Want create site? Find Free WordPress Themes and plugins.

The World Health Organization recently put out a letter arguing for stiff regulations against electronic cigarettes around the world. The letter voiced concern about the products and advised that they be treated as tobacco products. According to the tobacco researchers and experts, though, the WHO-commissioned review contains errors, misinterpretations and misrepresentations.

Experts argued that policymakers are being mislead to believe that electronic cigarettes pose no benefits and that they are worse than they actually are. Perhaps the most significant oversight is how little the review compares the effects of conventional tobacco cigarettes to that of electronic cigarettes. This is a major component in the argument for support of the products. If e-cigs can reduce the harm of smoking — as it appears they do — then they should be helped rather than hindered.

You can read about the expert input here.

The motivations for the WHO to get things wrong in this case is pretty clear. While the WHO appears mostly balanced in the face of controversy, it — like any other public health group — thrives on the existence of public health villains. And there is none bigger than tobacco. When you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The WHO is acting just like every other group that can’t see e-cigs as anything other than another type of smoking.

And that’s the problem these experts are shining light on. While there is evidence e-cigs can cause a barely measurable amount of harm, the benefits of a replacement product for traditional cigarettes that works are far to great to pass up.

For this reason, these experts find it appalling that the WHO would recommend making it harder to bring e-cigs to market while tobacco cigarettes remain so widely available.

“There are currently two products competing for smokers’ custom,” one said. “One – the conventional cigarette – endangers users and bystanders and recruits new customers from among non-smoking children who try it. The other – the e-cigarette – is orders of magnitude safer, poses no risk to bystanders, and generates negligible rates of regular use among non-smoking children who try it.”