But in fact, as pointed out by
The Electronic Cigarette blog,
Health Canada seems to know the benefits of vaporization over
when it comes to medical marijuana.
According to the government bureaucracy's website,
advantages of vaporization apparently include the formation of a smaller
quantity of toxic by-products such as carbon monoxide, polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and tar, as well as a more efficient
extraction of THC from the cannabis material […] The vaporizer is
well-tolerated, with no reported adverse effects, and is generally
preferred over smoking by most subjects.”
If Health Canada officials tolerate and even appear to recommend
vaporization over combustion for medical marijuana users, why change
their tune when it comes to tobacco?
As Kline suggests, maybe billions of dollars of tobacco taxes are
clouding their vision.
I am a lot less judgmental than I was as a child. I understand that
smoking is a dangerous activity, but I respect people's rights to make
their own decisions about whether or not to engage in dangerous
activities. I have even become a casual smoker myself, enjoying the odd
cigarette with a glass of wine or a beer, although I can easily go weeks
without a single drag.
But many people cannot forgo that nicotine fix. An electronic cigarette
could help, as it not only provides the drug smokers are addicted to,
but also simulates the action that has become such a habit. It is also
very probably a safer substitute for people who cannot or will not give
up nicotine. The fact that this has not been proven beyond the shadow of
a doubt is not reason enough to ban electronic cigarettes. They could
very easily be made available at the consumer's own risk until
sufficient evidence, whatever that might be, has been accumulated.
H.L. Mencken famously defined puritanism as “the
haunting fear that someone, somewhere, is having a good time.” The thing
I failed to understand when I was a kid is that people enjoy smoking.
Could puritanism be the real reason behind the Canadian ban on
e-cigarettes? As the above-mentioned blog recommends, I encourage you to
write to Health Canada
your Member of Parliament
to ask them why we need to be “protected” from making our own decisions
about a product that is freely available south of the border.