[ 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. ]
Yesterday was not the day to get behind - but here's a double-roundup to catch up ...
1) vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor bans: serious threats for Wales, WV (Clarksburg/Harrison Co., Barbour Co. & Hancock Co.), Daly City CA.
2) Citywide vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor referendum 4/8 for St. Joseph MO, see CASAA call:
CASAA: Local Alert! St. Joseph, Missouri - April 8, 2014 Public Vote on Ordinance That Would Ban E-Cigarette Use as "Smoking"
3) Victory's Micheal Clapper to head Europe's Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Assn (ECITA), and 5/5 daylong conf. in Chicgo of the Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Assn (SFATA) featuring speakers such as Clive Bates and Dr. Farsalinos.
4) UK's Royal College of Physicians publication embraces vaping as harm reduction and potential cessation.
5) Calgary AB's Councilperson Diane Colley-Urquhart passes resolution for a vaping study, to go with her proposal for a vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban.
6) Fraction of vapers triples in The Netherlands, cigarette smoking down about 7% but number of smokers approximately constant between 2012 and 2013, according to Dutch gov't org.
7) NJ Gov. Christie's state treas. claims that state tax will go to health, hipocrisy slammed in state assembly.
8) Univ. NV to go "tobacco-free" next year - campuswide ban on indoor and outdoor vaping on all university property, including private vehicles, etc. in order to "improve the health of the community."
9) Encitas CA enacts vaping=smoking ord. for the usual reasons (cigarettes are cigarettes, period).
10) IL's HB 5868 which requires that smokeless tobacco products be placed behind the counter, has passed the house, but with an exception added for retailers that do not permit minors in their stores (e.g. vape shops).
11) ANTZ orgs demand that FDA release initial draft reg.s, cite poison call center hysteria.
12) CBS news video segment manages to broadcast 11 falsehoods in 132 seconds (12 seconds each), and Jenny Lei Bolario (NPR "youth radio" reporter of 8th-grader gossip fame), is back.
13) "Cloud chasing" is annoyance to SFATA's Cynthia Cabrera, and taught by owner of Phoenix AZ vape shop.
14) Poison call center hysteria seems to have (temporarily) subsided - I have about 50 stories collected which I'm going to try to categorize and post in a dedicated review. As of this writing, I believe the following states have issued warnings/reports in approximately this sequence, since the frenzy began last week: MN, UT, FL, OK, KY, SC, GA and the Atlanta CDC. (That means we have another 40-odd states to get through.)
Coverage: Europe; Holland; UK [nat'l & Wales]; Ca (AB); US states: CT, NJ, MD, FL, VA, WV, AL, IN, IL, MN, TX, NE, AZ, NV, CA
Coverage: Europe; Holland; UK [nat'l & Wales]; Ca (AB); US states:
Also: Dr. Siegel on the claim by Dr. Jonathan Samet that "third hand (nicotine)" contamination is a threat in restaurants; Dr. Rodu on the exoneration of pulmonary effects from Snus; Gary Cox on ECITA's new head (Michael Clapper of Victory) and the real reason behind the e-juice poison center calls hysteria. Plus Bill Godshall's updates for the last ten very busy days.
***
BLOGS, STUDIES, ETC.
Title: Touching a Chair in a Restaurant Could Be Hazardous to Your Health if Vaping is Allowed, According to Tobacco Control Researcher
(Dr. Siegel's blog)
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/touching-chair-in-restaurant-could-be.html
As readers of this space know, on 3/29, it was reported that Dr. Jonathan Samet, who sits on the FDA's Tobacco Products Advisory Baord, told a reporter for a California paper that mere contact with surfaces such as a chair which were exposed to the vapor from an e-cigarette could be a health risk due to potential nicotine exposure through their skin.. Dr. Siegel analyzes this claim. In later developments, it turns out that at least one municipality has reacted in alarm to Dr. Samet's assertion, by passing laws to allegedly protect their citizens:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/policy-makers-respond-to-concerns-about.html
Title: No Stroke Risk with Snus
(Dr. Rodu's Blog)
http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/2014/04/no-stroke-risk-with-snus.html
"It is well known that nicotine does not cause cancer, but its role in cardiovascular diseases has been difficult to determine. Studying users of Swedish snus, who consume large quantities of smoke-free nicotine over decades, the Swedish researchers concluded that nicotine was unlikely to be a contributor to heart attacks or strokes. Smokeless tobacco and nicotine have been demonized for no valid scientific reasons. The Swedish findings are vitally important to all consumers of nicotine and tobacco products, including e-cigarettes. [para break omitted]"
Title: NICOTINE-INGESTION DEATH A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY
(ECF's InfoZone)
NICOTINE-INGESTION DEATH A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY - ECF InfoZone
Gary Cox on the ultimate psychological basis for the alarmist reports on e-liquid ingestion by children, and the unscientific nature of the hysteria.
Title: Clapper Will Head ECITA
(ECF's InfoZone)
Clapper Will Head ECITA - ECF InfoZone
Victory's Michael Clapper to head the E-Cigarette Industry Trade Association (ECITA), Europe's principal vaping industry organization. (Also see story immediately below in the "Europe" area.
Title: Bill Godshall Update 2014-03-31
(Bill's E-Cigarette Politics site)
Bill Godshall Update 2014-03-31
Bill's updates - and there are many - from 3/21/14 through 3/31/14.
***
EUROPE
Title: Michael Clapper, President International of Victory Electronic Cigarettes Corporation Elected as New Chairman of ECITA, Europes Leading ECIG Trade Association
(Press Release site) http://www.businesswire
.com/news/home/20140401005764/en/Michael-Clapper-President-International-Victory-Electronic-Cigarettes#.Uzu0KqJobfg
Looks like an ECITA/Vitory joint press release. No junk, of course.
***
HOLLAND
Title: Same number of smokers smoke fewer cigarettes
(Amalgam site) http://www.dutchnews
.nl/news/archives/2014/04/same_number_of_smokers_smoke_f.php
http://www.nltimes
.nl/2014/04/01/e-cigarette-use-triples-smoking/
About 25% of adults smoke, avg. daily #cigs went down from 14 to 13. It's not clear what the 3% of vapers figure means, although it seems to be more than "ever-vapers" (i.e. people who had tried vaping no more than once). This ratio is very roughly in line with the US and the UK. No junk.
***
UK: NATIONAL
Title: What you need to know about electronic cigarettes
(Royal College of Physicians) http://www.rcplondon
.ac.uk/commentary/what-you-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes
When I saw the title of this piece, I cringed - it's virtually a guarantee that any such article published in the states will be 100% garbage. This is the antithesis. I'll redirect discussion here, because it already seems to have been posted:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ou-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes.html
Title: If you ban my e-cig, I'm buying a deck of Marlboro Lights
(UK Nat'l Paper) http://blogs.telegraph
.co.uk/news/timstanley/100265966/if-you-ban-my-e-cig-im-buying-a-deck-of-marlboro-lights/
The tone and content of this rather amusing piece s/b fairly clear from the title. But here's a taste anyway:
"But do e-cigarettes normalise smoking? If they do, the evidence is sparse. For rather than rooting their criticisms in hard, medical proof about the negative impact of e-cigarettes, the anti-lobby simply rely on the general worry that if a teenager sees a little old lady puffing away on an e-cigarette in a tea room, the youth is more likely to start smoking thirty Rothmans a day. Which is a scenario that I struggle to believe.
"Keep e-cigarettes legal and tagged as 'medicinal' and they will remain uncool -because its prohibition that makes narcotics fashionable. Teenagers arent going to smoke behind the bike sheds a product they can purchase over the counter in Boots, along with hayfever relief and incontinence pads."
If it weren't for the previous entry, I'd hazard the guess that today's haul is pretty good evidence for the proposition that public health policy is best informed by everyone except MDs.
Title: In the spotlight: e-cigarettes
(Bupa Int'l H/C group site) Title: E-cigarette use triples; smoking down
http://www.bupa
.co.uk/individuals/health-information/smoking/e-cigarettes-2014
As far as I can tell, this piece contains no rabid ANTZ falsehoods, although it seems to be rather naive about the nature of reguation (describing it as having no downsides - which makes me suspicious that this site is bought and paid for by some UK BP interests), and seems to imply that anything over 20mg/ml (2%) is somehow dangerous for consumers. There are also no references to any studies - it's completely conclusory. The last paragraph doesn't attempt to convince the reader one way or the other about the value of trying vaping as a cessation tool, and directs us to the EU's official site. Perhaps this is the UK version of WebMD, albeit with much less in the way of ANTZ influence.
---
UK: WALES
Title: E-cigarettes face curb in public places in Wales [health minister to advance vaping=smoking legislation]
(BBC) http://www.bbc
.com/news/uk-wales-26837682
Title: Wales considers banning public use of electronic cigarettes
(Reuters) http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/04/02/us-britain-ecigarettes-idUSBREA311AJ20140402
[Both reports combined. Quotes from Health Min. Mark Drakeford, who appears to have a plethora of reasons that should sound rather familiar to anyone following the situation in the US. Or Israel. Or the EU (etc.):
1) "'E-cigarettes contain nicotine, which is highly addictive, and I want to minimize the risk of a new generation becoming addicted to this drug,'"
2) "'I have concerns about the impact of e-cigarettes on the enforcement of Wales' smoking ban. That's why we are proposing restricting their use in enclosed public places."
3) "'I am also concerned that their use in enclosed public places could normalise smoking behaviour."
"His proposals are open for consultation until June 24 and, if backed, will then go to the Welsh Assembly, which has the powers to run its own health and education services."
"Chief Medical Officer Dr Ruth Hussey said: 'On the seventh anniversary of the smoking ban, it is symbolic that Wales is once again at the forefront of a new set of radical proposals to improve public health.'
---
CANADA: ALBERTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Council orders study into health risks of e-cigarettes
(Calgary AB Ca. local paper) http://www.calgaryherald
.com/health/Council+orders+study+into+health+risks+cigarettes/9686248/story.html
Calgary's Councilperson Diane Colley-Urquhart is at it again. Readers of this space will recall a story from just two days ago that described her successful effort to get the council to study the question of whether the city should adopt an indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking ord. that would cover private businesses as well as public parks. Now she's got 8 out of 14 votes to fund a study on the health effects of vaping:
"'I would rather err on the side of caution until the jury's out and decided on this matter,' said Colley-Urquhart, a nurse by trade. Her motion asks city staff to consult Alberta Health Services and others on possible bylaws and report back by September. The proposal passed in a 8-6 vote. Many councillors said this study was an unnecessary expenditure of city money -- with the cost of studying not yet known. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
This is the same tactic that we've seen south of the border. Politicians who hate tobacco cigarettes tranfer their hatred to vaping and vapers, and use local health departments as their cudgels. However Your Correspondent has to wonder whether the Canadian Tobacco Control Industry is as functionally indistinguishable from the government in Canada as it is here in the states.
That said, Ms. Colley-Urquhart seems anxious to do whatever she can to keep Calgarians from vaping. Will a city tax or vape shop licensing and/or zoning restrictions be next? How about restrictions on municipal employees? Banning vaping in cars that have passengers under 18? "Tune in next week to find out."
***
US NATIONAL
Title: Largest Electronic Cigarette Trade Association Hosts Spring Conference Led by Industry Experts
(Paid site for conf. announements) http://fda.ulitzer
.com/node/3038300
Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Assn. one-day conf. in Chicago 5/5.
"Confirmed speakers and panelists include Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, Neil Mclaren, Co-founder of the E-Cigarette Forum (UK), William Bartowski, PhD, formerly of Ruyan International and current Principal of VapAria, and Clive Bates, Director of advocacy organization Counterfactual."
Title: Forging a vapor trail [virtual panel discussion w/ US-based cigAlike mfrs]
(US-based Grocer trade 'zine) http://www.groceryheadquarters
.com/2014/04/forging-a-vapor-trail/
Virtual (i.e. faux) panel discussion that includes Jason Healy (founder and Pres. of Lorillard's Blu), and spokespeople for V2 and Altria (formerly PMI) among others. Your Correspondent is not entirely certain that the discussion was illuminating, although their attitude towards looming FDA regulation seemed to be at the very least resigned - if not welcoming (which seems odd, given the likely effect of the "substantial equivalence" requirement). There are some interesting comments made about minor access. Absolutely nothing was said about Clean "Indoor" (= Indoor/outdoor) Air Act extensions, or the poison control media frenzy, nor was the minor-gateway-to-tobacco argument addressed.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Health officials push Obama for release of e-cigarette regulation proposal [cite poison center calls]
(Indianapolis IN US ABC affiliate) http://www.theindychannel
.com/news/health-officials-push-obama-for-release-of-e-cigarette-regulation-proposal
This chock-full-o-junk report (yes, it even includes Talbot's nanoparticles) cites a chock-full-o-junk letter sent to the administration, demanding that the FDA disclose its original set of draft regulations, which were rejected by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). While this is hardly news in general, I'm reporing it because they stoop low enough to mention the poison control center call article in the NYT. Signers are (mostly) the usual suspects: AAP, ACS, AHA, ALA, CAN, CFTFK, and Legacy.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette Use in Pregnancy
(US Nat'l Mag specializing in Psychology) http://www.psychologytoday
.com/blog/aristotles-child/201404/e-cigarette-use-in-pregnancy?quicktabs_5=1
Why exactly Psychology Today wanted to take on this extremely intricate physiological question is entirely beyond Your Correspondent. That said, it's clear that this article says - exactly nothing. (Well, in the sense that it provides a reader with zilch in the way of guidance.) However, it does point out that NRT presents issues during pregnancy, just as any system which delivers nicotine might (yes, it's possible that FDA-approved NRT may not be appropriate for all situations).
And, like virtually every MD who writes an article for public consumption or who advises public officials on health policy, or scientest who does research on vaping - the author of this piece is blissfully unware that 0% nicotine e-liquid is available.
In this context, that typical level of profound ignorance is perhaps even more regrettable than usual, because no one that I know of disputes the idea that nicotine is indeed damagine to a fetus. (Is that true of vaping vegatable glycerin with flavoring?)
Oh yes, and the conclusion is that vaping (nicotine-containing e-liquid) isn't "safe" during pregnancy. Surprise, surprise. But - as with smokers who can't quit - the recommendation is .. "just quit." (Except this time, it appears to be: "quit cold turkey." How helpful.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Antidote: Are e-cigarettes safe?
(Healthcare marketing trade site) http://www.mmm-online
.com/antidote-are-e-cigarettes-safe/article/340419/
Further proof that anyone who has an "MD" after their name now feels qualified to speak authoritatively on all vaping-related issues, after just a little googling time. The author begins with asking whether "e-cigarettes" are "safe?" The answer is that "Dr. Tom Frieden, head of the CDC and a top expert in preventive health, told me that e-cigarettes can be a gateway drug, with nicotine addiction leading to more tobacco use." [How nice that the author of this piece is communicating directly with the head of the CDC.] That's the end of the analysis. Clearly if the head of the CDC feels that "e-cigarettes can be a gateway drug," then the matter is settled.
Next we hear about the increase in "poisoning cases" (when did a "call" become a "case?" ... perhaps that's that what the good Dr. learned in med school.)
However (amazingly) the Dr.'s googling did include the Lancet study, so he's decided that vaping may have some cessation value. (Although he's evidently not familiar with vegatable glycerin or flavorings - all he knows about is proplylene glycol and liquid nicotine.)
So: what have four years of med. school and years of residency and practice allowed our erudite expert on vaping to conclude?
"I believe that in the right hands, e-cigarettes can be an effective tool for quitting smoking, perhaps the best we currently have available. But because of the risks of addiction and even poisoning that I have outlined above (though e-cigarettes continue to have much lower percentages of nicotine than the online liquids), I believe a physician should be guiding a patient's e-cigarette use."
Well, perhaps there's no need to spend millions studying the problem. In just five short paragraphs, we've got the answer. Vaping should be treated like medication. (Want a different flavor? See your Dr.! Prescription needs to be refilled? Go and buy a pack of ciggies while you wait for your appointment.)
All of that said, it could've been a whole lot worse.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Do Electronic Cigarettes Help Smokers Quit
(US Nat'l news web site) http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/youth-radio-youth-media-international/do-electronic-cigarettes_b_5036957.html
This piece was done by one of the reprehensible anti-vaping journalists in the country - Jenny Lei Bolario. Readers of this space will recall an article that she did for NPR "youth radio" on Feb 17th, entitled Candy Flavors Put E-Cigarettes On Kids' Menu, in which - based on the audiotape of a single eighth-grade student - Ms. Bolario asserted that teens are buying e-cigarettes off the internet and using them directly in front of teachers: http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/youth-radio-youth-media-international/candy-flavors-put-e-cigar_b_4833602.html
That story went national, and scores of mainsteam media outlets cited this allegation as fact. Ms. Bolario's despicable standards of journalism ethics, which appear to make no distinction between verifiable facts and rumors that float around the hallways of junior high schools, are fortunately no longer at issue in this piece, since she has decided that she'll do best in an environment in which anectdotal evidence of personal experiences are presented as such by adults willing to appear on camera.
I suppose she and her superiors are moved by the compelling neature of the reassuringly-aged authority figure (identified as Dr. Cathy McDonald, Almeda Co. Project Diretor of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drugs). The good Dr. advises us that: "'And what we know is that an evidence-based way to quit smoking is a combination of medication, and we have seven FDA-approved medications to help people quit smoking.'"
Cut back to the first of two early twenty-something vapers, who complains that he's tried the gum and the patch, without success.
Vape store owner explains that none of the existing products satisfy smokers, because they lack the "hand to mouth" ability to mimic smoking. Then we cut back to the good Dr. who says that "we" have a "'wonderful product that many peole don't even know about'" which turns out to be (surprise!) the nic. inhaler.
What Your Correspondent found laughably ludicrous is that the demonstration of the nic inhaler looked incredibly sterile, clinical, and unappealing, after we've seen lengthy segments during which the two vapers are obviously enjoying themselves tremendously.
And then the final appeal from Dr. McDonald: "'So we have something that's been studied, that's been safe, that's known to help people to quit.'"
Now bear in mind (and you'll have to watch the whole rather tiresome video to see this), that throughout it, we're hearing from the two young vapers that they're worried about the unknowns of vaping, and suffer minor problems from what anyone familiar with vaping will immediately recognize as probable symptoms of excessive nicotine consumption (headaches) or shortness of breath from (probably) too much PG. Evidently they've never heard of 0% nic. and/or VG-based e-liquid.
(Inquiring minds might ask: is it "vape pens that trick smokers," [the title] or is it this video which clearly is intended to trick vapers?)
Obviously this video is meant to scare people who are completely ignorant about vaping into believing that the unknowns and potential for overconsumption by vapers (who obviously don't know the first thing about it), are sufficient to send us all running into the therapeutic "arms" of the good Dr. and BP's dreadful billion-dollar excuse for an appealing cessation method.
Nice try, but even adults younger than the two vapers are probably just a tad more sophisticated than this video makes them out to be. (Are the two vapers in the video old enough to drink alcohol??).
Ms. Bolario may have hoodwinked the mainstream American media with her audiotape of Jr. H.S. hallway rumors in her last "youth radio" presentation, but methinks she's going to be a whole lot less successful with this one. Maybe that's because most young adults are more astute than the much-older folks who write and read the mainstream media outlets. Here's the YouTube video, in all its dubious glory: http://www.youtube
.com/watch?v=_ci8KH9fwn4
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette debate smolders over health claims [CBS nat'l news video puts out 11 major falshoods in 132 seconds - 12 seconds each]
(US Nat'l News Network) http://www.youtube
.com/watch?v=NWJKbiw5MP8
http://www.cbsnews
.com/videos/e-cigarette-debate-smolders-over-health-claims/
This one is full of junk, and would be funny to watch if so many viewers didn't realize just how many ludicrous fabrications are jammed into barely three minutes:
a) The moderator begins by saying that "The devices are marketed as [...] a way to quit smoking" [uh, no. But now it's time for our resident oncologist to step in:]
b) None of the other elements besides nicotine in e-liquid have been "studied."
c) While the Dr. does concede that nicotine doesn't cause cancer, he claims that:
d) "we also know that there are carcinogens in here" [in where? the cheap cigAlike that allegedly represents every option?]
e) "one of the chemicals thats in here is polyethelyne glycol, that's the same as antifreeze". Uh, no. First of all, polyethelyne glocol is not the same as diethylene glycol which goes into antifreeze (actually it's a food additive), and obviously polyethelyne glycol is not PG - but wait, there's more:
f) "and so, we know, [emphasis in original] that they don't actually allow people to stop smoking"
g) "85% of the people in a recent questionnaire said that they use these to smoke less, and the data don't actually show that, so we need to be careful."
h) Now the graphic gives us a list of bullet points - first one is "several studies showed no benefit"
i) next bullet point: "may be gateway to smoking real cigarettes"
j) next bullet point: "not approved for smoking cessation" (okay that's the first one which is actually indisputable)
k) next bullet point: "gums, patches & drugs are regulated treatments" (two true staements in a row)
j) after recounting (correctly) what happened with the 2010 lawsuit, the Dr. says: "it's not clear that they can regulate yet" [hmm maybe he's no better at the law]
k) finally, he refuses to say that second hand vapor is any less bad than second hand smoke.
j) There is one additional claim and that is that the original motive for developing them was to "allow socialization of smokers". (Hmm, we knew China was supposed to be a Communist country. I've heard of nationalization, but never "socializing" a human being. Quite the concept.)
Let's see, that's 11 signifcant lies (not counting the last one) packed into two minutes and twelve seconds, for an average of one every 12 seconds.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes: No smoke, no danger?
(Norris Cotton Cancer Center/Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center) http://www.sciencedaily
.com/releases/2014/04/140402111556.htm
This article contains no citations (not even hints about its sources), nor is it "written" by any named person. To make matters worse, it's full of amorphoous boilerplate generalizations couched in the sort of diction and syntax that one typically finds in science publications. Your Correspondent strongly suspects that the author(s) are simply unwilling to make too many declarative assertions, although they do seem to be certain of a few things that are clearly false, and appear to imply that the use of certain terms such as "e-hookah," "vaporizer pen," and "traditional e-cigarette" (what most of us would refer to as a "cigalike") are standardized. The most salient mistatements are:
1) "No one can say that they are safer than other tobacco products (such as non-combusted tobacco products)." [This is either false if one excludes the parenthesis and takes "other tobacco products" as a reference to the obvious comparision, namely tobacco cigarettes, or or arguably plausible if snus for example is one of the compared items. The mere willingness to group traditional tobacco cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products strikes me as a variety of falsehood - or at least a caveat that renders the entire assertion virtually devoid of useful information.]
2) "Anyone who uses e-cigarettes and continues to use those other [combustable tobacco] products is unlikely to greatly lower their risk of heart attack, cancer, or chronic lung disease." My understanding is that this assertion is correct regarding plumonary consequences, but innacurately misleading with regards to cancer and chronic lung disease: one tobacco cigarette a week in tandem with vaping does not expose the user to the same risk as two packs a day of tobacco cigarettes:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/anti-smoking-advocate-incorrectly-and.html
3) Finally, the assumption is consistently made that nicotine and proplyene glycol are required elements in e-liquid, and this assumption is used to advance a number of conclusions - such as the possibility that PG may be unsafe to inhale over the long term when heated, or that vapers who don't use nicotine are subject to relapse because they're still addicted.
At the end of the day, this is no ANTZ "hit job" by any means. The article does concede that complete combusable cigarette cessation is "safer than smoking," and (by implication) can "greatly lower the risk of heart attack, cancer, and chronic lung disease." But that: "Until we know more about e-cigarettes, these medicinal NRT products, combined with help from quit counselors or friends and family who have quit can help you become a non-smoker without tackling the remaining questions of e-cigarette safety."
Hence the author(s) appear to (mostly) arrive the same place at which vaping advocates end up, with the exception of their incorrect characterization of dual users. But this is done in a very unsatisfying manner - via misleading, ambiguous, unsourced and sometimes completely incorrect generalizations.
Title: Veteran E-Cigarette Users Fret Cloud Chasers Give Them a Bad Name
(US Nat'l news mag) http://www.newsweek
.com/veteran-e-cigarette-users-fret-cloud-chasers-give-them-bad-name-238978
No junk. Sounds familiar?
"Cynthia Cabrera, executive director of the Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association, warned several dozen vapers in her legal and political education workshop about being 'your own worst enemy' with careless exhalation, especially at public meetings. 'Please stop going to these meetings and blowing these huge billow[ing] clouds of vapor,' she said as a sweet, strawberry-scented haze drifted through the conference room at the Hyatt Dulles, an airport hotel outside of Washington, D.C. 'Have respect for the people that don't know what the products are and are afraid of them.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Title: New Device Allows Cigar Smokers to Sample Blends Before Online Purchase
(Some marketing firm's web site) http://www.prweb
.com/releases/famous-smoke-shop/personal-cigar-tester/prweb11722406.htm
I have no idea how this thing works, but it might be similar to a PV that dynamically mixes different kinds of flavors in various proportions:
"You simply select the cigar you want to sample, plug the ePCT base module into an available USB port on your laptop or desktop, and as you puff, the device then mixes the solution to match the exact flavor profile." No junk.
Title: E-Cigarettes: Friend or Foe for the LGBT Communities?
(US Nat'l news site) http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/scout-phd/e-cigarettes-friend-or-foe_b_5024583.html
I'm doing to do this one tomorrow. It's deceptively horrendous because it's written by a member of a group that suffers societal discrimination, in a way that's intended to appeal to others in that community. However in its own way, it's just as bad as many typical pieces penned by MDs who presume that they're experts on the subject of vaping, merely because they're physicians. I'll explain the parallels tomorrow.
---
US: CONNECTICUT
[Repust due to republication - original review 3/25]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: THEIR VIEW: FDA should stop sales of e-cigs to minors
(Bristol CT US local paper) http://www.bristolpress
.com/articles/2014/04/01/opinion/doc533a27360870c438906126.txt
Title: Editorial: FDA must regulate e-cigarettes, liquid nicotine [Editorial]
(New Haven CT US local paper)
This editorial denies that there's any evidence of cessation value, and as usual conflates poison control center calls with results.
'But a report in Monday's New York Times makes this issue even more of an imminent threat to health and safety. The liquid nicotine that is vaporized and inhaled is in fact a strong neurotoxin that can lead to serious and even lethal poisoning if ingested through the skin. The Times quoted a poison control director in California as saying, 'It's not a matter of if a child will be seriously poisoned or killed. It's a matter of when.' . Poisonings from liquid nicotine rose 300 percent between 2012 and 2013, reported the Times, based on information from the National Poison Data System. Even small amounts can lead to serious poisoning. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]
[ CT 24 (proposed by gov) minor sales ban - still in joint cmte on children? HB 5286 - burdensome labelling requirements whose purposes is to "destroy the e-cig industry" (Bill Godshall): http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...contents-nicotine-yield-hearing-feb-28-a.html ]
---
US: NEW JERSEY
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Christie's proposed e-cigarette tax is for public health, state treasurer says [and opponents legitimatly cite hypocrisy]
(Newark NJ US local paper) http://www.nj
.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/04/christies_proposed_e-cigarette_tax_is_for_public_health_state_treasurer_says.html
Here's the only junk:
"'Our goal is to achieve rough parity with the tax burden on conventional cigarettes. Why? Our main concern is public health,' [state Treas.] Sidamon-Eristoff said at an Assembly Budget Committee hearing today. 'Contrary to the claims of some users, e-cigarettes have not been shown to be a safe' alternative to regular cigarettes. Nor are they a proven path to smoking cessation.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
[Which is another way of saying that either they're recreational or they have a proven benefit. Since the cessation benefit isn't considered proven (unlike the patch), they need to be taxed. But of course, as the article suggests, the health argument is completely hypocritical, as several critics point out in the article. Also see CFTFK report, next.
[ 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
Also, Gov. Christie says he wants to tax vaping at the same rate as analogs, and S1867 has been introduced in the Sen. for that purpose:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ual-2-70-pack-cigarette-tax.html#post12450301
And:
CASAA: Call to Action! New Jersey's Governor Christie is Proposing a Tax on E-Cigarettes at the Same Rate as Combustible Cigarettes (Significantly UPDATED 3-27-14) ]
Title: National report ranks New Jersey last for efforts to control tobacco use by children
(Manalapan NJ small local paper collection site) http://em.gmnews
.com/news/2014-04-03/Front_Page/National_report_ranks_New_Jersey_last_for_efforts_.html
Perhaps Karen Blumenfeld and GASP should spend more of their time lobbying Gov. Christie to act against tobacco cigarette smoking, and a bit less to fight the completely misguided WAV (War Against Vaping).
[Oh, never mind. On second thought, if NJ spent more money on tobacco programs, it would be used against vaping.]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Growing popularity of e-cigs creates new culture of 'vapers'
(Newark NJ US local paper) http://www.nj
.com/news/index.ssf/2014/04/hot_topic_growing_popularity_of_e-cigs_creates_a_whole_new_culture_of_vapers.html
How refreshing it is to see a piece that's free of all the usual lies and distortions. IMO, the writer and editors should be congratulated!
This is the Newark-based Star-Ledger, probably the most moderate NJ local paper that I've seen (no comparison to the rabidly anti-vaping Woodbury based South Jersey times. So the almost complete absence of junk and remarkably sympathetic portrayal of vaping in this coverage of vape club meeting comes as something less than a total surprise. Here are a couple of interesting highlights:
"Assembly Budget Committee Chairman Gary Schaer (D-Passaic) said he understands the angst [expressed by vapers regarding the looming threat of a tax]. He's a smoker who's reduced his consumption of cigarettes via vaping. 'Most smokers would prefer to be ex-smokers in any way, shape or form,' said Schaer. 'I'm sympathetic to the citizens who came to speak about the e-cigarette issue, but I'm equally sympathetic to the needs of other groups that have spoken with regard to our policy regarding children and seniors and the disabled.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
And later, of course we find the expected comments from health officials. As always, they assume that vaping implies the use of nicotine (which makes the gateway argument so much stronger):
"'Our concern is the availability of electronic cigarettes to children, especially children on the Internet, especially children on the Internet who have money,' said Robert Lahita, chairman of medicine at Newark Beth Israel Medical Center. 'They buy the multi-flavored electronic cigarettes, and at 10 years old, they're smoking these things and becoming dependent on nicotine. As the child gets older, reaches the age of 18, they switch over to regular cigarettes to continue the nicotine habit.'[para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
---
US: MARYLAND
Title: E-cigarette store owners plan College Park cafe, retail shop
(U MD College Park MD US student paper) http://www.diamondbackonline
.com/news/local/article_61e1150e-ba18-11e3-ace6-0017a43b2370.html
Three UMD graduating cigarette smoking (now vaping) students to open local vape shop. Not a syllable of junk in this student-written article. And unlike Oak Park Chicago (as reported in this space on 3/28), it seems that a new business will be very much welcomed by the community:
"College Park Economic Development Coordinator Michael Stiefvater said the store will provide a unique service that will attract more consumers to the city. 'It's nice to diversify our stores a little bit,' Stiefvater said. 'Especially by bringing a nonrestaurant, those that visit the store will support the restaurants around it.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Now that's what I call economic development. And help for tobacco cigarette smokers who wish to quit or cut down, but who don't know quite how/where to start with vaping. A healthier economy, a healthier community. What's not to like?
[ There appear to be no threats in MD at the moment. ]
---
US: FLORIDA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Summit aims at snuffing out teen interest in e-cigs [tax dollars at work to fight vaping]
(Gainesville FL US local paper) http://www.gainesville
.com/article/20140401/ARTICLES/140409972/-1/rssphotogallery
Reporter attended the "6th Annual Rural Tobacco Summit" during which a 75-minute presentation entitled "Electronic Cigarettes"
"Dr. Barry Hummel, a pediatrician who established the Quit Doc Research and Education Foundation in 2006 to work on youth tobacco and prevention, said the celebrity shots and other ads make e-cigarettes acceptable. 'It undoes years of hard work by having (cigarettes) back in public view,' Hummel said. The availability and advertisement of e-cigarettes also makes it harder for people who are trying to quit smoking, he added. That's because e-cigarettes are pitched as a safe and convenient alternative. 'The moments of inconvenience are actually what make people give (smoking) up altogether,' he said. [...] The reality is that so far, there is only anecdotal evidence that e-cigarettes may be harmful: the rare instances when they've blown up in peoples' faces, causing them to lose teeth and parts of their tongue are at the extreme of what experts suspect may be more chronic damage, not just to smokers, but second-hand smokers. That's because e-cigarettes do contain some nicotine: in the liquid that an atomizer heats up, turning it into vapor. Propylene glycol is one example [of unsafe substances which may be included], which is approved as a food additive and present in flavorings but is not safe to inhale in the form of fruit-flavored e-cigarettes, Hummel continued. However, Hummel added that it will likely take 10-20 years for these health problems -- namely pulmonary and cardiovascular ailments -- to emerge. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
To put it another way: the Dr. knows that vaping is dangerous, even though he can't prove it. And he's doing everything he can to make sure that smokers don't consider vaping as a form of cessation or harm reduction - neither of which is mentioned in the article. The "summit" - paid for with your tax dollars - was attended by "60 health care professionals."
[ FL simple minor ban, SB 224 has passed the sen. and is ready for the house. HB 169 appears to be identical. Also see:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...would-block-electronic-cigarettes-minors.html ]
---
US: VIRGINIA
Title: E-cigarettes to be sold at Va. Beach jail canteen
(AP) http://wavy
.com/2014/04/01/e-cigarettes-to-be-sold-at-va-beach-jail-canteen/
Despite the misleading photo, the PVs in question are quite likely the tamper-proof CrossBars, developed by a KY corrections officer (see the 2/19, 2/25, and 3/20 media roundups). While public health officials and idiotic politicians everywhere are grandstanding against the evils of nicotine, corrections officers who have to deal with real problems understand that it has a calming effect that could save lives. We'll see whether some brain-dead local official decides to substitute their judgement for that of the Sheriff, and ban them in all gov't facilities - as has already occured in Gage Co. NE (see 3/20 report).
[ H218 simple minor sales ban is ready for Gov's sig. If you know anything about the other bills proposed in VA, please PM me. Also see these possibly not-current threads: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...cts-alternative-nicotine-products-minors.html *and* http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-bill-hb-26-would-ban-e-cig-sales-minors.html ]
---
US: WEST VIRGINIA
Title: W.Va. health boards weighing e-cigarette bans [Harrison Co., Barbour Co. & Hancock Co. vaping=smoking clean indoor air act extensions recommended by state health official]
(Clarksburg WV US local paper) http://wvpress
.org/news/w-va-health-boards-weighing-e-cigarette-bans/
Article explains that WV lacks a statewide clean indoor air act, but relies on county and city level health boards to make these decisions. It appears that vaping=smoking bans are either being considered or all-but-inevitable for Harrison Co/Clarksburg City, and Barbour Co. based on presentations and recommendations from the state health Dep't:
"There has been preliminary research done, and it was found that some particulate matter and substances are released during use of e-cigarettes, according to Bruce Adkins, director of the Division of Tobacco Prevention for the West Virginia Bureau for Public Health. The matter would be dangerous to public health. 'Our stance is, until we know more about these products, we have to consider them not yet proven to be safe,' he said. Adkins said caution about the unknown hazards and many national organizations' recommendations are why some health departments are looking to ban them. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Also see this CASAA call on Hancock co.:
Title: Local Alert! Hancock County, West Virginia - E-Cigarette Usage Ban
CASAA: Local Alert! Hancock County, West Virginia - E-Cigarette Usage Ban
[ WV's HB 4237 has passed house. Curiously this simple minor ban. Includes NRT stuff like lozenges & gum. ]
---
US: ALABAMA
Title: Non-smoker opens electronic cigarette store
(Anniston AL US local paper) http://www.annistonstar
.com/view/full_story/24852561/article-Non-smoker-opens-electronic-cigarette-store
Completely junk-free report on new local vape shop. No politicians or local health officials were quoted. What a relief.
[ AL's legislature will not be back in session until 2015. ]
---
US: INDIANA
Title: Safer cigarette?
(Kokomo IN US local paper) http://www.kokomotribune
.com/local/x1387898810/Safer-cigarette
Profile of a local vape shop that's existed since 2011. Story continues with interviews with local school students and officials. There are some mildly-troubling parts of it, for example this expression of opinion by the reporter, which leads to the expected quotes from various local officials associated with youth antismoking efforts:
"With liquid nicotine coming in flavors like cotton candy, gummy bear, Mountain Dew and Red Bull, it's not hard to see why students might want to try vaping. Shirley Dubois, Howard County Tobacco Coalition coordinator, and Rob Pruett, coordinator of the Mayors Youth Council on Substance Abuse Prevention, see these types of flavors, colorful packaging of certain e-cig products and other marketing strategies as directly targeting youth. 'We feel like all we've conquered in getting rid of the Marlboro Man and cartoons [selling tobacco products] ... is a little defeated,' Dubois said. 'With their marketing, because it's not regulated, they can do this. We feel this is marketing to the youth.' Dubois and Pruett view e-cigs as a 'gateway' to conventional cigarettes, which contain harmful chemicals. Both e-cigs and conventional tobacco products contain nicotine, which is extremely addictive. [...] 'Studies may not call it the gateway, but it's definitely not seen as a cessation tool for kids,' said Pruett, who also oversees Voice, a youth-led anti-tobacco initiative. 'Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances known to man, and marketing that to kids is not OK.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Of course this is the standard argument that kids are being targeted due to the mere existence of certain flavors.
The story also mentions some of Blu's ads, and cites CDC minor stats but (thankfully) says "The National Youth Tobacco Survey did not specify which type of cigarette those students tried first."
The Vape shop owner does a good job of defending himself by pointing out that vaping is too expensive for kids and that kids will do whatever adults will do.
The story seems to imply that most of the problem has to do w/ the internet, and there's no evidence that local officials are planning to pass a vaping=smoking ordinance, or any other form of (e.g.) zoning or licensing regulation.
[ Indiana passed a simple minor sales ban last year. Indiana's HB 1174 proposes to tax vaping in the same way as tobacco (24% of wholesale), it's still in Ways & Means. See: HB 1174: Taxation of electronic cigarettes. Amends the definition of tobacco product to include electronic cigarettes for purposes of the tobacco products tax. Hoosier Vapers and http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...5-hb-1174-taxation-electronic-cigarettes.html ]
---
US: ILLINOIS
Title: Electronic cigarette bill advances to state Senate
(AP) http://www.wistv
.com/story/25140778/electronic-cigarette-bill-advances-to-state-senate
HB 5868 unanimously passed the House. This requires that smokeless tobacco products be placed behind the counter (unlike combustible cigarettes), which may pose a problem for vape shops. Howver this bill was ammended to exempt retailers that do not allow minors in the store, according to this ECF thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...counter-exempts-tobacco-specialty-stores.html
---
US: MINNESOTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Editorial counterpoint: E-cigarette fright is uninformed
(Twin Cities MN US local paper) http://www.startribune
.com/opinion/commentaries/253468501.html
This is a fairly strong refutation to a dreadful Star Trib editorial, my only complaint is that it was written by a tobacco lobbyist (and will therefore likely have less effect). IMO this paper is in the dubious company of the S. Jersey times and the SacBee as one of the most anti-vaping local papers in the nation, so perhaps the editors intentionally chose to select a tobacco lobbyist's piece, on the grounds that his status would make it easy for readers to dismiess it. Obviously it contains no junk.
[ The situation in MN is murky, but for now it appears that if Gov. Dayton holds firm, that there will be no addition anti-vaping legislation passed this year. ]
---
US: TEXAS
Title: Administrators, students grapple with e-cigarettes
(Tarrant Co. College paper, Hurst TX US) http://collegian.tccd
.edu/?p=20059
Consists mostly of comments from students, which are entirely positive, except for one student who says that she's worried about minor use. The only negative comment comes from one staffer, described as Student Development Assistant Leah Hawkins says: "'It does bother me,' she said. 'I am a nonsmoker, and I raised a family of nonsmokers. So I would like to see the same policy put in place as other tobacco products.'"
(In other words, she's "bothered" by the fact that it's a "tobacco product." One would think that she would've gone out of her way to make a more specific comment about her experience as a bystander, had she something to say on that score. Few people seem to be bashful about expressing such opinions.
Article also contains a survey of some local TX campuses. As far as Your Correspondent knows, TX is the only state in the country in which vaping is allowed on college campuses. Most other US campuses have banned vaping on all campus property, in order to either take advantage of funding sources or to promote "health."
[ TX's legislature will not be back in session until 2015, unless Gov. Perry calls a special session. ]
---
US: NEBRASKA
Title: E-Cigarette Use Rising in Teens
(Kearney Nebraska US ABC affiliate) http://www.nebraska
.tv/story/25135696/e-cigarette-use-rising-in-teens
Apparently NE's LB863 (formerly 861, as its incorrectly id'd in this report) is not yet ready for the Gov Heineman's signature, as both this space - as well as several NE outlets - reported. Turns out that it's waiting for its final reading.
Local Tobacco Free Hall County Prevention Coordinator Sandy Yager also alleges that vaping has no cessation value and that:
"studies coming out now are finding formaldehyde and ammonia in e-cigarettes. She said the nicotine can be even more dangerous. 'Right now it's causing a lot of overdosing with youth and adults because it's easier to consume more nicotine with an electronic cigarette,' said Yager. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
(Either we have a sloppy reporter or a very stupid county employee.) To the reporter's credit, however, the last line does indicate that nicotine-free e-liquid is available. (Which means the reporter knows something that would be news to virtually all MDs and scientests who opine and/or do research in this area.)
---
US: ARIZONA
Title: E-cigarette smokers are chasing clouds
(Phoenix AZ US local paper) http://www.azcentral
.com/story/money/business/2014/04/01/e-cigarette-smokers-are-chasing-clouds-lm-biz/7158733/
To my utter astonishment, there isn't a single syllable in this piece about minor vaping, "unknown" health effects, poison center calls, the unregulated status of vaping, nor nary a lonely solitary quote by a "concerned" local health professional with "fears," or a rabid Tobacco Control Industry (e.g. ALA) representative (or any Tobacco Control Industry rep., for that matter).
Nothing like that - zero, zip, nada.
It's completely devoted to a vape store at which a local vaper's club teaches classes in how to sub-ohm and generally have fun by producing large nic-free "clouds." (In fact the nic-free point is made both by the writer and in quotes from the store owner.)
Did I say there was no junk?
[ No threats exist in AZ at the moment. ]
---
US: NEVADA
Title: University Announces Plan to Go Tobacco-Free in 2015
(Reno NV US CBS affiliate) http://www.ktvn
.com/story/25121385/university-announces-plan-to-go-tobacco-free-in-2015
UNLV will have a "tobacco free" campus starting next year. Although the article doesn't mention vaping, it's hard to believe that vaping isn't included in the ban, which will apply (naturally) to every square inch of university property, including privately-owned vehicles that are at UNLV:
"'Throughout the past several years, the University has made important progress in linking the mind, body and spirit' of our students by developing programming and physical infrastructure that emphasizes health and well-being,' University President Marc Johnson said. 'Our commitment to improve the health of our community, campus, students, faculty and staff is the impetus behind the initiative to create a tobacco-free environment.' In a joint letter sent to students, faculty and staff, representatives of the campus organizations offered more reasoning behind their endorsement for the Tobacco-Free University policy:
[...] 'We feel it is imperative that our University environment reflect the health-based principles of a modern land-grant institution that is home to the state's medical school as well as a nationally recognized research portfolio that includes efforts in medical, behavioral and social research aimed at improving the lives and health throughout our community, our state and the world. The health risks associated with tobacco use and secondhand smoke are well-known. Adopting a Tobacco-Free University policy is a significant way to improve health and demonstrate values that are in line with the research and academic mission of this University.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
In other words, tobacco use is dangerous, ergo vaping is too. "A cigarette is a cigarette is a cigarette (even if it contains no nicotine and doesn't burn anything)."
[ No threats exist in AZ at the moment. ]
---
US: CALIFORNIA
Title: Encinitas enacts e-cigarette restrictions
(San Diego CA US local paper) http://www.utsandiego
.com/news/2014/apr/01/ecigarette-policy-encinitas/
The vaping=smoking ban will establish a 20 foot perimter around parks, trails, or open-air restaurants.
"Saying people were 'slow' to react to the dangers of tobacco decades ago, Mayor Teresa Barth said during a discussion at Wednesday night's council meeting that she didn't want to make the same mistake now with electronic cigarettes and that's why she was supporting changing the ordinance. Councilman Tony Kranz said electronic cigarette users may stress that their new devices are 'smoke-free,' but said he didn't want to be exposed to the vapor. Councilwoman Kristin Gaspar said she had horrible allergies and can't be around smoke. She said she's not opposed to people using the electric devices --- she wishes her cigarette-smoking brother would make the switch. However, she added, she supports the new restrictions, saying there should be 'some boundaries with the devices.'[para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
[ 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 ]
Title: The Vaping Craze
(Santa Cruz local free weekly) http://www.gtweekly
.com/index.php/santa-cruz-news/santa-cruz-local-news/5532-the-vaping-craze-.html
Report on a local vape shop. But not just any - Beyond Vape has four existing outlets, three of which are in California, and one in Manhattan (two more are planned), and has developed its own proprietary MODS. Owner Wen Wei has been working in the industry since the FDA's vaping ban was overturned in 2010:
"In 2010, he and his partners began work on an e-cigarette product with design and function standards high enough to stand out in the newly competitive U.S. market. After 'two to three years of development' and selecting only the 'best manufacturers' to partner with, Beyond Vape was born. In May 2013, they opened their first retail store in Los Angeles. 'L.A. is the mecca of e-cigarettes,' Wei says. 'We didnt want to get into the online market because theres just too much crap out there. When you buy online you take a huge risk. The retail revolution really legitimized the product. It gives people the opportunity to taste and try the product.' [para break omitted]"
This space reported the Santa Cruz City Council decision to ban indoor/outdoor vaping in the 3/25 roundup, here's a quick recap for those of you who are curious about the depressingly-familiar rationales:
"[...] on Tuesday, March 25, the Santa Cruz City Council unanimously voted to treat e-cigarettes like combustible cigarettes, joining 40 other California cities in regulating the emerging technology like traditional tobacco. Councilmember Pamela Comstock cited the product's unknown health impact, perceived marketing to children and potential to create a new generation of smokers as the primary reasons to update the ordinance to include e-cigarettes."
"Lynn Lauridsen agrees with the decision. A member of the Santa Cruz Tobacco Education Coalition, Lauridsen believes the current 'glamorous' marketing of e-cigarettes and the wide assortment of available flavors such as chocolate, cotton candy and piña colada, have a direct impact on luring youth into potential nicotine addiction. [actually she's a city employee who works for the health dep't, not a volunteer]
'They are rapidly gaining popularity with young people,' Lauridsen says. 'And the marketing is sending a lot of mixed messages. They look like cigarettes and deliver nicotine like cigarettes, but Beyond Vape's radio ads make them sound like a smoking cessation tool. There's no scientific proof that they help people quit smoking. The bottom line is we don't want to see smoking re-normalized.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
(Catch that? Because there is "no scientific proof" that vaping is a cessation tool, it logically follows that vaping is renormalizing smoking.
Incidently, after speaking with a salesperson in one of their four outlets (two more coming soon), I determined that they do sell 0% nicotine e-liquid. But of course, to the ANTZ: No proof of cessation = renormalizing smoking since nicotine = smoking.
Wei remains philsophical about the whole thing, despite being singled out by the city health dep't (see above quote):
"Wei has no problem being lumped in with traditional cigarettes for now. He believes it is the e-cigarette industry's responsibility--not the government's--to educate the public about the differences between vaping and smoking. 'Anyone can see that our products and cigarettes are entirely different,' Wei says. 'If they're going to regulate us in the same way, fine. We welcome any kind of regulation because it forces manufacturers to produce a better product and ultimately evolves the industry.' [para break omitted]"
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Daly City considers regulations on electronic cigarettes
(SF CA US local paper) http://www.sfexaminer
.com/sanfrancisco/daly-city-considers-regulations-on-electronic-cigarettes/Content?oid=2751139
Some of you may recall from a 3/15 report in this space that the mayor of Daly City CA is a strong opponent of vaping, who has indicated that he wants to shut down the vape shops, on the grounds that the present a danger to minors. Dr. Seigel discussed the hipocrisy of doing this in a city with nearly 100 places that sell tobacco cigarettes, many of whom are known to have sold to minors:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/03/daly-city-mayor-wants-to-shut-down.html
Not surprisingly, the situation hasn't improved in the last two weeks or so: "At the request of Councilman Mike Guingona, Mayor David Canepa recently authorized a special subcommittee to study the issue. Joining Guingona on the subcommittee is Vice Mayor Carol Klatt [...]A leading concern in the local push to regulate e-cigarettes is secondhand smoke. Guingona has previously collaborated with the nonprofit Breathe California Golden Gate Public Health Partnership on its anti-smoking initiatives, and he has advocated for amending the citys secondhand smoke ordinance to prohibit e-cigarette smoking in locations where tobacco smoking is prohibited. Canepa is also in favor of such an amendment. 'Not enough is known about the potential health effects of using these products, and Im not satisfied that theyre as safe as their proponents make them out to be,' Guingona said."
Even worse: "San Mateo Police Chief Susan Manheimer said although its illegal to sell e-cigarettes to people under 18 years of age, police recently caught two local merchants allegedly selling the products to minors. The vaporizers can also be used to smoke illegal drugs, such as h@sh 0il and the recently outlawed synthetic drug commonly referred to as spice, she said. Manheimer further noted that in many cases, vape retailers also sell other types of smoke shop paraphernalia."
There's no word on a timetable for action, but things don't look good.
Title: It's confusing out there for e-cig smokers
(Orange Co. CA US local paper) http://www.ocregister
.com/articles/cigarettes-607966-city-cities.html
This survey of local Orange Co. Cities' policies on indoor/outdoor vaping makes the situation sound more complicated than it really is. In fact, just one city in Orange county has actually rejected a vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban:
CASAA: Laguna Beach council uses common sense, refuses to ban e-cigarettes
This junk-free piece indicates that San Clemente and Luna Niguel are currently at risk. Vapers who live in Orange County are strongly advised to do some googling, join a local vaper's organization (and/or CASAA). No junk.
Title: New Fears Push More California e-Cigarette Bans
(CA gov't reporting site - partnered with SacBee) http://www.publicceo
.com/2014/04/new-fears-push-more-california-e-cigarette-bans/
This is a rather uninformative survey article - similar to the above - although it contains no junk and does mention CASAA. There seems to be more of an emphasis here on explaining the rationales behind the tsunami of vaping=smoking ordinances (as well as moratoriums on new vape shops). However the writer appears to think that secondhand vaping is the issue. As readers of this space know, the most common rationale has to do with "renormalizing smoking," and/or "protecting minors," and/or not "repeating the mistakes of the past." Or to put it another way, it seems as if virtually every elected official in these CA counties and municipalities is bent on assuming that vaping is just as dangerous to everyone as tobacco cigarette smoking, even if proven otherwise.
***
GOOGLE TIPS
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.)
Yesterday was not the day to get behind - but here's a double-roundup to catch up ...
1) vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor bans: serious threats for Wales, WV (Clarksburg/Harrison Co., Barbour Co. & Hancock Co.), Daly City CA.
2) Citywide vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor referendum 4/8 for St. Joseph MO, see CASAA call:
CASAA: Local Alert! St. Joseph, Missouri - April 8, 2014 Public Vote on Ordinance That Would Ban E-Cigarette Use as "Smoking"
3) Victory's Micheal Clapper to head Europe's Electronic Cigarette Industry Trade Assn (ECITA), and 5/5 daylong conf. in Chicgo of the Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Assn (SFATA) featuring speakers such as Clive Bates and Dr. Farsalinos.
4) UK's Royal College of Physicians publication embraces vaping as harm reduction and potential cessation.
5) Calgary AB's Councilperson Diane Colley-Urquhart passes resolution for a vaping study, to go with her proposal for a vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban.
6) Fraction of vapers triples in The Netherlands, cigarette smoking down about 7% but number of smokers approximately constant between 2012 and 2013, according to Dutch gov't org.
7) NJ Gov. Christie's state treas. claims that state tax will go to health, hipocrisy slammed in state assembly.
8) Univ. NV to go "tobacco-free" next year - campuswide ban on indoor and outdoor vaping on all university property, including private vehicles, etc. in order to "improve the health of the community."
9) Encitas CA enacts vaping=smoking ord. for the usual reasons (cigarettes are cigarettes, period).
10) IL's HB 5868 which requires that smokeless tobacco products be placed behind the counter, has passed the house, but with an exception added for retailers that do not permit minors in their stores (e.g. vape shops).
11) ANTZ orgs demand that FDA release initial draft reg.s, cite poison call center hysteria.
12) CBS news video segment manages to broadcast 11 falsehoods in 132 seconds (12 seconds each), and Jenny Lei Bolario (NPR "youth radio" reporter of 8th-grader gossip fame), is back.
13) "Cloud chasing" is annoyance to SFATA's Cynthia Cabrera, and taught by owner of Phoenix AZ vape shop.
14) Poison call center hysteria seems to have (temporarily) subsided - I have about 50 stories collected which I'm going to try to categorize and post in a dedicated review. As of this writing, I believe the following states have issued warnings/reports in approximately this sequence, since the frenzy began last week: MN, UT, FL, OK, KY, SC, GA and the Atlanta CDC. (That means we have another 40-odd states to get through.)
Coverage: Europe; Holland; UK [nat'l & Wales]; Ca (AB); US states: CT, NJ, MD, FL, VA, WV, AL, IN, IL, MN, TX, NE, AZ, NV, CA
Coverage: Europe; Holland; UK [nat'l & Wales]; Ca (AB); US states:
Also: Dr. Siegel on the claim by Dr. Jonathan Samet that "third hand (nicotine)" contamination is a threat in restaurants; Dr. Rodu on the exoneration of pulmonary effects from Snus; Gary Cox on ECITA's new head (Michael Clapper of Victory) and the real reason behind the e-juice poison center calls hysteria. Plus Bill Godshall's updates for the last ten very busy days.
***
BLOGS, STUDIES, ETC.
Title: Touching a Chair in a Restaurant Could Be Hazardous to Your Health if Vaping is Allowed, According to Tobacco Control Researcher
(Dr. Siegel's blog)
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/touching-chair-in-restaurant-could-be.html
As readers of this space know, on 3/29, it was reported that Dr. Jonathan Samet, who sits on the FDA's Tobacco Products Advisory Baord, told a reporter for a California paper that mere contact with surfaces such as a chair which were exposed to the vapor from an e-cigarette could be a health risk due to potential nicotine exposure through their skin.. Dr. Siegel analyzes this claim. In later developments, it turns out that at least one municipality has reacted in alarm to Dr. Samet's assertion, by passing laws to allegedly protect their citizens:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/policy-makers-respond-to-concerns-about.html
Title: No Stroke Risk with Snus
(Dr. Rodu's Blog)
http://rodutobaccotruth.blogspot.com/2014/04/no-stroke-risk-with-snus.html
"It is well known that nicotine does not cause cancer, but its role in cardiovascular diseases has been difficult to determine. Studying users of Swedish snus, who consume large quantities of smoke-free nicotine over decades, the Swedish researchers concluded that nicotine was unlikely to be a contributor to heart attacks or strokes. Smokeless tobacco and nicotine have been demonized for no valid scientific reasons. The Swedish findings are vitally important to all consumers of nicotine and tobacco products, including e-cigarettes. [para break omitted]"
Title: NICOTINE-INGESTION DEATH A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY
(ECF's InfoZone)
NICOTINE-INGESTION DEATH A PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY - ECF InfoZone
Gary Cox on the ultimate psychological basis for the alarmist reports on e-liquid ingestion by children, and the unscientific nature of the hysteria.
Title: Clapper Will Head ECITA
(ECF's InfoZone)
Clapper Will Head ECITA - ECF InfoZone
Victory's Michael Clapper to head the E-Cigarette Industry Trade Association (ECITA), Europe's principal vaping industry organization. (Also see story immediately below in the "Europe" area.
Title: Bill Godshall Update 2014-03-31
(Bill's E-Cigarette Politics site)
Bill Godshall Update 2014-03-31
Bill's updates - and there are many - from 3/21/14 through 3/31/14.
***
EUROPE
Title: Michael Clapper, President International of Victory Electronic Cigarettes Corporation Elected as New Chairman of ECITA, Europes Leading ECIG Trade Association
(Press Release site) http://www.businesswire
.com/news/home/20140401005764/en/Michael-Clapper-President-International-Victory-Electronic-Cigarettes#.Uzu0KqJobfg
Looks like an ECITA/Vitory joint press release. No junk, of course.
***
HOLLAND
Title: Same number of smokers smoke fewer cigarettes
(Amalgam site) http://www.dutchnews
.nl/news/archives/2014/04/same_number_of_smokers_smoke_f.php
http://www.nltimes
.nl/2014/04/01/e-cigarette-use-triples-smoking/
About 25% of adults smoke, avg. daily #cigs went down from 14 to 13. It's not clear what the 3% of vapers figure means, although it seems to be more than "ever-vapers" (i.e. people who had tried vaping no more than once). This ratio is very roughly in line with the US and the UK. No junk.
***
UK: NATIONAL
Title: What you need to know about electronic cigarettes
(Royal College of Physicians) http://www.rcplondon
.ac.uk/commentary/what-you-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes
When I saw the title of this piece, I cringed - it's virtually a guarantee that any such article published in the states will be 100% garbage. This is the antithesis. I'll redirect discussion here, because it already seems to have been posted:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ou-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes.html
Title: If you ban my e-cig, I'm buying a deck of Marlboro Lights
(UK Nat'l Paper) http://blogs.telegraph
.co.uk/news/timstanley/100265966/if-you-ban-my-e-cig-im-buying-a-deck-of-marlboro-lights/
The tone and content of this rather amusing piece s/b fairly clear from the title. But here's a taste anyway:
"But do e-cigarettes normalise smoking? If they do, the evidence is sparse. For rather than rooting their criticisms in hard, medical proof about the negative impact of e-cigarettes, the anti-lobby simply rely on the general worry that if a teenager sees a little old lady puffing away on an e-cigarette in a tea room, the youth is more likely to start smoking thirty Rothmans a day. Which is a scenario that I struggle to believe.
"Keep e-cigarettes legal and tagged as 'medicinal' and they will remain uncool -because its prohibition that makes narcotics fashionable. Teenagers arent going to smoke behind the bike sheds a product they can purchase over the counter in Boots, along with hayfever relief and incontinence pads."
If it weren't for the previous entry, I'd hazard the guess that today's haul is pretty good evidence for the proposition that public health policy is best informed by everyone except MDs.
Title: In the spotlight: e-cigarettes
(Bupa Int'l H/C group site) Title: E-cigarette use triples; smoking down
http://www.bupa
.co.uk/individuals/health-information/smoking/e-cigarettes-2014
As far as I can tell, this piece contains no rabid ANTZ falsehoods, although it seems to be rather naive about the nature of reguation (describing it as having no downsides - which makes me suspicious that this site is bought and paid for by some UK BP interests), and seems to imply that anything over 20mg/ml (2%) is somehow dangerous for consumers. There are also no references to any studies - it's completely conclusory. The last paragraph doesn't attempt to convince the reader one way or the other about the value of trying vaping as a cessation tool, and directs us to the EU's official site. Perhaps this is the UK version of WebMD, albeit with much less in the way of ANTZ influence.
---
UK: WALES
Title: E-cigarettes face curb in public places in Wales [health minister to advance vaping=smoking legislation]
(BBC) http://www.bbc
.com/news/uk-wales-26837682
Title: Wales considers banning public use of electronic cigarettes
(Reuters) http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/04/02/us-britain-ecigarettes-idUSBREA311AJ20140402
[Both reports combined. Quotes from Health Min. Mark Drakeford, who appears to have a plethora of reasons that should sound rather familiar to anyone following the situation in the US. Or Israel. Or the EU (etc.):
1) "'E-cigarettes contain nicotine, which is highly addictive, and I want to minimize the risk of a new generation becoming addicted to this drug,'"
2) "'I have concerns about the impact of e-cigarettes on the enforcement of Wales' smoking ban. That's why we are proposing restricting their use in enclosed public places."
3) "'I am also concerned that their use in enclosed public places could normalise smoking behaviour."
"His proposals are open for consultation until June 24 and, if backed, will then go to the Welsh Assembly, which has the powers to run its own health and education services."
"Chief Medical Officer Dr Ruth Hussey said: 'On the seventh anniversary of the smoking ban, it is symbolic that Wales is once again at the forefront of a new set of radical proposals to improve public health.'
---
CANADA: ALBERTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Council orders study into health risks of e-cigarettes
(Calgary AB Ca. local paper) http://www.calgaryherald
.com/health/Council+orders+study+into+health+risks+cigarettes/9686248/story.html
Calgary's Councilperson Diane Colley-Urquhart is at it again. Readers of this space will recall a story from just two days ago that described her successful effort to get the council to study the question of whether the city should adopt an indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking ord. that would cover private businesses as well as public parks. Now she's got 8 out of 14 votes to fund a study on the health effects of vaping:
"'I would rather err on the side of caution until the jury's out and decided on this matter,' said Colley-Urquhart, a nurse by trade. Her motion asks city staff to consult Alberta Health Services and others on possible bylaws and report back by September. The proposal passed in a 8-6 vote. Many councillors said this study was an unnecessary expenditure of city money -- with the cost of studying not yet known. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
This is the same tactic that we've seen south of the border. Politicians who hate tobacco cigarettes tranfer their hatred to vaping and vapers, and use local health departments as their cudgels. However Your Correspondent has to wonder whether the Canadian Tobacco Control Industry is as functionally indistinguishable from the government in Canada as it is here in the states.
That said, Ms. Colley-Urquhart seems anxious to do whatever she can to keep Calgarians from vaping. Will a city tax or vape shop licensing and/or zoning restrictions be next? How about restrictions on municipal employees? Banning vaping in cars that have passengers under 18? "Tune in next week to find out."
***
US NATIONAL
Title: Largest Electronic Cigarette Trade Association Hosts Spring Conference Led by Industry Experts
(Paid site for conf. announements) http://fda.ulitzer
.com/node/3038300
Smoke-Free Alternatives Trade Assn. one-day conf. in Chicago 5/5.
"Confirmed speakers and panelists include Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos, Neil Mclaren, Co-founder of the E-Cigarette Forum (UK), William Bartowski, PhD, formerly of Ruyan International and current Principal of VapAria, and Clive Bates, Director of advocacy organization Counterfactual."
Title: Forging a vapor trail [virtual panel discussion w/ US-based cigAlike mfrs]
(US-based Grocer trade 'zine) http://www.groceryheadquarters
.com/2014/04/forging-a-vapor-trail/
Virtual (i.e. faux) panel discussion that includes Jason Healy (founder and Pres. of Lorillard's Blu), and spokespeople for V2 and Altria (formerly PMI) among others. Your Correspondent is not entirely certain that the discussion was illuminating, although their attitude towards looming FDA regulation seemed to be at the very least resigned - if not welcoming (which seems odd, given the likely effect of the "substantial equivalence" requirement). There are some interesting comments made about minor access. Absolutely nothing was said about Clean "Indoor" (= Indoor/outdoor) Air Act extensions, or the poison control media frenzy, nor was the minor-gateway-to-tobacco argument addressed.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Health officials push Obama for release of e-cigarette regulation proposal [cite poison center calls]
(Indianapolis IN US ABC affiliate) http://www.theindychannel
.com/news/health-officials-push-obama-for-release-of-e-cigarette-regulation-proposal
This chock-full-o-junk report (yes, it even includes Talbot's nanoparticles) cites a chock-full-o-junk letter sent to the administration, demanding that the FDA disclose its original set of draft regulations, which were rejected by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). While this is hardly news in general, I'm reporing it because they stoop low enough to mention the poison control center call article in the NYT. Signers are (mostly) the usual suspects: AAP, ACS, AHA, ALA, CAN, CFTFK, and Legacy.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette Use in Pregnancy
(US Nat'l Mag specializing in Psychology) http://www.psychologytoday
.com/blog/aristotles-child/201404/e-cigarette-use-in-pregnancy?quicktabs_5=1
Why exactly Psychology Today wanted to take on this extremely intricate physiological question is entirely beyond Your Correspondent. That said, it's clear that this article says - exactly nothing. (Well, in the sense that it provides a reader with zilch in the way of guidance.) However, it does point out that NRT presents issues during pregnancy, just as any system which delivers nicotine might (yes, it's possible that FDA-approved NRT may not be appropriate for all situations).
And, like virtually every MD who writes an article for public consumption or who advises public officials on health policy, or scientest who does research on vaping - the author of this piece is blissfully unware that 0% nicotine e-liquid is available.
In this context, that typical level of profound ignorance is perhaps even more regrettable than usual, because no one that I know of disputes the idea that nicotine is indeed damagine to a fetus. (Is that true of vaping vegatable glycerin with flavoring?)
Oh yes, and the conclusion is that vaping (nicotine-containing e-liquid) isn't "safe" during pregnancy. Surprise, surprise. But - as with smokers who can't quit - the recommendation is .. "just quit." (Except this time, it appears to be: "quit cold turkey." How helpful.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Antidote: Are e-cigarettes safe?
(Healthcare marketing trade site) http://www.mmm-online
.com/antidote-are-e-cigarettes-safe/article/340419/
Further proof that anyone who has an "MD" after their name now feels qualified to speak authoritatively on all vaping-related issues, after just a little googling time. The author begins with asking whether "e-cigarettes" are "safe?" The answer is that "Dr. Tom Frieden, head of the CDC and a top expert in preventive health, told me that e-cigarettes can be a gateway drug, with nicotine addiction leading to more tobacco use." [How nice that the author of this piece is communicating directly with the head of the CDC.] That's the end of the analysis. Clearly if the head of the CDC feels that "e-cigarettes can be a gateway drug," then the matter is settled.
Next we hear about the increase in "poisoning cases" (when did a "call" become a "case?" ... perhaps that's that what the good Dr. learned in med school.)
However (amazingly) the Dr.'s googling did include the Lancet study, so he's decided that vaping may have some cessation value. (Although he's evidently not familiar with vegatable glycerin or flavorings - all he knows about is proplylene glycol and liquid nicotine.)
So: what have four years of med. school and years of residency and practice allowed our erudite expert on vaping to conclude?
"I believe that in the right hands, e-cigarettes can be an effective tool for quitting smoking, perhaps the best we currently have available. But because of the risks of addiction and even poisoning that I have outlined above (though e-cigarettes continue to have much lower percentages of nicotine than the online liquids), I believe a physician should be guiding a patient's e-cigarette use."
Well, perhaps there's no need to spend millions studying the problem. In just five short paragraphs, we've got the answer. Vaping should be treated like medication. (Want a different flavor? See your Dr.! Prescription needs to be refilled? Go and buy a pack of ciggies while you wait for your appointment.)
All of that said, it could've been a whole lot worse.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Do Electronic Cigarettes Help Smokers Quit
(US Nat'l news web site) http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/youth-radio-youth-media-international/do-electronic-cigarettes_b_5036957.html
This piece was done by one of the reprehensible anti-vaping journalists in the country - Jenny Lei Bolario. Readers of this space will recall an article that she did for NPR "youth radio" on Feb 17th, entitled Candy Flavors Put E-Cigarettes On Kids' Menu, in which - based on the audiotape of a single eighth-grade student - Ms. Bolario asserted that teens are buying e-cigarettes off the internet and using them directly in front of teachers: http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/youth-radio-youth-media-international/candy-flavors-put-e-cigar_b_4833602.html
That story went national, and scores of mainsteam media outlets cited this allegation as fact. Ms. Bolario's despicable standards of journalism ethics, which appear to make no distinction between verifiable facts and rumors that float around the hallways of junior high schools, are fortunately no longer at issue in this piece, since she has decided that she'll do best in an environment in which anectdotal evidence of personal experiences are presented as such by adults willing to appear on camera.
I suppose she and her superiors are moved by the compelling neature of the reassuringly-aged authority figure (identified as Dr. Cathy McDonald, Almeda Co. Project Diretor of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Other Drugs). The good Dr. advises us that: "'And what we know is that an evidence-based way to quit smoking is a combination of medication, and we have seven FDA-approved medications to help people quit smoking.'"
Cut back to the first of two early twenty-something vapers, who complains that he's tried the gum and the patch, without success.
Vape store owner explains that none of the existing products satisfy smokers, because they lack the "hand to mouth" ability to mimic smoking. Then we cut back to the good Dr. who says that "we" have a "'wonderful product that many peole don't even know about'" which turns out to be (surprise!) the nic. inhaler.
What Your Correspondent found laughably ludicrous is that the demonstration of the nic inhaler looked incredibly sterile, clinical, and unappealing, after we've seen lengthy segments during which the two vapers are obviously enjoying themselves tremendously.
And then the final appeal from Dr. McDonald: "'So we have something that's been studied, that's been safe, that's known to help people to quit.'"
Now bear in mind (and you'll have to watch the whole rather tiresome video to see this), that throughout it, we're hearing from the two young vapers that they're worried about the unknowns of vaping, and suffer minor problems from what anyone familiar with vaping will immediately recognize as probable symptoms of excessive nicotine consumption (headaches) or shortness of breath from (probably) too much PG. Evidently they've never heard of 0% nic. and/or VG-based e-liquid.
(Inquiring minds might ask: is it "vape pens that trick smokers," [the title] or is it this video which clearly is intended to trick vapers?)
Obviously this video is meant to scare people who are completely ignorant about vaping into believing that the unknowns and potential for overconsumption by vapers (who obviously don't know the first thing about it), are sufficient to send us all running into the therapeutic "arms" of the good Dr. and BP's dreadful billion-dollar excuse for an appealing cessation method.
Nice try, but even adults younger than the two vapers are probably just a tad more sophisticated than this video makes them out to be. (Are the two vapers in the video old enough to drink alcohol??).
Ms. Bolario may have hoodwinked the mainstream American media with her audiotape of Jr. H.S. hallway rumors in her last "youth radio" presentation, but methinks she's going to be a whole lot less successful with this one. Maybe that's because most young adults are more astute than the much-older folks who write and read the mainstream media outlets. Here's the YouTube video, in all its dubious glory: http://www.youtube
.com/watch?v=_ci8KH9fwn4
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette debate smolders over health claims [CBS nat'l news video puts out 11 major falshoods in 132 seconds - 12 seconds each]
(US Nat'l News Network) http://www.youtube
.com/watch?v=NWJKbiw5MP8
http://www.cbsnews
.com/videos/e-cigarette-debate-smolders-over-health-claims/
This one is full of junk, and would be funny to watch if so many viewers didn't realize just how many ludicrous fabrications are jammed into barely three minutes:
a) The moderator begins by saying that "The devices are marketed as [...] a way to quit smoking" [uh, no. But now it's time for our resident oncologist to step in:]
b) None of the other elements besides nicotine in e-liquid have been "studied."
c) While the Dr. does concede that nicotine doesn't cause cancer, he claims that:
d) "we also know that there are carcinogens in here" [in where? the cheap cigAlike that allegedly represents every option?]
e) "one of the chemicals thats in here is polyethelyne glycol, that's the same as antifreeze". Uh, no. First of all, polyethelyne glocol is not the same as diethylene glycol which goes into antifreeze (actually it's a food additive), and obviously polyethelyne glycol is not PG - but wait, there's more:
f) "and so, we know, [emphasis in original] that they don't actually allow people to stop smoking"
g) "85% of the people in a recent questionnaire said that they use these to smoke less, and the data don't actually show that, so we need to be careful."
h) Now the graphic gives us a list of bullet points - first one is "several studies showed no benefit"
i) next bullet point: "may be gateway to smoking real cigarettes"
j) next bullet point: "not approved for smoking cessation" (okay that's the first one which is actually indisputable)
k) next bullet point: "gums, patches & drugs are regulated treatments" (two true staements in a row)
j) after recounting (correctly) what happened with the 2010 lawsuit, the Dr. says: "it's not clear that they can regulate yet" [hmm maybe he's no better at the law]
k) finally, he refuses to say that second hand vapor is any less bad than second hand smoke.
j) There is one additional claim and that is that the original motive for developing them was to "allow socialization of smokers". (Hmm, we knew China was supposed to be a Communist country. I've heard of nationalization, but never "socializing" a human being. Quite the concept.)
Let's see, that's 11 signifcant lies (not counting the last one) packed into two minutes and twelve seconds, for an average of one every 12 seconds.
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes: No smoke, no danger?
(Norris Cotton Cancer Center/Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center) http://www.sciencedaily
.com/releases/2014/04/140402111556.htm
This article contains no citations (not even hints about its sources), nor is it "written" by any named person. To make matters worse, it's full of amorphoous boilerplate generalizations couched in the sort of diction and syntax that one typically finds in science publications. Your Correspondent strongly suspects that the author(s) are simply unwilling to make too many declarative assertions, although they do seem to be certain of a few things that are clearly false, and appear to imply that the use of certain terms such as "e-hookah," "vaporizer pen," and "traditional e-cigarette" (what most of us would refer to as a "cigalike") are standardized. The most salient mistatements are:
1) "No one can say that they are safer than other tobacco products (such as non-combusted tobacco products)." [This is either false if one excludes the parenthesis and takes "other tobacco products" as a reference to the obvious comparision, namely tobacco cigarettes, or or arguably plausible if snus for example is one of the compared items. The mere willingness to group traditional tobacco cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products strikes me as a variety of falsehood - or at least a caveat that renders the entire assertion virtually devoid of useful information.]
2) "Anyone who uses e-cigarettes and continues to use those other [combustable tobacco] products is unlikely to greatly lower their risk of heart attack, cancer, or chronic lung disease." My understanding is that this assertion is correct regarding plumonary consequences, but innacurately misleading with regards to cancer and chronic lung disease: one tobacco cigarette a week in tandem with vaping does not expose the user to the same risk as two packs a day of tobacco cigarettes:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/anti-smoking-advocate-incorrectly-and.html
3) Finally, the assumption is consistently made that nicotine and proplyene glycol are required elements in e-liquid, and this assumption is used to advance a number of conclusions - such as the possibility that PG may be unsafe to inhale over the long term when heated, or that vapers who don't use nicotine are subject to relapse because they're still addicted.
At the end of the day, this is no ANTZ "hit job" by any means. The article does concede that complete combusable cigarette cessation is "safer than smoking," and (by implication) can "greatly lower the risk of heart attack, cancer, and chronic lung disease." But that: "Until we know more about e-cigarettes, these medicinal NRT products, combined with help from quit counselors or friends and family who have quit can help you become a non-smoker without tackling the remaining questions of e-cigarette safety."
Hence the author(s) appear to (mostly) arrive the same place at which vaping advocates end up, with the exception of their incorrect characterization of dual users. But this is done in a very unsatisfying manner - via misleading, ambiguous, unsourced and sometimes completely incorrect generalizations.
Title: Veteran E-Cigarette Users Fret Cloud Chasers Give Them a Bad Name
(US Nat'l news mag) http://www.newsweek
.com/veteran-e-cigarette-users-fret-cloud-chasers-give-them-bad-name-238978
No junk. Sounds familiar?
"Cynthia Cabrera, executive director of the Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association, warned several dozen vapers in her legal and political education workshop about being 'your own worst enemy' with careless exhalation, especially at public meetings. 'Please stop going to these meetings and blowing these huge billow[ing] clouds of vapor,' she said as a sweet, strawberry-scented haze drifted through the conference room at the Hyatt Dulles, an airport hotel outside of Washington, D.C. 'Have respect for the people that don't know what the products are and are afraid of them.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Title: New Device Allows Cigar Smokers to Sample Blends Before Online Purchase
(Some marketing firm's web site) http://www.prweb
.com/releases/famous-smoke-shop/personal-cigar-tester/prweb11722406.htm
I have no idea how this thing works, but it might be similar to a PV that dynamically mixes different kinds of flavors in various proportions:
"You simply select the cigar you want to sample, plug the ePCT base module into an available USB port on your laptop or desktop, and as you puff, the device then mixes the solution to match the exact flavor profile." No junk.
Title: E-Cigarettes: Friend or Foe for the LGBT Communities?
(US Nat'l news site) http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/scout-phd/e-cigarettes-friend-or-foe_b_5024583.html
I'm doing to do this one tomorrow. It's deceptively horrendous because it's written by a member of a group that suffers societal discrimination, in a way that's intended to appeal to others in that community. However in its own way, it's just as bad as many typical pieces penned by MDs who presume that they're experts on the subject of vaping, merely because they're physicians. I'll explain the parallels tomorrow.
---
US: CONNECTICUT
[Repust due to republication - original review 3/25]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: THEIR VIEW: FDA should stop sales of e-cigs to minors
(Bristol CT US local paper) http://www.bristolpress
.com/articles/2014/04/01/opinion/doc533a27360870c438906126.txt
Title: Editorial: FDA must regulate e-cigarettes, liquid nicotine [Editorial]
(New Haven CT US local paper)
This editorial denies that there's any evidence of cessation value, and as usual conflates poison control center calls with results.
'But a report in Monday's New York Times makes this issue even more of an imminent threat to health and safety. The liquid nicotine that is vaporized and inhaled is in fact a strong neurotoxin that can lead to serious and even lethal poisoning if ingested through the skin. The Times quoted a poison control director in California as saying, 'It's not a matter of if a child will be seriously poisoned or killed. It's a matter of when.' . Poisonings from liquid nicotine rose 300 percent between 2012 and 2013, reported the Times, based on information from the National Poison Data System. Even small amounts can lead to serious poisoning. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]
[ CT 24 (proposed by gov) minor sales ban - still in joint cmte on children? HB 5286 - burdensome labelling requirements whose purposes is to "destroy the e-cig industry" (Bill Godshall): http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...contents-nicotine-yield-hearing-feb-28-a.html ]
---
US: NEW JERSEY
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Christie's proposed e-cigarette tax is for public health, state treasurer says [and opponents legitimatly cite hypocrisy]
(Newark NJ US local paper) http://www.nj
.com/politics/index.ssf/2014/04/christies_proposed_e-cigarette_tax_is_for_public_health_state_treasurer_says.html
Here's the only junk:
"'Our goal is to achieve rough parity with the tax burden on conventional cigarettes. Why? Our main concern is public health,' [state Treas.] Sidamon-Eristoff said at an Assembly Budget Committee hearing today. 'Contrary to the claims of some users, e-cigarettes have not been shown to be a safe' alternative to regular cigarettes. Nor are they a proven path to smoking cessation.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
[Which is another way of saying that either they're recreational or they have a proven benefit. Since the cessation benefit isn't considered proven (unlike the patch), they need to be taxed. But of course, as the article suggests, the health argument is completely hypocritical, as several critics point out in the article. Also see CFTFK report, next.
[ 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
Also, Gov. Christie says he wants to tax vaping at the same rate as analogs, and S1867 has been introduced in the Sen. for that purpose:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ual-2-70-pack-cigarette-tax.html#post12450301
And:
CASAA: Call to Action! New Jersey's Governor Christie is Proposing a Tax on E-Cigarettes at the Same Rate as Combustible Cigarettes (Significantly UPDATED 3-27-14) ]
Title: National report ranks New Jersey last for efforts to control tobacco use by children
(Manalapan NJ small local paper collection site) http://em.gmnews
.com/news/2014-04-03/Front_Page/National_report_ranks_New_Jersey_last_for_efforts_.html
Perhaps Karen Blumenfeld and GASP should spend more of their time lobbying Gov. Christie to act against tobacco cigarette smoking, and a bit less to fight the completely misguided WAV (War Against Vaping).
[Oh, never mind. On second thought, if NJ spent more money on tobacco programs, it would be used against vaping.]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Growing popularity of e-cigs creates new culture of 'vapers'
(Newark NJ US local paper) http://www.nj
.com/news/index.ssf/2014/04/hot_topic_growing_popularity_of_e-cigs_creates_a_whole_new_culture_of_vapers.html
How refreshing it is to see a piece that's free of all the usual lies and distortions. IMO, the writer and editors should be congratulated!
This is the Newark-based Star-Ledger, probably the most moderate NJ local paper that I've seen (no comparison to the rabidly anti-vaping Woodbury based South Jersey times. So the almost complete absence of junk and remarkably sympathetic portrayal of vaping in this coverage of vape club meeting comes as something less than a total surprise. Here are a couple of interesting highlights:
"Assembly Budget Committee Chairman Gary Schaer (D-Passaic) said he understands the angst [expressed by vapers regarding the looming threat of a tax]. He's a smoker who's reduced his consumption of cigarettes via vaping. 'Most smokers would prefer to be ex-smokers in any way, shape or form,' said Schaer. 'I'm sympathetic to the citizens who came to speak about the e-cigarette issue, but I'm equally sympathetic to the needs of other groups that have spoken with regard to our policy regarding children and seniors and the disabled.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
And later, of course we find the expected comments from health officials. As always, they assume that vaping implies the use of nicotine (which makes the gateway argument so much stronger):
"'Our concern is the availability of electronic cigarettes to children, especially children on the Internet, especially children on the Internet who have money,' said Robert Lahita, chairman of medicine at Newark Beth Israel Medical Center. 'They buy the multi-flavored electronic cigarettes, and at 10 years old, they're smoking these things and becoming dependent on nicotine. As the child gets older, reaches the age of 18, they switch over to regular cigarettes to continue the nicotine habit.'[para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
---
US: MARYLAND
Title: E-cigarette store owners plan College Park cafe, retail shop
(U MD College Park MD US student paper) http://www.diamondbackonline
.com/news/local/article_61e1150e-ba18-11e3-ace6-0017a43b2370.html
Three UMD graduating cigarette smoking (now vaping) students to open local vape shop. Not a syllable of junk in this student-written article. And unlike Oak Park Chicago (as reported in this space on 3/28), it seems that a new business will be very much welcomed by the community:
"College Park Economic Development Coordinator Michael Stiefvater said the store will provide a unique service that will attract more consumers to the city. 'It's nice to diversify our stores a little bit,' Stiefvater said. 'Especially by bringing a nonrestaurant, those that visit the store will support the restaurants around it.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Now that's what I call economic development. And help for tobacco cigarette smokers who wish to quit or cut down, but who don't know quite how/where to start with vaping. A healthier economy, a healthier community. What's not to like?
[ There appear to be no threats in MD at the moment. ]
---
US: FLORIDA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Summit aims at snuffing out teen interest in e-cigs [tax dollars at work to fight vaping]
(Gainesville FL US local paper) http://www.gainesville
.com/article/20140401/ARTICLES/140409972/-1/rssphotogallery
Reporter attended the "6th Annual Rural Tobacco Summit" during which a 75-minute presentation entitled "Electronic Cigarettes"
"Dr. Barry Hummel, a pediatrician who established the Quit Doc Research and Education Foundation in 2006 to work on youth tobacco and prevention, said the celebrity shots and other ads make e-cigarettes acceptable. 'It undoes years of hard work by having (cigarettes) back in public view,' Hummel said. The availability and advertisement of e-cigarettes also makes it harder for people who are trying to quit smoking, he added. That's because e-cigarettes are pitched as a safe and convenient alternative. 'The moments of inconvenience are actually what make people give (smoking) up altogether,' he said. [...] The reality is that so far, there is only anecdotal evidence that e-cigarettes may be harmful: the rare instances when they've blown up in peoples' faces, causing them to lose teeth and parts of their tongue are at the extreme of what experts suspect may be more chronic damage, not just to smokers, but second-hand smokers. That's because e-cigarettes do contain some nicotine: in the liquid that an atomizer heats up, turning it into vapor. Propylene glycol is one example [of unsafe substances which may be included], which is approved as a food additive and present in flavorings but is not safe to inhale in the form of fruit-flavored e-cigarettes, Hummel continued. However, Hummel added that it will likely take 10-20 years for these health problems -- namely pulmonary and cardiovascular ailments -- to emerge. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
To put it another way: the Dr. knows that vaping is dangerous, even though he can't prove it. And he's doing everything he can to make sure that smokers don't consider vaping as a form of cessation or harm reduction - neither of which is mentioned in the article. The "summit" - paid for with your tax dollars - was attended by "60 health care professionals."
[ FL simple minor ban, SB 224 has passed the sen. and is ready for the house. HB 169 appears to be identical. Also see:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...would-block-electronic-cigarettes-minors.html ]
---
US: VIRGINIA
Title: E-cigarettes to be sold at Va. Beach jail canteen
(AP) http://wavy
.com/2014/04/01/e-cigarettes-to-be-sold-at-va-beach-jail-canteen/
Despite the misleading photo, the PVs in question are quite likely the tamper-proof CrossBars, developed by a KY corrections officer (see the 2/19, 2/25, and 3/20 media roundups). While public health officials and idiotic politicians everywhere are grandstanding against the evils of nicotine, corrections officers who have to deal with real problems understand that it has a calming effect that could save lives. We'll see whether some brain-dead local official decides to substitute their judgement for that of the Sheriff, and ban them in all gov't facilities - as has already occured in Gage Co. NE (see 3/20 report).
[ H218 simple minor sales ban is ready for Gov's sig. If you know anything about the other bills proposed in VA, please PM me. Also see these possibly not-current threads: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...cts-alternative-nicotine-products-minors.html *and* http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-bill-hb-26-would-ban-e-cig-sales-minors.html ]
---
US: WEST VIRGINIA
Title: W.Va. health boards weighing e-cigarette bans [Harrison Co., Barbour Co. & Hancock Co. vaping=smoking clean indoor air act extensions recommended by state health official]
(Clarksburg WV US local paper) http://wvpress
.org/news/w-va-health-boards-weighing-e-cigarette-bans/
Article explains that WV lacks a statewide clean indoor air act, but relies on county and city level health boards to make these decisions. It appears that vaping=smoking bans are either being considered or all-but-inevitable for Harrison Co/Clarksburg City, and Barbour Co. based on presentations and recommendations from the state health Dep't:
"There has been preliminary research done, and it was found that some particulate matter and substances are released during use of e-cigarettes, according to Bruce Adkins, director of the Division of Tobacco Prevention for the West Virginia Bureau for Public Health. The matter would be dangerous to public health. 'Our stance is, until we know more about these products, we have to consider them not yet proven to be safe,' he said. Adkins said caution about the unknown hazards and many national organizations' recommendations are why some health departments are looking to ban them. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Also see this CASAA call on Hancock co.:
Title: Local Alert! Hancock County, West Virginia - E-Cigarette Usage Ban
CASAA: Local Alert! Hancock County, West Virginia - E-Cigarette Usage Ban
[ WV's HB 4237 has passed house. Curiously this simple minor ban. Includes NRT stuff like lozenges & gum. ]
---
US: ALABAMA
Title: Non-smoker opens electronic cigarette store
(Anniston AL US local paper) http://www.annistonstar
.com/view/full_story/24852561/article-Non-smoker-opens-electronic-cigarette-store
Completely junk-free report on new local vape shop. No politicians or local health officials were quoted. What a relief.
[ AL's legislature will not be back in session until 2015. ]
---
US: INDIANA
Title: Safer cigarette?
(Kokomo IN US local paper) http://www.kokomotribune
.com/local/x1387898810/Safer-cigarette
Profile of a local vape shop that's existed since 2011. Story continues with interviews with local school students and officials. There are some mildly-troubling parts of it, for example this expression of opinion by the reporter, which leads to the expected quotes from various local officials associated with youth antismoking efforts:
"With liquid nicotine coming in flavors like cotton candy, gummy bear, Mountain Dew and Red Bull, it's not hard to see why students might want to try vaping. Shirley Dubois, Howard County Tobacco Coalition coordinator, and Rob Pruett, coordinator of the Mayors Youth Council on Substance Abuse Prevention, see these types of flavors, colorful packaging of certain e-cig products and other marketing strategies as directly targeting youth. 'We feel like all we've conquered in getting rid of the Marlboro Man and cartoons [selling tobacco products] ... is a little defeated,' Dubois said. 'With their marketing, because it's not regulated, they can do this. We feel this is marketing to the youth.' Dubois and Pruett view e-cigs as a 'gateway' to conventional cigarettes, which contain harmful chemicals. Both e-cigs and conventional tobacco products contain nicotine, which is extremely addictive. [...] 'Studies may not call it the gateway, but it's definitely not seen as a cessation tool for kids,' said Pruett, who also oversees Voice, a youth-led anti-tobacco initiative. 'Nicotine is one of the most addictive substances known to man, and marketing that to kids is not OK.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Of course this is the standard argument that kids are being targeted due to the mere existence of certain flavors.
The story also mentions some of Blu's ads, and cites CDC minor stats but (thankfully) says "The National Youth Tobacco Survey did not specify which type of cigarette those students tried first."
The Vape shop owner does a good job of defending himself by pointing out that vaping is too expensive for kids and that kids will do whatever adults will do.
The story seems to imply that most of the problem has to do w/ the internet, and there's no evidence that local officials are planning to pass a vaping=smoking ordinance, or any other form of (e.g.) zoning or licensing regulation.
[ Indiana passed a simple minor sales ban last year. Indiana's HB 1174 proposes to tax vaping in the same way as tobacco (24% of wholesale), it's still in Ways & Means. See: HB 1174: Taxation of electronic cigarettes. Amends the definition of tobacco product to include electronic cigarettes for purposes of the tobacco products tax. Hoosier Vapers and http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...5-hb-1174-taxation-electronic-cigarettes.html ]
---
US: ILLINOIS
Title: Electronic cigarette bill advances to state Senate
(AP) http://www.wistv
.com/story/25140778/electronic-cigarette-bill-advances-to-state-senate
HB 5868 unanimously passed the House. This requires that smokeless tobacco products be placed behind the counter (unlike combustible cigarettes), which may pose a problem for vape shops. Howver this bill was ammended to exempt retailers that do not allow minors in the store, according to this ECF thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...counter-exempts-tobacco-specialty-stores.html
---
US: MINNESOTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Editorial counterpoint: E-cigarette fright is uninformed
(Twin Cities MN US local paper) http://www.startribune
.com/opinion/commentaries/253468501.html
This is a fairly strong refutation to a dreadful Star Trib editorial, my only complaint is that it was written by a tobacco lobbyist (and will therefore likely have less effect). IMO this paper is in the dubious company of the S. Jersey times and the SacBee as one of the most anti-vaping local papers in the nation, so perhaps the editors intentionally chose to select a tobacco lobbyist's piece, on the grounds that his status would make it easy for readers to dismiess it. Obviously it contains no junk.
[ The situation in MN is murky, but for now it appears that if Gov. Dayton holds firm, that there will be no addition anti-vaping legislation passed this year. ]
---
US: TEXAS
Title: Administrators, students grapple with e-cigarettes
(Tarrant Co. College paper, Hurst TX US) http://collegian.tccd
.edu/?p=20059
Consists mostly of comments from students, which are entirely positive, except for one student who says that she's worried about minor use. The only negative comment comes from one staffer, described as Student Development Assistant Leah Hawkins says: "'It does bother me,' she said. 'I am a nonsmoker, and I raised a family of nonsmokers. So I would like to see the same policy put in place as other tobacco products.'"
(In other words, she's "bothered" by the fact that it's a "tobacco product." One would think that she would've gone out of her way to make a more specific comment about her experience as a bystander, had she something to say on that score. Few people seem to be bashful about expressing such opinions.
Article also contains a survey of some local TX campuses. As far as Your Correspondent knows, TX is the only state in the country in which vaping is allowed on college campuses. Most other US campuses have banned vaping on all campus property, in order to either take advantage of funding sources or to promote "health."
[ TX's legislature will not be back in session until 2015, unless Gov. Perry calls a special session. ]
---
US: NEBRASKA
Title: E-Cigarette Use Rising in Teens
(Kearney Nebraska US ABC affiliate) http://www.nebraska
.tv/story/25135696/e-cigarette-use-rising-in-teens
Apparently NE's LB863 (formerly 861, as its incorrectly id'd in this report) is not yet ready for the Gov Heineman's signature, as both this space - as well as several NE outlets - reported. Turns out that it's waiting for its final reading.
Local Tobacco Free Hall County Prevention Coordinator Sandy Yager also alleges that vaping has no cessation value and that:
"studies coming out now are finding formaldehyde and ammonia in e-cigarettes. She said the nicotine can be even more dangerous. 'Right now it's causing a lot of overdosing with youth and adults because it's easier to consume more nicotine with an electronic cigarette,' said Yager. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
(Either we have a sloppy reporter or a very stupid county employee.) To the reporter's credit, however, the last line does indicate that nicotine-free e-liquid is available. (Which means the reporter knows something that would be news to virtually all MDs and scientests who opine and/or do research in this area.)
---
US: ARIZONA
Title: E-cigarette smokers are chasing clouds
(Phoenix AZ US local paper) http://www.azcentral
.com/story/money/business/2014/04/01/e-cigarette-smokers-are-chasing-clouds-lm-biz/7158733/
To my utter astonishment, there isn't a single syllable in this piece about minor vaping, "unknown" health effects, poison center calls, the unregulated status of vaping, nor nary a lonely solitary quote by a "concerned" local health professional with "fears," or a rabid Tobacco Control Industry (e.g. ALA) representative (or any Tobacco Control Industry rep., for that matter).
Nothing like that - zero, zip, nada.
It's completely devoted to a vape store at which a local vaper's club teaches classes in how to sub-ohm and generally have fun by producing large nic-free "clouds." (In fact the nic-free point is made both by the writer and in quotes from the store owner.)
Did I say there was no junk?
[ No threats exist in AZ at the moment. ]
---
US: NEVADA
Title: University Announces Plan to Go Tobacco-Free in 2015
(Reno NV US CBS affiliate) http://www.ktvn
.com/story/25121385/university-announces-plan-to-go-tobacco-free-in-2015
UNLV will have a "tobacco free" campus starting next year. Although the article doesn't mention vaping, it's hard to believe that vaping isn't included in the ban, which will apply (naturally) to every square inch of university property, including privately-owned vehicles that are at UNLV:
"'Throughout the past several years, the University has made important progress in linking the mind, body and spirit' of our students by developing programming and physical infrastructure that emphasizes health and well-being,' University President Marc Johnson said. 'Our commitment to improve the health of our community, campus, students, faculty and staff is the impetus behind the initiative to create a tobacco-free environment.' In a joint letter sent to students, faculty and staff, representatives of the campus organizations offered more reasoning behind their endorsement for the Tobacco-Free University policy:
[...] 'We feel it is imperative that our University environment reflect the health-based principles of a modern land-grant institution that is home to the state's medical school as well as a nationally recognized research portfolio that includes efforts in medical, behavioral and social research aimed at improving the lives and health throughout our community, our state and the world. The health risks associated with tobacco use and secondhand smoke are well-known. Adopting a Tobacco-Free University policy is a significant way to improve health and demonstrate values that are in line with the research and academic mission of this University.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
In other words, tobacco use is dangerous, ergo vaping is too. "A cigarette is a cigarette is a cigarette (even if it contains no nicotine and doesn't burn anything)."
[ No threats exist in AZ at the moment. ]
---
US: CALIFORNIA
Title: Encinitas enacts e-cigarette restrictions
(San Diego CA US local paper) http://www.utsandiego
.com/news/2014/apr/01/ecigarette-policy-encinitas/
The vaping=smoking ban will establish a 20 foot perimter around parks, trails, or open-air restaurants.
"Saying people were 'slow' to react to the dangers of tobacco decades ago, Mayor Teresa Barth said during a discussion at Wednesday night's council meeting that she didn't want to make the same mistake now with electronic cigarettes and that's why she was supporting changing the ordinance. Councilman Tony Kranz said electronic cigarette users may stress that their new devices are 'smoke-free,' but said he didn't want to be exposed to the vapor. Councilwoman Kristin Gaspar said she had horrible allergies and can't be around smoke. She said she's not opposed to people using the electric devices --- she wishes her cigarette-smoking brother would make the switch. However, she added, she supports the new restrictions, saying there should be 'some boundaries with the devices.'[para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
[ 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 ]
Title: The Vaping Craze
(Santa Cruz local free weekly) http://www.gtweekly
.com/index.php/santa-cruz-news/santa-cruz-local-news/5532-the-vaping-craze-.html
Report on a local vape shop. But not just any - Beyond Vape has four existing outlets, three of which are in California, and one in Manhattan (two more are planned), and has developed its own proprietary MODS. Owner Wen Wei has been working in the industry since the FDA's vaping ban was overturned in 2010:
"In 2010, he and his partners began work on an e-cigarette product with design and function standards high enough to stand out in the newly competitive U.S. market. After 'two to three years of development' and selecting only the 'best manufacturers' to partner with, Beyond Vape was born. In May 2013, they opened their first retail store in Los Angeles. 'L.A. is the mecca of e-cigarettes,' Wei says. 'We didnt want to get into the online market because theres just too much crap out there. When you buy online you take a huge risk. The retail revolution really legitimized the product. It gives people the opportunity to taste and try the product.' [para break omitted]"
This space reported the Santa Cruz City Council decision to ban indoor/outdoor vaping in the 3/25 roundup, here's a quick recap for those of you who are curious about the depressingly-familiar rationales:
"[...] on Tuesday, March 25, the Santa Cruz City Council unanimously voted to treat e-cigarettes like combustible cigarettes, joining 40 other California cities in regulating the emerging technology like traditional tobacco. Councilmember Pamela Comstock cited the product's unknown health impact, perceived marketing to children and potential to create a new generation of smokers as the primary reasons to update the ordinance to include e-cigarettes."
"Lynn Lauridsen agrees with the decision. A member of the Santa Cruz Tobacco Education Coalition, Lauridsen believes the current 'glamorous' marketing of e-cigarettes and the wide assortment of available flavors such as chocolate, cotton candy and piña colada, have a direct impact on luring youth into potential nicotine addiction. [actually she's a city employee who works for the health dep't, not a volunteer]
'They are rapidly gaining popularity with young people,' Lauridsen says. 'And the marketing is sending a lot of mixed messages. They look like cigarettes and deliver nicotine like cigarettes, but Beyond Vape's radio ads make them sound like a smoking cessation tool. There's no scientific proof that they help people quit smoking. The bottom line is we don't want to see smoking re-normalized.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
(Catch that? Because there is "no scientific proof" that vaping is a cessation tool, it logically follows that vaping is renormalizing smoking.
Incidently, after speaking with a salesperson in one of their four outlets (two more coming soon), I determined that they do sell 0% nicotine e-liquid. But of course, to the ANTZ: No proof of cessation = renormalizing smoking since nicotine = smoking.
Wei remains philsophical about the whole thing, despite being singled out by the city health dep't (see above quote):
"Wei has no problem being lumped in with traditional cigarettes for now. He believes it is the e-cigarette industry's responsibility--not the government's--to educate the public about the differences between vaping and smoking. 'Anyone can see that our products and cigarettes are entirely different,' Wei says. 'If they're going to regulate us in the same way, fine. We welcome any kind of regulation because it forces manufacturers to produce a better product and ultimately evolves the industry.' [para break omitted]"
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Daly City considers regulations on electronic cigarettes
(SF CA US local paper) http://www.sfexaminer
.com/sanfrancisco/daly-city-considers-regulations-on-electronic-cigarettes/Content?oid=2751139
Some of you may recall from a 3/15 report in this space that the mayor of Daly City CA is a strong opponent of vaping, who has indicated that he wants to shut down the vape shops, on the grounds that the present a danger to minors. Dr. Seigel discussed the hipocrisy of doing this in a city with nearly 100 places that sell tobacco cigarettes, many of whom are known to have sold to minors:
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/03/daly-city-mayor-wants-to-shut-down.html
Not surprisingly, the situation hasn't improved in the last two weeks or so: "At the request of Councilman Mike Guingona, Mayor David Canepa recently authorized a special subcommittee to study the issue. Joining Guingona on the subcommittee is Vice Mayor Carol Klatt [...]A leading concern in the local push to regulate e-cigarettes is secondhand smoke. Guingona has previously collaborated with the nonprofit Breathe California Golden Gate Public Health Partnership on its anti-smoking initiatives, and he has advocated for amending the citys secondhand smoke ordinance to prohibit e-cigarette smoking in locations where tobacco smoking is prohibited. Canepa is also in favor of such an amendment. 'Not enough is known about the potential health effects of using these products, and Im not satisfied that theyre as safe as their proponents make them out to be,' Guingona said."
Even worse: "San Mateo Police Chief Susan Manheimer said although its illegal to sell e-cigarettes to people under 18 years of age, police recently caught two local merchants allegedly selling the products to minors. The vaporizers can also be used to smoke illegal drugs, such as h@sh 0il and the recently outlawed synthetic drug commonly referred to as spice, she said. Manheimer further noted that in many cases, vape retailers also sell other types of smoke shop paraphernalia."
There's no word on a timetable for action, but things don't look good.
Title: It's confusing out there for e-cig smokers
(Orange Co. CA US local paper) http://www.ocregister
.com/articles/cigarettes-607966-city-cities.html
This survey of local Orange Co. Cities' policies on indoor/outdoor vaping makes the situation sound more complicated than it really is. In fact, just one city in Orange county has actually rejected a vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban:
CASAA: Laguna Beach council uses common sense, refuses to ban e-cigarettes
This junk-free piece indicates that San Clemente and Luna Niguel are currently at risk. Vapers who live in Orange County are strongly advised to do some googling, join a local vaper's organization (and/or CASAA). No junk.
Title: New Fears Push More California e-Cigarette Bans
(CA gov't reporting site - partnered with SacBee) http://www.publicceo
.com/2014/04/new-fears-push-more-california-e-cigarette-bans/
This is a rather uninformative survey article - similar to the above - although it contains no junk and does mention CASAA. There seems to be more of an emphasis here on explaining the rationales behind the tsunami of vaping=smoking ordinances (as well as moratoriums on new vape shops). However the writer appears to think that secondhand vaping is the issue. As readers of this space know, the most common rationale has to do with "renormalizing smoking," and/or "protecting minors," and/or not "repeating the mistakes of the past." Or to put it another way, it seems as if virtually every elected official in these CA counties and municipalities is bent on assuming that vaping is just as dangerous to everyone as tobacco cigarette smoking, even if proven otherwise.
***
GOOGLE TIPS
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.)
Last edited:
