CEH files shakedown lawsuits in CA against 24 large e-cig companies alleging high carcinogen levels

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bill Godshall

Executive Director<br/> Smokefree Pennsylvania
ECF Veteran
Apr 2, 2009
5,171
13,288
66
The Center for Environmental Health (which filed shakedown lawsuits against e-cig companies last year for failing to post Prop 65 warnings) has announced it is filing similar shakedown lawsuits against 24 of the world's largest vapor product companies for allegedly selling products containing high levels of
formaldehyde and acetaldehyde.

It appears their tests on vapor products were conducted by inaccurate and unreliable smoking/vaping machines, which e-cig company lawyers should challenge. Interestingly, it appears Altria is the only large vapor product company that isn't targeted by CEH.

CEH's legal notice is at
http://www.ceh.org/wp-content/uploads/DRAFT_EcigProp65Notices9_2_15.pdf

Below is e-mail CEH sent to news media, along with CEH's press release is below in an e-mail sent out by CEH media

EMBARGOED FOR WEDNESDAY SEPTEMBER 2

On Wednesday, CEH is releasing our report on lab testing of e-cigarettes made by 24 companies, including Vuse, blu, NJoy and other major brands, finding that nearly 90% of the companies had at least one product that produced high levels of one or both of the cancer-causing chemicals formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, in violation of California standards. Our testing is the first-ever large sampling of actual e-cigarettes, tested simulating real-world use of the products, to find that the majority of products tested (50 of 97 products) produce high levels of one or both of these dangerous chemicals.

EMBARGOED [cid:image001.jpg@01D0E4B9.EF6E99B0]
FOR RELEASE on September 2, 2015
Contact: Charles Margulis,

Health Watchdog Finds High Levels of Cancer-Causing Chemicals in the Majority of Nearly 100 E-cigarettes Tested

Legal action launched to hold e-cigarette makers accountable for failure to warn consumers

Oakland, CA-The national nonprofit health watchdog Center for Environmental Health (CEH) today announced that the majority of 97 e-cigarettes and other “vaping” products tested produce high levels of the cancer-causing chemicals formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, in violation of California safety standards. The independent lab testing of products from two dozen e-cigarette makers, including RJ Reynolds (blu brand e-cigarettes), Imperial Tobacco/ITG Brands (Vuse brand), NJoy and other major companies found that 90% of the companies had at least one product that produced high levels of one or both chemicals, above the state safety limit. A test on one e-cigarette found the level of formaldehyde was more than 470 times higher than the California safety standard.

The CEH report, “A Smoking Gun: Cancer Causing Chemicals in E-cigarettes,” outlines the first-ever large sampling of actual e-cigarettes and vaping products tested simulating real-world use of the products, and demonstrating that the majority of e-cigarettes tested pose a serious cancer risk. CEH is initiating legal action against the companies producing the cancer-causing products for failing to warn consumers, as required under California’s strong consumer protection law known as Proposition 65. This follows CEH’s legal action earlier this year against e-cigarette makers for failing to warn consumers about risks from nicotine in e-cigarettes.

“For decades, the tobacco industry mounted a campaign of lies about cigarettes, and now these same companies claim that their e-cigarettes are harmless. Anyone who thinks that vaping is harmless needs to know that our testing unequivocally shows that it’s not safe to vape,” said Michael Green, Executive Director of CEH. “This is especially troubling given the reckless marketing practices of the e-cigarette industry, which targets teens and young people, and deceives the public with unfounded health and safety claims. Our legal action aims to force the industry to comply with the law and create pressure to end their most abusive practices.”

CEH purchased e-cigarettes, e-liquids, and other vaping products from major retailers including RiteAid, 7-Eleven, and from many online retailers and Bay Area vape shops between February and July 2015. The nonprofit commissioned an independent lab accredited by the American Association for Laboratory Accreditation to test 97 products, including 15 disposable “cigalikes” e-cigarettes, 32 cartridge devices, and 50 refillable devices, for formaldehyde and acetaldehyde. The two chemicals are known to cause cancer and are also linked to genetic damage, birth defects, and reduced fertility. The lab used standard smoking machines that simulate how consumers use the products.

Almost ninety percent of the companies whose products were tested (21 of 24 companies) had one or more products that produced hazardous amounts of one or both of the chemicals, in violation of California law. The testing showed that 21 products produced a level of one of the chemicals at more than ten times the state safety standard, and 7 products produced one of the chemicals at more than 100 times the safety level. While some consumers believe that nicotine-free e-cigarettes are safe, the CEH testing found high levels of the chemicals even in several of these varieties. For example, one nicotine-free product produced acetaldehyde at more than 13 times the state legal safety threshold and formaldehyde at more than 74 times the threshold. In all, the majority of the products tested (50 of the 97 products) showed high levels of one or both of the cancer-causing chemicals, in excess of the California standards.

The e-cigarette industry heavily markets their products as safe, even claiming that e-cigarettes produce nothing more than “harmless water vapor.” A 2014 study of e-cigarette websites found companies market the products as healthier (60% of brands) and cleaner (95% of websites) than traditional cigarettes, and make unsubstantiated claims that the products do not produce secondhand smoke (76%) and can be used where smoking is banned or restricted. The study also found ads featuring doctors approving of e-cigarettes (22%). The industry also claims e-cigarettes are safe smoking cessation devices, but experts say e-cigarettes are more likely a gateway to traditional tobacco: a recent study of high schoolers who used e-cigarettes found that they are almost twice as likely as non-users to start smoking traditional cigarettes.

The e-cigarette industry aggressively markets its products to teens and young people, yet the CEH testing exposing the prevalence of cancer-causing chemicals in e-cigarettes means that teen e-cigarette users are not only being exposed to the addictive, brain-altering chemical nicotine but also to what could end up being a lifetime of exposure to potent carcinogens. E-cigarette use is particularly problematic for pregnant teens and young women, since exposure to nicotine and other chemicals during pregnancy can contribute to small babies, premature birth, and stillbirth.

Many of the products CEH purchased were made with bright colors and/or candy or dessert flavors. Nicotine is especially dangerous for young children: A teaspoon of a typical e-liquid contains enough nicotine to be lethal to an adult; smaller amounts would be lethal to a child. Already one death has been attributed to a child accidentally swallowing e-liquid. Nationwide, the number of cases of child poisoning linked to e-liquids jumped to 1,543 in 2013, and almost 4,000 in 2014.

“Parents should know about the dangers of e-cigarettes and young people should be wary of the industry’s deceptive marketing,” said Green. “We must not stand by while the tobacco industry preys on a new generation of victims. Consumers need to know that the smoke from e-cigarettes is far from harmless vapor, but is in fact a cancer-causing cocktail of toxic chemicals.”

The Center for Environmental Health has a nearly 20-year track record of protecting children and families from harmful chemicals in our air, water, food and in dozens of every day products. CEH also works with major industries and leaders in green business to promote healthier alternatives to toxic products and practices. In 2010, the San Francisco Business Times bestowed its annual “Green Champion” award to CEH for its work to improve health and the environment in the Bay Area and beyond.
# # #
 

skoony

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jul 31, 2013
5,692
9,952
68
saint paul,mn,usa
thanks Bill.
the old formaldehyde thing.
back in the 70's there was formaldehyde in all of the
beer purchased by the military procurement system.
it was used as a preservative. some where between
then and now it has become as ominous as the extremely
addictive,harmful and,most child attracting substance
known to mankind,nicotine.
:2c:
regards
mike
 

mcclintock

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
  • Oct 28, 2014
    1,547
    1,787
    Yeas I want to see their testing methodology. If it does not include taste testing by an experienced vaper after the machine test to see if the atomizer is burnt beyond what would be tolerated by a human user, it is not valid. With the original test that found high formaldehyde, I find it unlikely anyone even smelled the room where the test was made, or the problem would have been obvious. They charge that many previous tests were done with improper equipment, but it appears more likely theirs was the improper test. Testing by well-regarded people disagree that proper use has this problem, and yet agree that improper testing can show it.

    I do believe some starter kits are somewhat questionable. For example, a working battery and clearomizer, but not matched for the battery to not overpower the clearo unless the user is very careful. These would still be adapted to by any user with enough experience, or likely discarded as unusable after a short time.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: nicnik

    Jman8

    Vaping Master
    ECF Veteran
    Jan 15, 2013
    6,419
    12,927
    Wisconsin
    From the "Notice of Violation" document:

    Formaldehyde is produced when electronic cigarette devices are used in the intended manner. The primary routes of exposure for the violations are inhalation and direct ingestion when consumers inhale the aerosol emitted from electronic cigarette devices.

    How do you say, "doomed to fail" in ANTZ-speak.

    And the goal of all this:

    CEH intends to file a citizen enforcement lawsuit against each alleged violator unless such violator agrees in a binding written instrument to: (1) recall products already sold; (2) provide clear and reasonable warnings for products sold in the future; and (3) pay an appropriate civil penalty based on the factors enumerated in California Health and Safety Code Section 25249.7(b).

    Forum censors would forbid me from saying what I really think about this course of action.
     

    nicnik

    Ultra Member
    ECF Veteran
    Apr 20, 2015
    2,649
    5,220
    Illinois, USA
    From the "Notice of Violation" document:
    "Formaldehyde is produced when electronic cigarette devices are used in the intended manner."

    Electronic cigarette devices aren't intended to be sucked on by machines. I see no evidence that they even tested intended use. We vapers know they're intended for use by humans.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: KattMamma

    navigator2011

    Super Member
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Dec 6, 2013
    742
    1,522
    Fullerton, CA, USA
    It is well known in the legal realm that the Center for Environmental Health is basically a Prop 65 troll. But their "press release" above does a great job of spreading fear to the public. I think things are just going to get worse and worse, regardless of the truth.
     

    somdcomputerguy

    vaper dedicato
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Contest Winner!
    o_O Next they'll say something ridiculous like "The coffee you get at a drive thru is hot.", or "The pop you get at a drive thru is cold.", "They are misinforming the public by putting lids on the cups so the steam or ice isn't visible."
     
    Last edited:

    Kent C

    ECF Guru
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Jun 12, 2009
    26,547
    60,050
    NW Ohio US
    Is it just me, or if this group formed a baseball team, they'd all be fighting over who gets to play LEFT field?

    I googled them. They all play on the line in Left. BUT there's been some (R) sponsors to some bills in certain states, so it's a "bipartisan" effort :facepalm:
     
    • Like
    Reactions: KattMamma

    nicnik

    Ultra Member
    ECF Veteran
    Apr 20, 2015
    2,649
    5,220
    Illinois, USA
    I googled them. They all play on the line in Left.
    Jman's joke flew right by me in left field and hit a wall.
    BUT there's been some (R) sponsors to some bills in certain states, so it's a "bipartisan" effort :facepalm:
    Bipartisanship is not the great hope people think.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: KattMamma

    Kent C

    ECF Guru
    ECF Veteran
    Verified Member
    Jun 12, 2009
    26,547
    60,050
    NW Ohio US
    Jman's joke flew right by me in left field and hit a wall.
    Bipartisanship is not the great hope people think.

    You're absolutely right about that.

    As I've said before, many of the state regulations were 'merely' to prevent sales to minors - there you get some bipartisan support - with some Dems withdrawing 'because it doesn't go far enough'. The other overriding factor is 'philosophy/religion' - for Dems it's the 'we know what's best for you' and for some Republicans it's 'God knows what's best for you' so there will be some bipartisanship along those lines. Most Conservatives and all Libertarians will be against regulation in general. So when some Republican - at the state level (and not the federal level) - is a sponsor to some of the bans we've seen - it's worth it too google the guy/gal and see what else they've supported. Hence my post here:

    Arkansas ACT 1235 (SB978) Shuts Down Online Sales ... and the next one a few posts down.
     
    • Like
    Reactions: KattMamma
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread