[ Just paste broken links shown in purple directly into your browser - the extra line doesn't matter. Pls. PM me if you have more recent info. about proposed/actual legislation, if you think I've missed an important story, or if you want more tweaks to the formatting program. ]
As if the big news of the day (EU) wasn't enough ...
1) CASAA alert on San Diego - ord. would define vaping as smoking for purposes of both indoor and outdoor vaping (including public parks). Hearing TODAY 2:00 PM in the Council Committee Room, located on the 12th Floor of the City Admin bldg, see: _http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-san-diego-e-cigarette.html
2) CASAA call on CT HB 5286, confusing labelling requirements would reduce the availability of both e-liquids and vaping equipment. Hearing is FRIDAY at 10:30AM in Rm. 10 of the Legis. Office Bldg. See call: CASAA: Call to Action: Connecticut. Oppose HB 5286 (Confusing labeling standards that would serve to limit availability of products for adults) and SUPPORT SB 24 (Ban on sales to minors)
3) CASAA call on MN bills that would define vaping as smoking for purposes of the indoor clean air act. Hearing is March 5th.. See: CASAA: Call to Action! Minnesota E-Cigarette Usage Ban
4) Vineland NJ extended the perimeter around its municipal buildings within which no vaping is allowed for reasons of public health, litter and fire hazards. Ft Worth schools banned vaping for everyone on its property (including outdoors).
5) ANTZ orgs continue to place paid "third party content" in various places around the web. Recently it was network affiliates. Now it's Reuters (see below).
6) Under theat: Yakima WA (see below). Will extend indoor clean air act to ban vaping indoors and outdoors on city property (e.g. parks, parking lots etc.).
7) Spreading: the dreadful Consumer Reports "don't try vaping for cessation" video/story, and an alarmist CNN "health" story about minor "gateway" fears (the CNN story and its clones have been posted about in the Comments forum). The UCI "investigation" story out of SD CA's ABC affiliate continues to be chopped up and rehashed (you know: the one with tin nanoparticles).
8) Lots of reaction to LA's ext. of the "indoor" clean air act (which includes parks, beaches, etc.). Misc. stories collected at end, but also see some good opinion pieces below.
Coverage: India, Canada, US states: CT, NJ, PA, MD, OH, MN, TX, OK, WA, CA
Also: CASAA VP C.V. Phillips continues to dissect Sunday's NY Times piece, Glantz posts aother common on "substantial equivalence," ECF's InfoZone's Gary Cox on Sullen's pro-vaping opinion in yesterday's Forbes, and the situation with MSA-backed bonds (i.e. securitization).
Not Covered: EU passes Tobacco Products Directive by a lopsided margin (see other threads stated today in Media & Europe Forums)
***
Title: Good Sense Continues to Prevail in E-Cig Debate!
(ECF's InfoZone) Good Sense Continues to Prevail in E-Cig Debate! - ECF InfoZone
Gary Cox lauds Forbes' recent piece by Jacob Sullen, and explains why Sullen's analysis is critical.
Title: A paragraph-by-paragraph dissection of an unusually good article about e-cigarettes (part 3 of 3)
(C.V. Phillips' Blog) A paragraph-by-paragraph dissection of an unusually good article about e-cigarettes (part 3 of 3)) | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
Last in a series of CASAA VP Phillips' analysis of last Sunday's NYT piece.
Title: Public comment on FDA's process of documenting substantial equivalence: Need high standards of evidence and real transparency
(Glantz's blog) http://www.tobacco
.ucsf.edu/public-comment-fdas-process-documenting-substantial-equivalence-need-high-standards-evidence-and-rea
This is a bit wonky, although it could be important. For the sake of readability, I've moved my summary to the end.
***
Title: Concerns over e-fad to kick the ....
(Indian nat'l paper) http://timesofindia.indiatimes
.com/city/kolkata/Concerns-over-e-fad-to-kick-the-..../articleshow/31012190.cms
Generic anti-vaping piece, with some junk.
Title: Indian e-cigarette sales not approved
(Tobacco Amalgam site Re: India Mumbai MH) http://www.tobaccoreporter
.com/2014/02/indian-e-cigarette-sales-not-approved/
Maharashtra state FDA issues "warning against the sale of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes" since these are being marketed as cessation tools. It's not at all clear what effect this will have. Maharashtra is the second-largest state in India, its capital is Mumbai. No junk.
***
Title: Selby, Sweanor & Hughes: E-cigarettes could save the government billions
(Toronto ON Ca local paper - effectively nat'l) http://fullcomment.nationalpost
.com/2014/02/26/selby-sweanor-hughes-e-cigarettes-could-save-the-government-billions/
Pro-vaping junk-free opinion piece.
***
Title: L.A. Notices That Vaping Looks Like Smoking, So An E-Cigarette Ban Is Imminent
(US Nat'l Business) http://www.forbes
.com/sites/jacobsullum/2014/02/25/l-a-notices-that-vaping-looks-like-smoking-so-an-e-cigarette-ban-is-imminent/
The title says it all. Looks as if I wasn't the only person to notice what the City Atty said yesterday - namely that vaping "renormalizes" smoking, even if it causes no harm to bystanders in an outdoor environment (and therefore, it makes sense to ban vaping in a public park or on a beach). Junk-free.
Title: Why Is The FDA Regulating Tobacco Products?
(US Nat'l Business) http://www.forbes
.com/sites/davidkroll/2014/02/25/what-are-bidis-and-why-is-the-fda-regulating-tobacco-products/
When I first read the title of this piece, I thought the writer might be taking a particular position. This (largely) junk-free article is apparently intended to be entirely expositional, in order to bring readers up to speed on the FDA's regulatory authority over (non-therapeutic) tobacco products.
Title: Drop in smoking threatens embattled tobacco bonds
(Northwestern U. Journalism Students' Site - re: Tobacco Bonds) http://news.medill
.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=228288
Junk-free story discusses both IL's tobacco bonds situation, as well as that of the other states that have issued them against their shares of the MSA - in light of declining analog sales. It seems that journalism is still taught in the US, although most stories covered in this space might lead one to conclude otherwise.
Title: Are e-cigarettes putting a drag on life insurance sales?
(US Insurance Agent trade 'zine) http://www.producersweb
.com/r/ZMGI/d/contentFocus/?pcID=216c38aa1ddbd58acc067b992d898042
Fairly balanced article advises ins. agents that the cotine test will detect vaping as well as smoking, but that the industry is "keeping an open mind." There is some junk in this piece, including FDA '09.
Title: E-Cigarettes help some quit, but health experts worry about risk
Title: The pros and cons of e-cigarettes [More common title]
(CNN "health minute" video) http://www.wday
.com/event/article/id/93934/
Another "fears and concerns" about minors story cites CDC junk. I've collected at least a dozen re-syndications in the Comments Needed subforum, e-mails to CNN are recommended here.
***
Title: Smoking [including vaping/smokeless tobacco] banned on city-owned property
(Vineland NJ US local paper) http://www.thedailyjournal
.com/article/20140226/NEWS01/302250037/Smoking-banned-city-owned-property
Short junk-free piece reports that the Vineland City Council voted unanimously to ban smoking and vaping on municipal property. This space previously reported that the goal was to protect health and minimize litter and fire risk. Ban also includes smokeless tobacco.
[ NJ's house bill A1080 was originally proposed as a ban on tobacco smoking in parks and beaches, but was immediately ammended to include vaping as soon as it got on to the house floor. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ng-all-public-parks-beaches.html#post12349761 ]
***
Title: Roll With It Tobacco/City Vapor
(Beaver PA US local paper) http://www.timesonline
.com/special_sections/progress_edition/advertorial/roll-with-it-tobacco-city-vapor/article_146e0232-0dd6-5126-a8d4-d7b1b7f1a18b.html
Short junk-free piece announces opening of vape store in Ambridge, a Pittsburgh suburb.
[ PS's SB 1055 a simple minor sales ban, hasn't passed the state sen. No other threats. ]
***
Title: E-cigarette stores ignite in Catonsville
(Baltimore MD local paper) http://www.baltimoresun
.com/news/maryland/baltimore-county/arbutus-lansdowne/ph-ca-at-ecigarette-lounge-0226-20140226,0,726259.story
Short piece on two new vape shops in the Balto. area. Junk comes from local MD who remarks that the proposed MD ban on indoor and outdoor vaping is a good idea because there is a "concern" that vaping will "renormalize smoking."
[ HB 1291 would define vaping as smoking for Indoor Clean Air act purposes. Hearing 3/5/14. CASAA: Call to Action: Maryland E-Cigarette Usage Ban ]
***
(Cleveland OH US ABC affiliate) Title: Helpful or harmful? 5 On Your Side Investigators put E-cigarettes to the test
http://www.newsnet5
.com/news/local-news/investigations/helpful-or-harmful-5-on-your-side-investigators-put-e-cigarettes-to-the-test
This is a partial rehash of the junky San Diego CA ABC affiliate's original piece with the UC Riverside "investigation," (you know - those tin nanoparticles), mixed up with portions of the "harmful or helpful" pieces that have also been making the rounds at network affiliates. It appears that at least two stories were placed in the journalism equivalent of a food processor in order to create the end result, which features all our favorite junk science and ANTZ propagandists. Comments would be helpful. See also: http://www.abc2news
.com/web/wmar/news/health/are-e-cigarettes-vaping-safe
Yet another story which appears to have been put together in this way, out of an ABC Baltimore MD affiliate.
[ OH's simple minor sales ban is waiting for Gov. Kasich's signature. No other threats. ]
***
Title: [ANTZ ADVERTISEMENT] Poll: Minnesotans strongly support prohibiting e-cigarette use indoors
(Reuters re: MN) http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/02/26/mn-restrictecigpoll-idUSnPnCGvJc1X+169+PRN20140226
This is yet another example of gov't/MSA-funded smoking cessation organizations using their budgets to pay for media exposure. The "third party content" story is identified as originating from Clearway Minnesota and it appears that this org. commissioned the poll. The PDF describing the poll contains none of the usual information that's normally provided with professional polls (for ex., how the questions were phrased): http://clearwaymn.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/E-cig-poll-fact-sheet-FINAL-02-25-14-2
.pdf
And again: http://www.foxcarolina
.com/story/24824070/poll-minnesotans-strongly-support-prohibiting-e-cigaret
[ MN wants to extend its indoor clean air act to define vaping as smoking. Covers outside vaping too, see: CASAA: Call to Action! Minnesota E-Cigarette Usage Ban ]
***
Title: (Texarkana TX US NexStar TV)
http://www.arklatexhomepage
.com/story/d/story/texarkana-e-cigarette-debate/32952/JFbduXkLb0O436FLigW4fw
Texarkana councilperson introduces simple minor ban, meeting is tonight. We'll see if it morphs into an indoor/outdoor (e.g. public parks) vaping ban. I'm not aware of any legislation currently in TX, please PM me if you know anything.
Title: Consumer Reports takes closer look at E-cigarettes
(Austin TX ABC affiliate) http://www.kvue
.com/news/consumer/Consumer-Reports-takes-closer-look-at-E-cigarettes-247079111.html
Here's that junk-filled Consumer Reports "don't try vaping for cessation" piece. I've lost count of the syndications and knock-offs.
Title: E-cigarettes banned on Fort Worth school property
(Ft. Worth TX US local paper) http://www.star-telegram
.com/2014/02/25/5601666/e-cigarettes-banned-on-fort-worth.html?rh=1
FW sch. dist. bans vaping on school property. A lone employee requested a simple minor usage ban to no avail. Vote was unanimous but no other info. in story besides the crypic last sentence: "Critics of the devices say e-cigarettes contain nicotine and are addictive."
***
Title: Proposed tobacco tax cut disguised as e-cig regulation
(OK City OK US local paper) http://newsok
.com/article/3936846
Junk-free editorial Opposes SB 1892, which is now out of committee. 1892 is a mixed bag for proponents of smoke-free alternatives, because it raises the tax on Snus and other smokeless products, but exempts vaping. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...g-bills-introduced-oklahoma-hearing-held.html
and: Oklahoma -- OK! - ECF InfoZone
***
Title: Yakima leaders to consider banning e-cigarette smoking in public
(Yakima WA US CBS TV affiliate) http://www.kimatv
.com/news/local/Yakima-leaders-to-consider-banning-e-cigarette-smoking-in-public-247172371.html?tab=video&c=y
City Atty's office submitted plan to extend clean air act to include vaping. This would also ban outdoor vaping in public parks and rec. areas.
[ WA's SB 6569 imposes a 95% wholesale tax, burdensome licensing requirements for B&M stores, now out of committe and on to the floor: CASAA: Call to Action! Washington Bill to Impose Excessive 95% Tax on E-Cigarettes and http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-cigs-95-referred-senate-ways-means-cmte.html ]
***
Title: Nicotine in e-cigarettes makes them a problem: Letter
(LA CA US local paper) http://www.dailynews
.com/opinion/20140225/nicotine-in-e-cigarettes-makes-them-a-problem-letter
This letter by a UCLA med. sch. prof. suggests that "Nicotine has both short-term and long-term detrimental effects during development, and for many generations thereafter." (This appears to be a ref. to epigenetics, but it's not clear what the actual relevance may be to exposure from "second hand vapor" in an ourdoor environment.) The letter concludes with what appears to be an invocation of the "THR" (third hand smoke) studies: "And nicotine remains in the environment for years as a breakdown product that is even more harmful than nicotine itself." (This is a great example of the manner in which all the research on nicotine - junk science or not - is immediately applied without question to vaping.)
[ CA is under threat from a wide variety of legislation, such as an internet sales ban: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-shipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california.html ]
***
More coverage on the LA Council cmte's recomendation. Most contain some junk.
Title: The City Crackdown on E-Cigarettes Continues in Los Angeles
http://www.businessweek
.com/articles/2014-02-25/the-city-crackdown-on-e-cigarettes-continues-in-los-angeles
Title: L.A. city council health committee votes to move forward on e-cigarette ban
http://www.upi
.com/Top_News/US/2014/02/25/LA-city-council-health-committee-votes-to-move-forward-on-e-cigarette-ban/4131393360976/#ixzz2uR8O4WIw
Title: Los Angeles mulling proposal to ban electronic cigarettes in public places
http://www.cbsnews
.com/news/los-angeles-mulling-proposal-to-ban-electronic-cigarettes-in-public-places/
Title: Vapor Lounges Would be Legal Under L.A. E-Cigarette Ban
http://www.laweekly
.com/informer/2014/02/25/vapor-lounges-would-be-legal-under-la-e-cigarette-ban
Title: LA City Council Committee Supports E-Cigarette Ban
http://www.atvn
.org/news/2014/02/la-city-council-approves-ban-e-cigarettes
Title: Los Angeles E-Cigarette Bill Will Ban Citizens From Smoking in Public Places
http://www.hngn
.com/articles/25251/20140225/los-angeles-e-cigarette-bill-will-ban-citizens-from-smoking-in-public-places.htm
Title: L.A. Moves Forward On Proposal To Treat E-Cigs Like Regular Cigs
http://laist.com/2014/02/25/la_moves_forward_on_proposal_to_ban
.php
***
To avoid clogging up the beginning of this post ...
Title: Public comment on FDA's process of documenting substantial equivalence: Need high standards of evidence and real transparency
(Glantz's blog) http://www.tobacco
.ucsf.edu/public-comment-fdas-process-documenting-substantial-equivalence-need-high-standards-evidence-and-rea
You don't have to be a substantial equivalence junkie to care about this stuff, because this standard was used just recently to take some mini-cigars off the market, and may eventually apply to e-juice. Within the turgid language, there seem to be at least three points
First, Glantz wants manufacturers of "tobacco products" to submit more information prior to receiving approval under the substantial equivalence standard, whether the FDA requests it or not. Such submissions must have "adequate statistical power and effect size" to ensure that the data is not "misleading." This standard must also apply to market studies. In effect what Glantz is saying is that if a tobacco vendor engages in any effort to determine consumer perceptions, this effort must be held to the same statistical standards as other data. (To be precise, we're talking about "data comparing consumer perceptions with respect to the new tobacco product and the predicate that could affect initiation, cessation, frequency of use, patterns of use, smoking behavior, and perceptions of harm or addictiveness."
Second, Glantz wants the FDA to require that manufacturers of tobacco products prove that these products are "otherwise" in compliance with the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. While this requirement already exists, Glantz implies that the FDA hasn't been sufficiently exacting in its enforcement.
Finally he insists that all information provided to the FDA under a substantial equivalence application be minimally redacted, and uses a recent application from Lorrilard for its Gold Box 100s as an example.
My own take on this is that Glantz wishes to maximize the costs incurred by manufacturers. While there is little hope for a smaller e-juice vendor to ever be able to successfully navigate the labrythine requirements of the PSPTCA, it seems clear that Glantz would like to make this task even more daunting. (Which generally fits with his overall view of vaping as just another form of smoking.)
***
Tip: to see whether there are bad things happening where you live, try this Google search (example for Rhode Island) -
rhode site:casaa.org
(Replace rhode with a single word that describes your city, county, or state. For ex., if you live in Eau Claire, WI - you might use "Claire" to see if something is being proposed at the city level. Don't forget the : (colon), and be sure that there's nothing before or after the colon (not even spaces or tabs.)
You can also try replacing site:casaa.org with e-cigarette to find out what the media is reporting in your area. This is usually most helpful if you use the search tools to search by date. (CASAA doesn't generally issue calls or alerts until a bill is out of a state legislative committee, or is scheduled for a local city or county hearing.)
As if the big news of the day (EU) wasn't enough ...
1) CASAA alert on San Diego - ord. would define vaping as smoking for purposes of both indoor and outdoor vaping (including public parks). Hearing TODAY 2:00 PM in the Council Committee Room, located on the 12th Floor of the City Admin bldg, see: _http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-san-diego-e-cigarette.html
2) CASAA call on CT HB 5286, confusing labelling requirements would reduce the availability of both e-liquids and vaping equipment. Hearing is FRIDAY at 10:30AM in Rm. 10 of the Legis. Office Bldg. See call: CASAA: Call to Action: Connecticut. Oppose HB 5286 (Confusing labeling standards that would serve to limit availability of products for adults) and SUPPORT SB 24 (Ban on sales to minors)
3) CASAA call on MN bills that would define vaping as smoking for purposes of the indoor clean air act. Hearing is March 5th.. See: CASAA: Call to Action! Minnesota E-Cigarette Usage Ban
4) Vineland NJ extended the perimeter around its municipal buildings within which no vaping is allowed for reasons of public health, litter and fire hazards. Ft Worth schools banned vaping for everyone on its property (including outdoors).
5) ANTZ orgs continue to place paid "third party content" in various places around the web. Recently it was network affiliates. Now it's Reuters (see below).
6) Under theat: Yakima WA (see below). Will extend indoor clean air act to ban vaping indoors and outdoors on city property (e.g. parks, parking lots etc.).
7) Spreading: the dreadful Consumer Reports "don't try vaping for cessation" video/story, and an alarmist CNN "health" story about minor "gateway" fears (the CNN story and its clones have been posted about in the Comments forum). The UCI "investigation" story out of SD CA's ABC affiliate continues to be chopped up and rehashed (you know: the one with tin nanoparticles).
8) Lots of reaction to LA's ext. of the "indoor" clean air act (which includes parks, beaches, etc.). Misc. stories collected at end, but also see some good opinion pieces below.
Coverage: India, Canada, US states: CT, NJ, PA, MD, OH, MN, TX, OK, WA, CA
Also: CASAA VP C.V. Phillips continues to dissect Sunday's NY Times piece, Glantz posts aother common on "substantial equivalence," ECF's InfoZone's Gary Cox on Sullen's pro-vaping opinion in yesterday's Forbes, and the situation with MSA-backed bonds (i.e. securitization).
Not Covered: EU passes Tobacco Products Directive by a lopsided margin (see other threads stated today in Media & Europe Forums)
***
Title: Good Sense Continues to Prevail in E-Cig Debate!
(ECF's InfoZone) Good Sense Continues to Prevail in E-Cig Debate! - ECF InfoZone
Gary Cox lauds Forbes' recent piece by Jacob Sullen, and explains why Sullen's analysis is critical.
Title: A paragraph-by-paragraph dissection of an unusually good article about e-cigarettes (part 3 of 3)
(C.V. Phillips' Blog) A paragraph-by-paragraph dissection of an unusually good article about e-cigarettes (part 3 of 3)) | Anti-THR Lies and related topics
Last in a series of CASAA VP Phillips' analysis of last Sunday's NYT piece.
Title: Public comment on FDA's process of documenting substantial equivalence: Need high standards of evidence and real transparency
(Glantz's blog) http://www.tobacco
.ucsf.edu/public-comment-fdas-process-documenting-substantial-equivalence-need-high-standards-evidence-and-rea
This is a bit wonky, although it could be important. For the sake of readability, I've moved my summary to the end.
***
Title: Concerns over e-fad to kick the ....
(Indian nat'l paper) http://timesofindia.indiatimes
.com/city/kolkata/Concerns-over-e-fad-to-kick-the-..../articleshow/31012190.cms
Generic anti-vaping piece, with some junk.
Title: Indian e-cigarette sales not approved
(Tobacco Amalgam site Re: India Mumbai MH) http://www.tobaccoreporter
.com/2014/02/indian-e-cigarette-sales-not-approved/
Maharashtra state FDA issues "warning against the sale of nicotine-containing e-cigarettes" since these are being marketed as cessation tools. It's not at all clear what effect this will have. Maharashtra is the second-largest state in India, its capital is Mumbai. No junk.
***
Title: Selby, Sweanor & Hughes: E-cigarettes could save the government billions
(Toronto ON Ca local paper - effectively nat'l) http://fullcomment.nationalpost
.com/2014/02/26/selby-sweanor-hughes-e-cigarettes-could-save-the-government-billions/
Pro-vaping junk-free opinion piece.
***
Title: L.A. Notices That Vaping Looks Like Smoking, So An E-Cigarette Ban Is Imminent
(US Nat'l Business) http://www.forbes
.com/sites/jacobsullum/2014/02/25/l-a-notices-that-vaping-looks-like-smoking-so-an-e-cigarette-ban-is-imminent/
The title says it all. Looks as if I wasn't the only person to notice what the City Atty said yesterday - namely that vaping "renormalizes" smoking, even if it causes no harm to bystanders in an outdoor environment (and therefore, it makes sense to ban vaping in a public park or on a beach). Junk-free.
Title: Why Is The FDA Regulating Tobacco Products?
(US Nat'l Business) http://www.forbes
.com/sites/davidkroll/2014/02/25/what-are-bidis-and-why-is-the-fda-regulating-tobacco-products/
When I first read the title of this piece, I thought the writer might be taking a particular position. This (largely) junk-free article is apparently intended to be entirely expositional, in order to bring readers up to speed on the FDA's regulatory authority over (non-therapeutic) tobacco products.
Title: Drop in smoking threatens embattled tobacco bonds
(Northwestern U. Journalism Students' Site - re: Tobacco Bonds) http://news.medill
.northwestern.edu/chicago/news.aspx?id=228288
Junk-free story discusses both IL's tobacco bonds situation, as well as that of the other states that have issued them against their shares of the MSA - in light of declining analog sales. It seems that journalism is still taught in the US, although most stories covered in this space might lead one to conclude otherwise.
Title: Are e-cigarettes putting a drag on life insurance sales?
(US Insurance Agent trade 'zine) http://www.producersweb
.com/r/ZMGI/d/contentFocus/?pcID=216c38aa1ddbd58acc067b992d898042
Fairly balanced article advises ins. agents that the cotine test will detect vaping as well as smoking, but that the industry is "keeping an open mind." There is some junk in this piece, including FDA '09.
Title: E-Cigarettes help some quit, but health experts worry about risk
Title: The pros and cons of e-cigarettes [More common title]
(CNN "health minute" video) http://www.wday
.com/event/article/id/93934/
Another "fears and concerns" about minors story cites CDC junk. I've collected at least a dozen re-syndications in the Comments Needed subforum, e-mails to CNN are recommended here.
***
Title: Smoking [including vaping/smokeless tobacco] banned on city-owned property
(Vineland NJ US local paper) http://www.thedailyjournal
.com/article/20140226/NEWS01/302250037/Smoking-banned-city-owned-property
Short junk-free piece reports that the Vineland City Council voted unanimously to ban smoking and vaping on municipal property. This space previously reported that the goal was to protect health and minimize litter and fire risk. Ban also includes smokeless tobacco.
[ NJ's house bill A1080 was originally proposed as a ban on tobacco smoking in parks and beaches, but was immediately ammended to include vaping as soon as it got on to the house floor. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ng-all-public-parks-beaches.html#post12349761 ]
***
Title: Roll With It Tobacco/City Vapor
(Beaver PA US local paper) http://www.timesonline
.com/special_sections/progress_edition/advertorial/roll-with-it-tobacco-city-vapor/article_146e0232-0dd6-5126-a8d4-d7b1b7f1a18b.html
Short junk-free piece announces opening of vape store in Ambridge, a Pittsburgh suburb.
[ PS's SB 1055 a simple minor sales ban, hasn't passed the state sen. No other threats. ]
***
Title: E-cigarette stores ignite in Catonsville
(Baltimore MD local paper) http://www.baltimoresun
.com/news/maryland/baltimore-county/arbutus-lansdowne/ph-ca-at-ecigarette-lounge-0226-20140226,0,726259.story
Short piece on two new vape shops in the Balto. area. Junk comes from local MD who remarks that the proposed MD ban on indoor and outdoor vaping is a good idea because there is a "concern" that vaping will "renormalize smoking."
[ HB 1291 would define vaping as smoking for Indoor Clean Air act purposes. Hearing 3/5/14. CASAA: Call to Action: Maryland E-Cigarette Usage Ban ]
***
(Cleveland OH US ABC affiliate) Title: Helpful or harmful? 5 On Your Side Investigators put E-cigarettes to the test
http://www.newsnet5
.com/news/local-news/investigations/helpful-or-harmful-5-on-your-side-investigators-put-e-cigarettes-to-the-test
This is a partial rehash of the junky San Diego CA ABC affiliate's original piece with the UC Riverside "investigation," (you know - those tin nanoparticles), mixed up with portions of the "harmful or helpful" pieces that have also been making the rounds at network affiliates. It appears that at least two stories were placed in the journalism equivalent of a food processor in order to create the end result, which features all our favorite junk science and ANTZ propagandists. Comments would be helpful. See also: http://www.abc2news
.com/web/wmar/news/health/are-e-cigarettes-vaping-safe
Yet another story which appears to have been put together in this way, out of an ABC Baltimore MD affiliate.
[ OH's simple minor sales ban is waiting for Gov. Kasich's signature. No other threats. ]
***
Title: [ANTZ ADVERTISEMENT] Poll: Minnesotans strongly support prohibiting e-cigarette use indoors
(Reuters re: MN) http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/02/26/mn-restrictecigpoll-idUSnPnCGvJc1X+169+PRN20140226
This is yet another example of gov't/MSA-funded smoking cessation organizations using their budgets to pay for media exposure. The "third party content" story is identified as originating from Clearway Minnesota and it appears that this org. commissioned the poll. The PDF describing the poll contains none of the usual information that's normally provided with professional polls (for ex., how the questions were phrased): http://clearwaymn.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/E-cig-poll-fact-sheet-FINAL-02-25-14-2
And again: http://www.foxcarolina
.com/story/24824070/poll-minnesotans-strongly-support-prohibiting-e-cigaret
[ MN wants to extend its indoor clean air act to define vaping as smoking. Covers outside vaping too, see: CASAA: Call to Action! Minnesota E-Cigarette Usage Ban ]
***
Title: (Texarkana TX US NexStar TV)
http://www.arklatexhomepage
.com/story/d/story/texarkana-e-cigarette-debate/32952/JFbduXkLb0O436FLigW4fw
Texarkana councilperson introduces simple minor ban, meeting is tonight. We'll see if it morphs into an indoor/outdoor (e.g. public parks) vaping ban. I'm not aware of any legislation currently in TX, please PM me if you know anything.
Title: Consumer Reports takes closer look at E-cigarettes
(Austin TX ABC affiliate) http://www.kvue
.com/news/consumer/Consumer-Reports-takes-closer-look-at-E-cigarettes-247079111.html
Here's that junk-filled Consumer Reports "don't try vaping for cessation" piece. I've lost count of the syndications and knock-offs.
Title: E-cigarettes banned on Fort Worth school property
(Ft. Worth TX US local paper) http://www.star-telegram
.com/2014/02/25/5601666/e-cigarettes-banned-on-fort-worth.html?rh=1
FW sch. dist. bans vaping on school property. A lone employee requested a simple minor usage ban to no avail. Vote was unanimous but no other info. in story besides the crypic last sentence: "Critics of the devices say e-cigarettes contain nicotine and are addictive."
***
Title: Proposed tobacco tax cut disguised as e-cig regulation
(OK City OK US local paper) http://newsok
.com/article/3936846
Junk-free editorial Opposes SB 1892, which is now out of committee. 1892 is a mixed bag for proponents of smoke-free alternatives, because it raises the tax on Snus and other smokeless products, but exempts vaping. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...g-bills-introduced-oklahoma-hearing-held.html
and: Oklahoma -- OK! - ECF InfoZone
***
Title: Yakima leaders to consider banning e-cigarette smoking in public
(Yakima WA US CBS TV affiliate) http://www.kimatv
.com/news/local/Yakima-leaders-to-consider-banning-e-cigarette-smoking-in-public-247172371.html?tab=video&c=y
City Atty's office submitted plan to extend clean air act to include vaping. This would also ban outdoor vaping in public parks and rec. areas.
[ WA's SB 6569 imposes a 95% wholesale tax, burdensome licensing requirements for B&M stores, now out of committe and on to the floor: CASAA: Call to Action! Washington Bill to Impose Excessive 95% Tax on E-Cigarettes and http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-cigs-95-referred-senate-ways-means-cmte.html ]
***
Title: Nicotine in e-cigarettes makes them a problem: Letter
(LA CA US local paper) http://www.dailynews
.com/opinion/20140225/nicotine-in-e-cigarettes-makes-them-a-problem-letter
This letter by a UCLA med. sch. prof. suggests that "Nicotine has both short-term and long-term detrimental effects during development, and for many generations thereafter." (This appears to be a ref. to epigenetics, but it's not clear what the actual relevance may be to exposure from "second hand vapor" in an ourdoor environment.) The letter concludes with what appears to be an invocation of the "THR" (third hand smoke) studies: "And nicotine remains in the environment for years as a breakdown product that is even more harmful than nicotine itself." (This is a great example of the manner in which all the research on nicotine - junk science or not - is immediately applied without question to vaping.)
[ CA is under threat from a wide variety of legislation, such as an internet sales ban: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-shipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california.html ]
***
More coverage on the LA Council cmte's recomendation. Most contain some junk.
Title: The City Crackdown on E-Cigarettes Continues in Los Angeles
http://www.businessweek
.com/articles/2014-02-25/the-city-crackdown-on-e-cigarettes-continues-in-los-angeles
Title: L.A. city council health committee votes to move forward on e-cigarette ban
http://www.upi
.com/Top_News/US/2014/02/25/LA-city-council-health-committee-votes-to-move-forward-on-e-cigarette-ban/4131393360976/#ixzz2uR8O4WIw
Title: Los Angeles mulling proposal to ban electronic cigarettes in public places
http://www.cbsnews
.com/news/los-angeles-mulling-proposal-to-ban-electronic-cigarettes-in-public-places/
Title: Vapor Lounges Would be Legal Under L.A. E-Cigarette Ban
http://www.laweekly
.com/informer/2014/02/25/vapor-lounges-would-be-legal-under-la-e-cigarette-ban
Title: LA City Council Committee Supports E-Cigarette Ban
http://www.atvn
.org/news/2014/02/la-city-council-approves-ban-e-cigarettes
Title: Los Angeles E-Cigarette Bill Will Ban Citizens From Smoking in Public Places
http://www.hngn
.com/articles/25251/20140225/los-angeles-e-cigarette-bill-will-ban-citizens-from-smoking-in-public-places.htm
Title: L.A. Moves Forward On Proposal To Treat E-Cigs Like Regular Cigs
http://laist.com/2014/02/25/la_moves_forward_on_proposal_to_ban
.php
***
To avoid clogging up the beginning of this post ...
Title: Public comment on FDA's process of documenting substantial equivalence: Need high standards of evidence and real transparency
(Glantz's blog) http://www.tobacco
.ucsf.edu/public-comment-fdas-process-documenting-substantial-equivalence-need-high-standards-evidence-and-rea
You don't have to be a substantial equivalence junkie to care about this stuff, because this standard was used just recently to take some mini-cigars off the market, and may eventually apply to e-juice. Within the turgid language, there seem to be at least three points
First, Glantz wants manufacturers of "tobacco products" to submit more information prior to receiving approval under the substantial equivalence standard, whether the FDA requests it or not. Such submissions must have "adequate statistical power and effect size" to ensure that the data is not "misleading." This standard must also apply to market studies. In effect what Glantz is saying is that if a tobacco vendor engages in any effort to determine consumer perceptions, this effort must be held to the same statistical standards as other data. (To be precise, we're talking about "data comparing consumer perceptions with respect to the new tobacco product and the predicate that could affect initiation, cessation, frequency of use, patterns of use, smoking behavior, and perceptions of harm or addictiveness."
Second, Glantz wants the FDA to require that manufacturers of tobacco products prove that these products are "otherwise" in compliance with the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. While this requirement already exists, Glantz implies that the FDA hasn't been sufficiently exacting in its enforcement.
Finally he insists that all information provided to the FDA under a substantial equivalence application be minimally redacted, and uses a recent application from Lorrilard for its Gold Box 100s as an example.
My own take on this is that Glantz wishes to maximize the costs incurred by manufacturers. While there is little hope for a smaller e-juice vendor to ever be able to successfully navigate the labrythine requirements of the PSPTCA, it seems clear that Glantz would like to make this task even more daunting. (Which generally fits with his overall view of vaping as just another form of smoking.)
***
Tip: to see whether there are bad things happening where you live, try this Google search (example for Rhode Island) -
rhode site:casaa.org
(Replace rhode with a single word that describes your city, county, or state. For ex., if you live in Eau Claire, WI - you might use "Claire" to see if something is being proposed at the city level. Don't forget the : (colon), and be sure that there's nothing before or after the colon (not even spaces or tabs.)
You can also try replacing site:casaa.org with e-cigarette to find out what the media is reporting in your area. This is usually most helpful if you use the search tools to search by date. (CASAA doesn't generally issue calls or alerts until a bill is out of a state legislative committee, or is scheduled for a local city or county hearing.)
