Court in Hungary rules against medical regulation for E-cigs

Discussion in 'EU Legislation' started by Orb Skewer, Jan 8, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Image has been removed.
URL has been removed.
Email address has been removed.
Media has been removed.
  1. Orb Skewer

    Orb Skewer Ultra Member ECF Veteran

    Oct 19, 2011
    Terra firma
  2. AegisPrime

    AegisPrime Super Member ECF Veteran

    Dec 17, 2013
    The Fortesque Mansion, UK
    Good. Now lets see some more common sense from other EU member states :)

    And Dr. F deserves a :toast:
  3. Anjaffm

    Anjaffm Dragon Lady ECF Veteran

    Supporting member
    Sep 12, 2013
    alright! :thumbs:
  4. jpargana

    jpargana Super Member ECF Veteran

    Mar 5, 2010
    Maybe, just maybe, we start seeing some common sense.

    Here's a draft opinion from the Committee on Legal Affairs:

    http://www.europarl.europa. eu / sides/

    "Some provisions in the Commission's proposal also raise serious doubts as to their conformity
    with fundamental rights such as the right to property, the right to freedom of expression and
    information and the freedom to conduct business. These rights are enshrined in the Charter of
    Fundamental Rights of the European Union (“the Charter”) and may only be limited pursuant
    to Article 52(1) of the Charter if the limitation is necessary, genuinely meets objectives of
    general interest and is proportional.
    Certain of the proposed measures, especially regarding the packaging, do not meet these
    requirements. One example is the proposed increase in size of the health warnings to 75 % of
    both the front and back surface of the packs (Article 9(1)(c)). This would severely reduce the
    space available for trademarks and product description. In practice, not even 25 % of the front
    and back surface would be available for the information provided by the producer, as national
    law requires additional features such as tax stamps and security features."

    Did these people still not realize that many smokers have good sight? What is the real point in increasing health warnings? How about wrapping a pack of cigarettes in an A3 size piece of paper, with health warnings written in a 72+ font size? Would that really be more effective than what we already have today?

    "By prohibiting any labelling that suggests that a particular tobacco product is less harmful
    than others, the proposal causes an additional problem. The development and promotion of
    less harmful means of tobacco use is essential in order to support tobacco users to stop
    smoking cigarettes and the like
    . Manufacturers must be able to communicate that a certain
    product is less harmful than others if this is scientifically proven and if it is not misleading.
    This is not the only measure proposed that would make it more difficult to access reduced risk
    products. Article 18 of the proposal prohibits nicotine-containing products (NCP) such as ecigarettes
    containing a certain nicotine level if they are not authorised pursuant to Directive
    2001/83/EC (the Medicinal Products Directive). It is, however, quite unclear if these products
    (which are much less harmful than tobacco products) even fall under the scope of the
    Medicinal Products Directive

    Well... isn't it obvious...?

    So, here we have a tobacco directive that mixes the problem with the solution, trying to take away the only thing so far that is actually effective at keeping people away from tobacco...! :facepalm:

    (Of course, many of us already understood the real motives behind all this. None of those are even related to health concerns... :mad: )
  5. AegisPrime

    AegisPrime Super Member ECF Veteran

    Dec 17, 2013
    The Fortesque Mansion, UK
    Nice catch jpargana! And encouraging too!
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page