkey said.

“The idea of introducing a bill when, even by your own admission, you don’t know if they shouldn’t be banned — you’re just going to do it just in case — is the most irresponsible form of legislation I have ever heard of,” he added.

E-cigarettes are battery-powered utensils designed to mimic cigarettes by vaporizing nicotine-laced liquids, which are inhaled by the user. E-cigs are noncombustible, do not contain tobacco and produce vapor, not smoke.

More than 50 nicotine science and public health policy specialists who wrote the World Health Organization in May are urging lawmakers not to draft legislation “protecting” bystanders from e-cigarettes because they say there is no evidence of health risks.

“Decisions on whether it is permitted or banned in a particular space should rest with the owners or operators of public spaces, who can take a wide range of factors into account,” the letter says.

But a study published last week in the online journal Public Library of Science ONE found that vaping may not be as safe as many believe.

In the experiments, led by John Hopkins University professor Shyam Biswai, mice exposed to e-cigarette vapor suffered mild damage to their lungs and became more susceptible to respiratory infections.

Researchers also learned that vapor fumes contain free radical toxins comparable to those in cigarette smoke and air pollution. But those toxins found in the vapor were about 1 percent of the level of traditional cigarettes.

Other studies also have shown e-cigarettes are far less hazardous than smoking tobacco, likely in the range of 98 to 99 percent.

“Let me be clear: Cigarette smoking is dramatically more harmful than smoking (e-cigarettes),” said Jeff Stier, director of the National Center for Public Policy Research’s Risk Analysis Division. “Second-hand exposure to cigarette smoking is even more dramatic, in terms of the risk to the bystander. So, you get somewhere between zero and almost zero benefit from a restriction on vaping indoors.”

Stier told Wisconsin Reporter the ban doesn’t make sense from a public health perspective because many people have been using the electronic devices to quit smoking cigarettes.

Stier says e-cigarettes work best because users can regulate the amount of nicotine that enters their bodies. Nicotine patches and gum are not as effective because they only release small amounts of the chemical over longer periods of time, according to Stier.

“Why would you pretend to act in the interest of public health and put an obstacle in front of people who are trying to quit?” Stier asked. “And that’s what they are doing with this indoor ban.”

Berkey is also worried about what Kolste’s bill could do to the local economy and vaping industry, which he says has brought thousands of jobs to Wisconsin.

“It’s going to hurt vapor shop owners, it’s going to hurt small businesses, restaurants, bars and the like, and all because a legislator decided to act on a matter she doesn’t know anything about,” Berkey told Wisconsin Reporter.

State Rep. Joel Kleefisch, R-Ocononmowoc, has said he intends to introduce legislation blocking e-cigarettes from the smoking ban because he doesn’t think it’s the government’s job to tell business owners what legal activities customers can do in their establishments.

“The nanny state needs to stop interfering in our daily lives … When the right to choose where an adult of legal age enjoys a legal activity becomes infringed, our freedoms are taken away,” Kleefisch said.