For those who just cannot kick smoking and are considering NRT (nicotine replacement therapy) products — patches, gum, lozenges, spray or other products like Chantix – consider this fact in your electronic cigarette review repertoire. It’s simple, really: NRT products, despite the FDA and pharmaceutical company hype, are far less effective over the long term and are even less effective than quitting “cold turkey.”
In an April 2009 response to British Medical Journal’s study of NRT smoking cessation therapies and their long-term effectiveness, one observer commented, “With a long-term smoking cessation percentage of only 1.6%, one can hardly call NRT treatment an “effective” intervention in this situation…In fact, the logical conclusion from this paper is that NRT was a dismal intervention.” Again, anecdotal evidence is that most people who have stopped smoking did so without nicotine replacement products.
Electronic cigarette review: better way to quit when compared to NRT
E-cigarettes provide a better way to get off cigarettes, but they are not a nicotine replacement therapy. NRT (which, as previously demonstrated, doesn’t work well over the long term) is designed to help the smoker overcome or take the edge off the nicotine craving. Sold over the counter, and averaging about $40 for a two-week supply, these products are designed for use over a restricted period, after which any accompanying therapy ceases.
E-cigarettes, on the other hand, are simply designed to give consumer a safer alternative delivery of nicotine. The e-cigarette user can transition immediately to e-cigarettes without “psyching up” and can keep using nicotine indefinitely. An electronic cigarette review identifies the immediate benefits are both in health and esthetics and the smoker can decide to join the many other e-cigarette users who have stopped altogether.
Smoking is harmful because of the junk you inhale with the smoke. Nicotine is highly addictive and hard to kick, but it is not carcinogenic; again, the inhaled smoke is. You can continue the “behavior” and “habits” of smoking with e-cigarettes, without the withdrawal, and you will avoid the side effects of nicotine patches (bad dreams, headaches, skin reactions, dizziness, upset tummy, weakness) and gum (irritation for denture wearers, etc.)
So, strictly speaking e-cigarettes should be regarded as a product that reduces the harm of tobacco products, much the say way that low fat and reduced sugar in everyday foods does. Significantly, we can measure success in harm reduction products simply by how the user of the product continues using it over the long haul. Electronic cigarette review shows the best promise in meeting that criterion.
Professor Siegel weighs in
Dr. Michael Siegel (a Boston University Health expert and smoking cessation advocate) targets antismoking organizations, who continue to oppose electronic cigarettes, in favor of “approved” cessation strategies. He points to studies that show that “show that ‘legitimate’ cessation strategies fail more the 90% of the time.”
We now have the capability to deliver nicotine (through safe e-cigarettes), Dr. Siegel says, but it appears that “ideology” is getting in the way. That “ideology” looks at anything “that looks like smoking is evil and cannot possibly be condoned” – even if it is far more beneficial to public health.
Top Electronic Cigarette Review is a site created by long-time E-cigarette smokers that profile the best electronic cigarette for 2012. They provide reliable and an expert electronic cigarette review of the brands worth your consideration.