URGENT - NYS Outright Sales Ban On the AGENDA Again - Page 11
Page 11 of 28 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 276
Like Tree3Likes

Thread: URGENT - NYS Outright Sales Ban On the AGENDA Again

  1. #101
    PV Master Vaping Advocate
    ECF Veteran
    kristin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    CASAA Board of Directors - Wisconsin
    Posts
    7,849

    Default

    If anyone is interested, I also blogged about this bill: Wisconsin Vapers Blog - Enjoying a Smoke-Free Life: New York at it again - your state could be next!

    Feel free to pass it on - hopefully people will see why to help in New York!


  2. #102
    ECF Administrator
    Social Groups Manager
    Reviewer/Blogger Manager
    Verified Member
    ECF Veteran
    Supporting Member
    Valsacar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    1,785

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Papa Lazarou View Post
    Not sure if this is any help but a free internet fax service is here - Truly Free Internet Faxing I can't guarantee it's reliable because I've just found it, but they do e-mail an acknowledgement and what I've sent so far appears to be going through OK. So get faxing to the numbers on the first page as well as writing and e-mailing
    I used it, could only send 5 or 6 before it stopped me (limit on free usage), will try again from home. It definitely does not look very professional though, it has ads all over the faxed page.


    Above is probably a lie... mmm, more flavours!

  3. #103
    Ultra Member ECF Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    USA-Florida
    Posts
    2,041

    Default

    I have a fax service so I faxed the CASAA letter to each on the list. Yeah, it may not help but you never know...it just might!!!!

  4. #104
    PV Master ECF Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,663

    Default

    Proposed Law Endangers Health of Former Smokers

    New York State Assembly Health Committee is scheduled to discuss proposed bill A01468,
    which would outlaw the sales of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) in New York. The
    Consumer Advocates for Smoke-free Alternatives Association (CASAA) supports a ban
    on sales to minors, as electronic cigarettes are an alternative tobacco product. However,
    CASAA’s medical director, Theresa Whitt, M.D., says that banning sales to adults would
    be harmful to former smokers who rely on e-cigarettes to remain smoke-free.

    Article: Click Here

  5. #105
    bbb
    bbb is online now
    Super Member Verified Member
    ECF Veteran

    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    322

    Default

    I called a couple Health Committee members ... took 30 seconds to relay my concerns ... the aides answering the phone have said they will pass on my concerns ... one even requested my name and zip code, which I gladly gave ... she explained they are receiving calls on this and are keeping count ... so do it today

    I don't even live in NY, I live in FL ... but I can see the writing on the wall <sigh>

    EDIT: added this in case anyone needs a sample intro ... I just talked off the cuff, got my point across, quickly, clearly and politely ... phoning might have more impact ? ... I'm sure there is a list of Health Committee members offices, maybe somewhere else in this thread

    "My name is ________. I am calling in reference to A-1468. If this passes, I would no longer be able to buy electronic cigarettes in New York. I smoked for ___ years. I quit smoking using an electronic cigarette. Why would Assemblyman/Assemblywoman ________ want to take away my choice to use a healthier alternative? I have sent emails with studies showing that the e-cigarette is safer than smoking and that there has not been one recorded case of a negative reaction from using an e-cigarette with more than a million former smokers using them!"

    You should tell them that you encourage them to ban sales to MINORS, but that section 2 of this bill actually bans sales to ADULTS and you cannot understand why the respresentative would want to do that if it
    would send you back to cigarettes! Then tell them your story for as long as they will listen!!! Tell the secretary, the legal aid, whoever answers the phone... because they are the ones that report back to the Assemblymember. If we ALL call and tell them our story... it WILL make a difference!!! If you don't live in NY you can tell them that the company you purchase your electronic cigarettes from is based in New
    York (eliquidplanet.com, evaporworld.com, myvaporstore.com) and you may not be able to get them if they stop sales in New York. You can tell them you don't want them to take away your choice to use a healthier alternative. Tell them how good you feel and how much your life is improved. Tell them how e-cigarettes saved YOUR life. They NEED to hear your story. Tell them how many times you tried to quit
    before. Tell them how your kids like that you will be around long enough to see them graduate (use the children... cause 2 can play at that game!). The numbers are below.

    Just to be clear (we have had some questions from people who are not sure how the leguslative system works)... if this passes through the NY Assembly Health Committee ... it will not mean that e-cigarettes
    are banned in New York. It will mean that the entire Assembly (who voted UNANIMOUSLY to pass this bill last year!!!) will get to vote on it and there are too many of them for us to meet with and talk to. We
    need to stop this before it gets to them!
    Last edited by bbb; 01-24-2011 at 02:33 PM. Reason: add more info

  6. #106
    Full Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Just sent my letter out ...I am so angry! What will they tell us we can and cannot do next? I so should have been born in the 60's, I'm way to liberal for this day and age...lol

  7. #107
    Executive Director
    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    Vaping Advocate
    ECF Veteran
    Supporting Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,125

    Default

    Here is my letter to NY Assembly Health Committee members, which I'm also faxing to each member. I also e-mailed an alert urging several hundred other consumer and public health advocates to contact members.

    From: Bill Godshall
    To: [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected]
    Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 11:48 AM
    Subject: Amend or reject legislation to ban e-cigarette sales (A01468)

    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    1926 Monongahela Avenue
    Pittsburgh, PA 15218
    412-315-5880
    [email protected]

    NY Assembly Health Committee:

    Smokefree Pennsylvania strongly encourages you to AMEND Assembly Bill A01468 (by deleting Section 2 of the bill [pg 3, lines 37-53] and by deleting references to Section 2 in the bill's Summary and Memo) so that it bans the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors (like all other tobacco products), and to OPPOSE A01468 until/unless amended because the bill would force tens of thousands of adult e-cigarette consumers in NY to either go back to smoking tobacco cigarettes, or to purchase these far less hazardous life saving alternatives from an newly created black market.

    In sharp contrast to the inaccurate and misleading claims in Assembly member Rosenthal's purported justification of A01468, there is no evidence that e-cigarettes have ever harmed any consumers nor anyone else. The growing body of scientific and empirical evidence indicates that e-cigarettes (also called nicotine vaporizers) are at least 99% less hazardous alternatives to tobacco cigarettes (since they emit no smoke), satisfy the cravings of many smokers, and have helped hundreds of thousands of smokers stop smoking or significantly reduce cigarette consumption. The most comprehensive analysis of e-cigarette research is at http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/centers-...ticle.jphp.pdf

    Also in contrast to the sponsor's inaccurate claims, there is no evidence that e-cigarettes are marketed to youth, that any youth use the products, or that the very low levels of nicotine emitted by e-cigarettes (that are lower than levels emitted by nicotine gums, lozenges and patches) can cause addiction http://www.healthnz.co.nz/2010%20Bullen%20ECig.pdf http://www.casaa.org/files/Virgiania...ty%20Study.pdf Regardless, as with all other tobacco products, it would be wise for NY to ban the sale of e-cigarettes to minors.

    Section 2 of A01468 is inconsistent with last year's opinion by federal Judge Richard Leon http://www.casaa.org/files/SE-vs-FDA-Opinion.pdf that the FDA isn't authorized to regulate e-cigarettes as drug devices (unless a manufacturer/importer makes therapeutic claims), and his injunction prohibiting FDA from banning the import of e-cigarettes http://www.casaa.org/files/SE-vs-FDA-Ruling.pdf , which was unanimously upheld last month by the DC Court of Appeals http://www.casaa.org/files/ct%20app%...injunction.pdf and which Smokefree Pennsylvania and other public and consumer health advocates filed a supportive amici curiae brief http://www.casaa.org/files/amicus%20...0smokefree.pdf

    Consistent with public health goals and Judge Leon's opinion, last year the American Association of Public Health Physicians (AAPHP) filed two petitions to the FDA urging the agency to classify and regulate e-cigarettes as tobacco products in accordance with the FSPTCA, and to truthfully inform smokers that these products are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes Regulations.gov Regulations.gov

    Since 2007, an estimated 500,000 smokers in the US have switched to e-cigarettes, which emit smokefree nicotine vapor. A01468 threatens public health and protects the deadliest consumer product (tobacco cigarettes) from market competition by these exponentially less hazardous smokefree alternatives. E-cigarette consumers and smokers have a human right to truthful information about, and legal access to far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes.

    By banning the legal sale of e-cigarettes, A01468 would result in many/most e-cigarette consumers in NY buying the products from a newly created black market or in adjacent states (none of which ban their sale), where taxpaying e-cigarette industry jobs in NY also would relocate. Furthermore, if A01468 is enacted, any enforcement, prosecution and/or adjudication of this unwarranteed legislation would pose an unjustifiable burden on state and local taxpayers.

    Last September, I and other consumer and public health advocates testified before NY Senate Health Committee about this legislation at YouTube - nysenateuncut's Channel

    Ironically, although cigarette companies would be the chief beneficiary of A01468, they aren’t lobbying for the legislation. Rather, drug industry funded anti-tobacco/nicotine extremists have been lobbying for this bill because they vehemently oppose smokers reducing their health risks by switching to less hazardous alternatives. And yet, public health officials, organizations and professionals have an ethical duty to not only truthfully inform the public about health risks, but also to provide smokers with legal access to far less hazardous alternatives.

    Since I founded Smokefree Pennsylvania in 1990, our nonprofit organization has advocated local, state and federal policies to reduce indoor tobacco smoke pollution, reduce tobacco marketing to youth, hold cigarette companies accountable for past misdeeds, preserve civil justice remedies for those injured by cigarettes, increase cigarette tax rates, fund tobacco education and smoking cessation services, and inform smokers that all smokefree tobacco/nicotine products are far less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes. For disclosure, neither I nor Smokefree Pennsylvania have ever received any direct or indirect funding from any tobacco, drug or electronic cigarette company or trade association.

    Once again, please amend or reject this outrageous and inhumane legislation.

    Sincerely,


    William T. Godshall, MPH
    Executive Director
    Last edited by Bill Godshall; 01-24-2011 at 04:20 PM.

  8. #108
    Executive Director
    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    Vaping Advocate
    ECF Veteran
    Supporting Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,125

    Default

    Joel Nitzkin sent the following letter to NY Assembly Health Committee members.

    Dear Assembly Health Committee:

    Bill A01468 banning the sale of electronic cigarettes should be withdrawn from further legislative consideration for two reasons:

    1) Contrary to a popular description of E-cigarettes as a potentially dangerous product -- the real-life safety profile is very close to the pharmaceutical nicotine replacement therapy products (Nicorette, Committ, etc), with the same trace levels of the same carcinogens in all these nicotine-delivery products. While the finding of diethylene glycol has been extensively hyped -- what has not been mentioned is the fact that it was found in only one of 19 samples tested by the FDA, and at a level so low that one would have to consume the E-cigarette equivalent of 500 cigarettes a day to reach the lowest potentially toxic dose. Virtually all the hype claiming excessive toxicity for E-cigarettes has emanated from an FDA press conference in July of 2009, when, in the process of trying to justify their attempt to remove E-cigarettes from the market as unlicensed drug-device combinations, they made a distorted presentation of their own laboratory findings. In my capacity as then-current Co-Chair of the Tobacco Control Task Force of the American Association of Public Health Physicians, I submitted a Citizen's Petition to FDA pointing out the errors and misleading statements in that press conference and requested response by FDA. They have opted not to respond. For a copy of this Petition, and index to the 300+ pages of background material, please follow this link: Regulations.gov

    2) There is a major technical error in the bill as written, that, if implemented as written will require removal of all tobacco products from the market in New York State. While it is the intent of the FDA legislation to approve and regulate the manufacture and marketing of tobacco products, FDA is not far enough along in its process to to initiate such approvals. In other words, there are no tobacco products on sale in the United States that have been approved by FDA, and it is likely going to be another one to three years begins to grant such approvals. A law requiring all such product to be approved by FDA will result in the removal of all such products from the NYS marketplace.

    Joel L. Nitzkin, MD
    4939 Chestnut Street
    New Orleans, LA 70115-2941
    Phone: 504 899 7893 or 800 598 2561
    Cell phone 504 606 7043
    Fax: 504 899 7557
    Skypename jlnitzkin
    JLN, MD Associates - home page healthcare consulting and expert witness consulting
    [email protected]
    [email protected]

  9. #109
    Executive Director
    Smokefree Pennsylvania
    Vaping Advocate
    ECF Veteran
    Supporting Member

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,125

    Default

    Mike Siegel sent the following letter to NY Assembly Health Committee members (not sure if this has already been posted)

    Dear Members of the Health Committee of the New York State Assembly:

    You have a unique opportunity to save thousands of lives Tuesday when you decide whether to allow ex-smokers to remain ex-smokers by continuing to keep themselves off tobacco cigarettes with the use of electronic cigarettes.

    To be very clear, passage of Assembly Bill A01468 would force thousands of ex-smokers in New York State to return to cigarette smoking by taking electronic cigarettes off the market in the state. In addition, it would prevent current smokers who want to quit from successfully quitting smoking using the most effective method currently available - vaping - thus causing immense damage to the public's health.

    The bill's justification claims that electronic cigarettes contain diethylene glycol - an ingredient in anti-freeze - and carcinogens and therefore must be removed from the market because there is no evidence that they are any safer than regular cigarettes. However, this justification is factually inaccurate on both counts.

    First, although diethylene glycol was detected more than 18 months ago in one cartridge of one brand of electronic cigarettes, there is no evidence that it is present in any of the more than 100 other brands of electronic cigarettes on the market. Multiple companies have had their products tested for diethylene glycol and none of the samples have turned up positive. It appears that the presence of diethylene glycol was an isolated anomaly caused by one company's errant use of a non-pharmaceutical grade of propylene glycol. Readers should note that pharmaceutical grade propylene glycol does not contain any appreciable quantities of diethylene glycol.

    Second, the bill's justification ignores the fact that the levels of carcinogens found in electronic cigarettes were only trace levels - comparable to those present in nicotine patches and nicotine gum. In fact, the relevant finding from the FDA's testing was that the level of tobacco-specific nitrosamines in electronic cigarettes was more than 1000 times lower than that present in Marlboro, the most commonly smoked cigarette in New York State. Thus, there is no scientific doubt that switching from tobacco cigarettes to electronic cigarettes will substantially reduce a smoker's risk of developing cancer.

    Why would the New York State Assembly want to take away from both current smokers and ex-smokers the choice to use a product that is demonstrably much safer than cigarettes and which also appears to be far more effective than nicotine replacement therapy in reducing both the craving and desire to smoke?

    The majority of smokers who have switched to electronic cigarettes report an immediate and dramatic improvement in their health. If this bill passes, these largely ex-smokers will be forced to return to cigarette smoking and these health gains will be decimated.

    There are few public policies that, if enacted, will almost certainly result in an increase in morbidity and mortality. Assembly Bill A01468 is, unfortunately, one of them.

    It is certainly reasonable to prohibit the sale of electronic cigarettes to minors. But New York Assembly members have a unique opportunity to save lives on Tuesday by voting to delete section 2 of the bill, which bans the sale of electronic cigarettes to adults, and retain section 1, which merely prohibits the sale of this product to minors.

    The Scientific Evidence

    A new study I co-authored which was published online ahead of print last month in the Journal of Public Health Policy was the first to comprehensively review the scientific evidence about the safety and effectiveness of electronic cigarettes (see: Cahn Z, Siegel M. Electronic cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy for tobacco control: A step forward or a repeat of past mistakes? Journal of Public Health Policy; 9 December 2010; doi:10.1057/jphp.2010.41).

    After reviewing 16 laboratory studies of the constituents of electronic cigarettes, we conclude that electronic cigarettes are much safer than the real ones and therefore show tremendous promise in the fight against tobacco-related morbidity and mortality. Nevertheless, the FDA and several states are threatening to ban them from the market, an action that would benefit the tobacco companies at the expense of the public’s health.

    The FDA and major anti-smoking groups keep saying that we don’t know anything about what is in electronic cigarettes. The truth is, we know a lot more about what is in electronic cigarettes than regular cigarettes. Our review shows that carcinogen levels in electronic cigarettes are up to 1,000 times lower than in tobacco cigarettes. No other constituents have been detected at levels that are of significant health concern. Thus, using electronic cigarettes (also called vaping) appears to be much safer than smoking. Taking these products off the market would force thousands of vapers to return to cigarette smoking. Why would the FDA and the anti-smoking groups want to take an action that is going to seriously harm the public’s health? The only ones who would be protected by a ban on e-cigarettes are the tobacco companies, as these new products represent the first real threat to their profits in decades.

    Regarding the relative safety of electronic cigarettes, the study concludes that “few, if any, chemicals at levels detected in electronic cigarettes raise serious health concerns. Although the existing research does not warrant a conclusion that electronic cigarettes are safe in absolute terms and further clinical studies are needed to comprehensively assess the safety of electronic cigarettes, a preponderance of the available evidence shows them to be much safer than tobacco cigarettes and comparable in toxicity to conventional nicotine replacement products.”

    The study also reviews preliminary evidence that electronic cigarettes can be effective in suppressing the urge to smoke, largely because they simulate the act of smoking a real cigarette. The fact that bothers the anti-smoking groups the most – that vaping looks like smoking – is precisely the fact which appears to make e-cigarettes an effective tool for smoking cessation.

    Regarding the effectiveness of electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation, the study concludes as follows: “Although more research is needed before we will know how effective electronic cigarettes are at achieving smoking abstinence, there is now sufficient evidence to conclude that these products are at least capable of suppressing the urge to smoke.” There is also reason to believe that they offer an advantage over traditional nicotine delivery devices, the study argues, because smoking-related stimuli alone have been found capable of suppressing tobacco abstinence symptoms for long periods of time.

    The article concludes: "The evidence reviewed in this article suggests that electronic cigarettes are a much safer alternative to tobacco cigarettes. They are likely to improve upon the efficacy of traditional pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation." While more research is needed, the article concludes that electronic cigarettes show promise as a harm reduction strategy and that removing them from the market would substantially harm the public’s health.

    Thank you for taking the time to review the scientific evidence, and to consider this perspective, before casting your vote on this important issue.

    Sincerely,


    Michael Siegel, MD, MPH
    Professor
    Department of Community Health Sciences
    Boston University School of Public Health
    801 Massachusetts Avenue, 3rd Floor
    Boston, MA 02118

  10. #110
    Ultra Member ECF Veteran
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Goin' Mobile... eeh ooh, beep beep!
    Posts
    1,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Godshall View Post
    Here is my letter to NY Assembly Health Committee members, which I'm also faxing to each member. I also e-mailed an alert urging several hundred other consumer and public health advocates to contact members.
    Thanks Bill! I'm working my down the phone number list - have already sent faxes - but not with the citations & teeth of yours. Thanks again.

Page 11 of 28 FirstFirst ... 78910111213141521 ... LastLast

Bookmarks