Frankly, overall, if it's too much stress or inconvenience to kick the nicotine habit, then it makes a heck of a lot more sense to use a nicotine inhaler without the smoke and carcinogens.

People - in particular non-smokers - often forget that nicotine is seven times more addictive than heroin, and that's no picnic to kick... it's seven times harder to kick nicotine than heroine.

Kicking heroine usually means having to book about a week off where you can shut yourself away with supplies of tomato juice and buckets to evacuate in, and kicking nicotine realistically means something like gong out into the bush with a case of scotch, pitching a tent, and then saying goodbye to ordinary reality for about five days, during which you cannot be disturbed with calls from the office.

So... if you're busy with a career and/or family issues that have you running every minute, it's just not sensible to expect someone to be kicking nicotine in the middle of it, but if they can switch to a nicotine inhaler while rushing around, then hey... that's a good thing.

The issue of it being an inhaler is important, because the rate and method of delivery of the nicotine affects how it will work to a large degree, such that patches and gums just don't do it right... it has to be an inhaler in order to properly replace a cigarette.

By using a nicotine inhaler, you're cutting out the 1500 carcinogens found in the tar and smoke of tobacco, so it's a huge gain in detoxification as far as your body is concerned, whether or not the puritans think you're being a real spirit to continue with the inhaler.

What to watch out for is the things that nicotine do, that the tar does not, which is vasoconstriction.

Vasoconstriction is the part about smoking that causes heart attacks and stroke and *that's* caused by the nicotine.

So... if you go for a nicotine inhaler, you're cutting out the 1500 carcinogens from the tar, but you're still keeping the risk of heart attack and stroke,

Overall, it will boil down to a price issue, such that it could be regulated where nicotine inhalers are not significantly more expensive than cigarettes, then society would save a fortune in 20 years because it costs way more to take care of a cancer patient than someone who's had a heart attack or a stroke.

The tobacco companies will complain, but their the ones who say they just the roll the stuff, and that it's not their business what they're rolling, so with just the right kind of tax incentive, it should be easy to get the tobacco companies to change it so that those packets contain 20 tubes of inhalable nicotine that deliver at the same rate as a cigarette and that cost the same...

... after all, 80% of the cost of of a pack of cigarettes is tax, so if it costs the cigarette manufacturer 20% more to make inhalent cigarettes, then all the government has to do is cut the tax on a pack by 20% and everything's equal as far as the cigarette maker is concerned. Cut the tax by 25%, and the cigarette maker is making more profit than they do with tobacco.

Then the tobacco growers will complain, but give them some subsidies to convert to a different crop and account for it with a "tobacco growers crop conversion subsidy" account, which will go into the red for awhile, but then in 20 years when the cancer drops, the money saved from treating cancer can but put back towards paying off the "tobacco growers crop conversion subsidy" account. When it's zero, close it, and use the rest of the money saved from no cancer for other things.

So... yeah... nicotine without smoke and carcinogens is a darned practical idea.

The health effects of tobacco are the circumstances, mechanisms, and factors of tobacco consumption on human health. Epidemiological research have been focused primarily on tobacco smoking,which has been studied more extensively than any other form of consumption.

Tobacco use leads most commonly to diseases affecting the heart and lungs, with smoking being a major risk factor for heart attacks, strokes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, and cancer (particularly lung cancer, cancers of the larynx and mouth, and pancreatic cancer).

Many people don't know this, but nicotine is in fact, a very dangerous pesticide.

"Nicotine — Botanical insecticide. Pure nicotine is a tobacco extract highly toxic to warm-blooded animals. The insecticide usually is marketed as a 40% liquid concentrate of nicotine sulfate, which is diluted in water and applied as a spray. Dusts can irritate the skin and are not normally available for garden use. Nicotine is used primarily for piercing sucking-insects such as aphids, whitefiles, leaf hoppers and thrips. Nicotine is more effective when applied during warm weather. It degrades quickly, so can be used on many food plants nearing harvest. It is registered for use on a wide range of vegetable and fruit crops. " from http://www.hbci.com/~wenonah/hydro/pestcont.htm

Notice that it says that pure nicotine is "highly toxic to warm-blooded animals". I believe the last time I checked, humans were warm blooded animals.

"According to Poison/Toxicology by Jay Arena, the lethal dosage of nicotine for a 150 pound (68kg) male is 60mg. This is less than both arsenic and strychnine. (would you use a product if you knew it had either of those in it?) ...
"Much more nicotine enters the body through chewing tobacco and many nicotine patches/gums than through smoking cigarettes; nicotine levels should be monitored when using these methods of disbursement. While gums and patches have maximum recommended doses, chewers of tobacco should be aware of how much nicotine they are sending directly to their blood stream. An average pinch of chew held in the cheek for half an hour provides as much nicotine as smoking three or four cigarettes. " In the same article it says that nicotine itself is tied to several types of cancer, so nicotine itself is a carcinogen.
from http://www.wisegeek.com/is-nicotine-dangerous.htm

In the advertisement, it says "...nicotine by itself is not a terrible thing." Now that you have the facts, what do you think? It's just another way to get people to get addicted. Once they are hooked, and they can't afford the $150 e-cigarettes, they will start using regular cigarettes.