Rolygate, Vocalek; can we do something internationally as Emonty has suggested. Would it be possible to wake up one day next month & find the USA along with the rest of the Globe other than China has been Banned to some degree or another??
Bans occur when the pharmaceutical industry succeeds in exerting pressure on elements within government to restrict sales in order to protect their income. The first-line product to be affected by safer
tobacco product sales is that of NRTs, quit-smoking drugs, because consumers buy the tobacco alternatives instead of the NRTs. The second-line products to be affected in the long term are medical drugs sold for the treatment of sick smokers, since if smokers don't get sick, the drugs are not needed. This product line is many times the size of the NRT market (which itself is a billion-dollar a year global product line) and must be protected. Pharma sales in Sweden are the worst in the world as far as per-capita sales of NRTs and chemotherapy drugs in a developed country is concerned, and the spread of 'Swedenism' is considered a nightmare situation by pharma. It will result in the loss of many billions in assorted drug sales.
In the advanced consumer societies of north America and northern Europe, tobacco industry opposition to e-cigarette sales has largely ceased because their future planning now includes e-cigs as an option. Sweden is considered a model for tobacco sales as an example of where the rest of Europe and North America may be in 30 years time, and in this scenario, there is less room for cigarette sales but much more space for alternative tobacco products. (In Sweden 20% of people use smokeless tobacco, only 12% smoke; and as a result their smoking-related death rate dropped by 40%). Big tobacco, above all else, is not stupid.
In developing countries, pharma has no dog in the fight because it has very low sales of NRTs and treatment drugs. Smoking is considered the norm, and there are few well-off enough to want to quit using pharma products - this would be a luxury few could afford. In addition, sick smokers are typically not treated to any great extent in these countries, they simply die. Therefore pharma's interests do not warrant the expenditure of extensive sums in prevention of e-cigarette sales. They can also see that the tobacco industry will do their work for them.
In contrast, the tobacco industry is usually strong in these countries. In fact, in totalitarian regimes, the government may be the tobacco industry (as in China, which is the largest tobacco company in the world). Here, tobacco will protect its investments and income by opposing e-cigarettes.
So now you see the reasons behind e-cigarette bans. Can this happen in the US? It already did, and was defeated. The US is in a unique situation because the e-cigarette industry, due to its size ($100m per year plus, in sales), can protect itself. This may also apply to the industry in the UK, although a lot smaller, because it is the best-organized in the world.
Other places are not so fortunate and will succumb to pharma-purchased pressure. The largest vulnerable area is the EU, which has clearly demonstrated an accord with pharma and willingness to ignore public health, with the ongoing Snus ban. Unfortunately for countries that are EU members, EU law overrules national law, and an EU ban on e-cigarettes will affect all member countries. This represents the ultimate bargain deal for pharma, since the application of a couple of million at the top in the EU will obviate the much higher expense of achieving the same objective in over twenty other countries.
The US is safe from a ban, as we have seen. However, pharma has such a vast amount of money available to apply to problems that the attacks will continue, since legislators are easily influenced when cash on that scale can be invoked. Expect all sorts of minor (and major) regulatory assaults, once the legislators have got all their ducks in a row.
Essentially, e-cigarettes are not under threat as they are now protected by law, but every single aspect of their sales will be, at some stage in the future, because this will cost pharma billions of dollars and there is no way they can let that sort of a loss slide.
On a personal level, you have no need to worry just now, because there will be plenty of warning of the next attack by the pharma industry's government agents. Americans are safe for now, but in most other countries they do not have the funds required to protect themselves.
