Hoosiers - Marion County to have ecig ban

**Bill Godshall** · 11-28-2009, 06:55 PM

On Monday, November 30 at 7PM, the Merion County/Indianapolis Council is scheduled to consider Proposal 371 at http://www.indy.gov/eGov/Council/Pro...PROP09-371.pdf that would expand the city/county smokefree workplace law to include SEVERAL HUNDRED previously exempted workplaces (mostly bars), but also would ban the use of e-cigarettes in SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND workplaces (i.e. everywhere smoking is banned).

On October 26th, the same council voted 13-14 on the proposed legislation, with 2 abstentions and 2 absenters. Republican Mayor Gregory Ballard (who previously supported the smokefree workplace proposal) now opposes it, and he has asked fellow Republicans on the Council to not approve the proposal (as he'd then either have to sign or veto it).

To my knowledge, this proposal could become the first smokefree workplace legislation that also bans the use of e-cigarettes (by inaccurately defining smoking as including e-cigarette usage). But virtually NOBODY (i.e. mayor, council members or the advocacy group Smokefree Indy) has mentioned or discussed the clause banning e-cigarette usage (as the only issue they've been debating is whether smoking should be allowed in bars).

Please send a letter to council members (and fax a letter to the mayor and council president, contact info below) urging them to remove "the use of an electronic cigarette (also known as an e-cigarette)" from the definition of "smoking".

Following is the letter sent by Smokefree Pennsylvania:

From: Bill Godshall
To: Ed Coleman ; Barbara Malone ; Joanne Sanders ; Kent Smith ; Jose Evans ; Angela Mansfield ; Ryan Vaughn ; Christine Scales ; Virginia Cain ; Janice McHenry ; Maggie Lewis ; Monroe Gray ; Jackie Nytes ; William Oliver ; Paul Bateman ; Robert Lutz ; Marilyn Pfisterer ; Doris Minton--NcNeill ; Brian Mahern ; N. Susie Day ; Benjamin Hunter ; Jeff Cardwell ; Mike Speedy ; Lincoln Plowman ; Mike McQuillen
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 1:16 PM
Subject: Don't ban lifesaving smokefree products from workplaces

Indianapolis / Merion County Council Members:

Unlike thousands of other smokefree workplace laws enacted worldwide, Proposal 371 (on Council's agenda Monday) contains a stealth eleven-word clause that misrepresents science, threatens public health, hasn't been discussed by Council, and should be removed from the legislation.

While Proposal 371 would ban smoking in SEVERAL HUNDRED previously exempted workplaces, it also would ban the use of lifesaving smokefree nicotine inhalers (aka electronic cigarettes) in SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND workplaces (i.e. everywhere smoking is banned) by inaccurately and improperly redefining "Smoking" as including usage of these noncombustible nicotine products (that have helped several hundred thousand smokers quit smoking). Please amend Proposal 371 by removing the clause "the use of an electronic cigarette (also known as an e-cigarette)" from the definition of "Smoking".

E-cigarettes and other smokefree tobacco/nicotine products (including nicotine gums, lozenges, patches) are at least 99% less hazardous alternatives to cigarettes for smokers, and pose ZERO RISKS for NONUSERS (because they emit NO smoke). Changing the legal definition of "Smoking" (as Proposal 371 would do) to include usage of smokefree nicotine products defies science and common sense, is inconsistent with the original purpose of the legislation (i.e. to protect workers and public health from hazardous tobacco smoke pollution), would encourage e-cigarette users to switch back to lethal cigarettes (as they'd have to go to smoking areas to use smokefree products), and would discourage smokers from switching to lifesaving smokefree alternatives.

The e-cigarette usage ban is included in Proposal 371 because some extremist smokefree advocacy groups (including Smoke Free Indy) have recently changed their mission/goals to include banning the use of smokefree tobacco/nicotine products (that help smokers quit, and that pose no risks to nonusers). This abstinence-only anti-nicotine intolerance defies common sense and threatens public health, and should be rejected.

As a public health activist who has advocated smokefree workplace policies/laws since 1986, I again urge you to amend Proposal 371 by removing the clause "the use of an electronic cigarette (also known as an e-cigarette)" from the definition of "Smoking". Then, please support the proposal because it would achieve its original purpose; smokefree workplaces.

Feel free to contact me any time for additional information or assistance.

William T. Godshall, MPH
Executive Director
Smokefree Pennsylvania
1926 Monongahela Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15218
412-351-5880
FAX 351-5881
smokefree@compuserve.com

- - -

Gregory A. Ballard
Mayor of Indianapolis
2501 City-County Bldg.
200 E. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: (317) 327-3601
Fax: (317) 327-3980
No e-mail address

Merion County / Indianapolis Council

Ed Coleman ; Barbara Malone ; Joanne Sanders ; Kent Smith ; Jose Evans ; Angela Mansfield ; Ryan Vaughn ; Christine Scales ; Virginia Cain ; Janice McHenry ; Maggie Lewis ; Monroe Gray ; Jackie Nytes ; William Oliver ; Paul Bateman ; Robert Lutz ; Marilyn Pfisterer ; Doris Minton--NcNeill ; Brian Mahern ; N. Susie Day ; Benjamin Hunter ; Jeff Cardwell ; Mike Speedy ; Lincoln Plowman ; Mike McQuillen

At-Large
Ed Coleman
edward.coleman@gmail.com
327-4242
Libertarian

At-Large
Barbara Malone
barbara_malone@sbcglobal.net
291-4359
Republican

At-Large
Joanne Sanders
jmsanders@msn.com
283-6040
Minority Leader - Democrat

At-Large
Kent Smith
ksmith4ccc@gmail.com
327-4242
Republican

1st District
Jose M. Evans
info@evansforindy.com
777-4711
Democrat

2nd District
Angela Mansfield
angelamansfield@aol.com
872-3306
Democrat

3rd District
Ryan Vaughn
vaughnforcouncil@gmail.com
437-7701
Vice President-Republican

4th District
Christine Scales
cscales_2000@yahoo.com
578-8901
Republican

5th District
Virginia Cain
CainforCouncil@aol.com
823-2460
Republican

6th District
Janice McHenry
jfmchenry@iquest.net
298-5285
Republican

7th District
Maggie A. Lewis
mlewis2@indy.gov
289-6059
Democrat

8th District
Monroe Gray
mgray@indy.gov
327-4242
Democrat

9th District
Jackie Nytes
jnytes@indy.gov
370-6184
Democrat

10th District
William Oliver
woliver@indy.gov
546-7467
Minority Whip-Democrat

11th District
Paul Bateman
pbateman@indy.gov
327-4242
Democrat

12th District
Michael J. McQuillen
mike@mikemcquillen.com
374-1481
Majority Whip-Republican

13th District
Robert Lutz
rlutz@indy.gov
241-4020
Republican

14th District
Marilyn Pfisterer
cpfist1061@aol.com
244-7156
Republican

15th District
Doris Minton-McNeill
dmmcneil@indy.gov

Democrat

16th District
Brian Mahern
brian@mahern.net
331-5011
Democrat

17th District
Mary Moriarty Adams
mmadams@iquest.net
359-6940
Democrat

18th District
Vernon Brown
VABrown2022@yahoo.com
501-6680
Democrat

19th District
Dane Mahern
dmmahern@hotmail.com
506-2707
Democrat

20th District
N. Susie Day
susieday20@yahoo.com
787-2417
Republican

21st District
Benjamin Hunter
bdhunter@sbcglobal.net
508-0688
Republican

22nd District
Bob Cockrum
317-856-5549
FAX 317-856-5549
President-Republican

23rd District
Jeff Cardwell
jcardwell@cardwellhomecenter.com
781-4769
Republican

24th District
Mike Speedy
m.speedy@sbcglobal.net
786-6689
Republican

25th District
Lincoln Plowman
lincolnplowman@comcast.net
557-7594
Majority Leader-Republican

**Bill Godshall** · 11-28-2009, 07:00 PM

Here is the letter the American Association of Public Health Physicians sent to Indianapolis / Merion County Council members.

On October 26th, the council voted 13-14 on the proposed legislation, with 2 abstentions and 2 absenters.

- - - -

From: Joel Nitzkin
To:
Sent: Saturday, November 28, 2009 7:01 AM
Subject: Re: e-cigarettes

Dear At-large Members of the Marion County Council:

This note is to urge your deletion of any reference to e-cigarettes in the proposed expansion of your smoking ban.

Banning smoking in public places and workplaces is an effective measure to both protect non-smokers and reduce exposure to tobacco-related toxic substances in cigarette smoke. Including e-cigarettes in this ban, however, will do more harm than good.

From a public health perspective, the most promising option we have to rapidly and substantially reduce tobacco-related illness and death in American society is to honestly communicate the fact that there are now smokeless tobacco products and other nicotine delivery products on the market that carry near-zero risk of cancer, heart or lung disease. Enabling and empowering current smokers to switch to such products could safe the lives of 4 million of the 8 million current adult smokers who will otherwise die of a smoking-related illness over the next 20 years. We believe that e-cigarettes will soon prove to be one of these zero-risk products. We also believe that this public health benefit can be secured without increasing the numbers of children and teens initiating nicotine use.

I, and the organization I represent (AAPHP) have no financial or other relationship with any manufacturer or vendor of E-cigarettes or any other tobacco product or nicotine delivery product. This communication is based on our best judgment of the steps we, as an American society, should take if we are to achieve the most rapid and most substantial reduction in tobacco-related illness and death.

From our perspective, use of E-cigarettes should be encouraged as a substitute for conventional cigarettes for cigarette smokers who are unable or unwilling to quit, but are sincerely interested in reducing their risk of tobacco-related illness.

The carrier for the nicotine is ethylene glycol, not the diethylene glycol found in automobile antifreeze. Ethylene glycol is the substance used by theater fog machines. It has been extensively tested and found to be safe.

Your inclusion of e-cigarettes in the proposed smoking ban appears to be a direct response to the July FDA press conference on electronic cigarettes. This press conference included substantial inaccurate information and failed to mention that the carcinogens found in the E-cigarette liquid were the same carcinogens found in FDA approved nicotine replacement products and in the same concentrations. The new leadership of the FDA tobacco program have been advised of these inaccuracies and is now considering their response, There has been no further action against E-cigarettes (that we are aware of). FDA has not formally asserted regulatory authority over these products. Since there is not yet a formal regulatory program for E-cigarettes, those E-cigarette manufacturers who would like to submit their products for FDA review have been unable to do so. Some have, however, submitted their products to independent laboratories and published the resu lts on their respective web sites.

Even without FDA oversight, a number of the E-cigarette manufactures and vendors have voluntarily adopted a policy of no sales to minors.

E-cigarettes have been in use in the United States for more than three years. There are currently hundreds of thousands of users. There are no reports of adverse effects, and many reports of success in totally quitting conventional cigarettes, and feeling better as a result.

The tobacco problem, from a public health perspective, can be summarized as follows:

1. Conventional cigarettes kill about 440,000 Americans each year -- about 400,000 smokers and about 40,000 non-smokers killed from environmental tobacco smoke.
2. Conventional cigarettes are, by a very wide margin, the most hazardous of nicotine delivery products, in terms of illness and death rates, and property damage.
3. The death rate from conventional cigarettes is at least 50 times more than the death rate from smokeless tobacco products. There are some smokeless products that have been well studied over a number of years that carry no measurable risk of any form of cancer or any other serious illness. While E-cigarettes are too new to have undergone such studies, everything we know about them suggests that they, too, will pose little or no risk of cancer, heart or lung disease or other cause of death.
4. Nicotine addiction is extremely powerful. Once acquired, it is very hard to break.
5. The success rates from pharmaceutical nicotine replacement treatment (NRT) products are dismal. While the quit rates are about 40% at 12 weeks, the rates are about 7% at 6 months and only 5% one year post treatment. These product appear to be effective only if used on a long term basis. Even this is unsatisfactory to most current smokers because they are very expensive and do not deliver a level of nicotine satisfaction equal to that of cigarettes. In this context, E-cigarettes appear to both effective and satisfactory to large numbers of smokers as a means to maintain their nicotine addiction while eliminating exposure to the high concentrations of dangerous chemicals in tobacco smoke.
6. E-cigarettes pose no fire hazard, and, as far as we can tell, no risk to others who may be in the same indoor space. Please keep in mind that the vast majority of indoor air pollution from conventional cigarettes is from sidestream smoke -- the smoke that curls off the end of the cigarette when no one is puffing on it. E-cigarettes have no sidestream vapor.
7. There is no evidence that E-cigarettes may be any more attractive to children and teens than conventional cigarettes.

From our perspective, E-cigarettes should be considered a smokeless tobacco product (vapor is not smoke) and should not be prohibited in areas where smoking is prohibited.

To learn more about how we reached these conclusions, and the scientific evidence that backs up these conclusions, please see the "Tobacco Issues" page on our Tobaccolegfeb07 web site. The papers of most interest to you will probably be our Harm Reduction Resolution and White Paper, and the paper on the Myth of the Safe Cigarette.

Please feel free to contact me by phone or e-mail if you would like yet additional information on this topic.

Joel L. Nitzkin, MD, MPH, DPA
Chair AAPHP Tobacco Control Task Force
(AAPHP = American Association of Public Health Physicians)
c/o JLN, MD Associates LLC
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@mindspring.com
Tobaccolegfeb07

**TheIllustratedMan** · 11-28-2009, 08:48 PM

Oh dear...

Originally Posted by Bill Godshall

Here is the letter the American Association of Public Health Physicians sent to Indianapolis / Merion County Council members.

...

The carrier for the nicotine is ethylene glycol, not the diethylene glycol found in automobile antifreeze. Ethylene glycol is the substance used by theater fog machines. It has been extensively tested and found to be safe.

...

That bit should read propylene glycol. Ethylene glycol is in fact toxic, and not something that anyone should be ingesting in any capacity.

**Kurt** · 11-28-2009, 10:58 PM

Originally Posted by TheIllustratedMan

Oh dear...

That bit should read propylene glycol. Ethylene glycol is in fact toxic, and not something that anyone should be ingesting in any capacity.

Yes, this error is a real problem if anyone actually looks into EG. I applaud the spirit of the letter, and it is very well written and should be convincing...but the EG error is IMHO serious, and could cause far more harm than if no letter were sent.

I would respectfully, and I mean that sincerely, request that such letters be written well in advance and posted so that the chemists here, or even those that know a bit about the chemistry involved with PVs, can make comments. Seems this could have been avoided, but I do hope that this detail, like most chemistry details in media pieces, is ignored out of lack of knowledge. If letters containing chemistry are to be sent, PLEASE make sure it is sound chemistry, and at the very least accurate to the situation. Being from Indiana myself, and with my parents living in the area, I am aware that many decisions are made with a very knee-jerk moralistic bent in the Hoosier state. In fact, the state prides itself in its conservative down-home red-white-and-blue thinking...or the lack thereof.

I will say, however, that it takes guts to even send a letter like this off to govt officials, and for this I am very grateful to you. Kudos, but please be more careful.

**TheIllustratedMan** · 11-29-2009, 03:34 AM

I did write to Dr. Nitzkin and ask that he send a follow-up to the board correcting the typographical error and apologizing for the mistake. Hopefully, no harm, no foul. I can just see our opponents latching onto this letter from a doctor and using one small error as gospel. I do thank both Dr. Nitzkin and Mr. Godshall for their time and efforts in this matter.

-Nate

[UPDATE] Dr. Nitzkin kindly wrote back and acknowledged the mistake, then cc'd me on his rectifying email to the board. I thank him for all his work.