CASAA PRESIDENT ELAINE KELLER STEPS DOWN
CASAA President Elaine Keller is retiring, after guiding CASAA for the last 2-1/2 years, i.e. for the majority of its history (since its founding in 2009). ECF members know Elaine as Vocalek.
I'd like to humbly thank Elaine for her tireless efforts on behalf of our right to vape, as well as the larger cause of harm reduction. I sincerely believe that she and CASAA have saved and enhanced the quality of many lives, by combating ignorant, unscientific and perhaps even downright mean-spirited efforts to limit the ability of combustible tobacco users to avail themselves of better alternatives to smoking pipes, cigars, and cigarettes - and in many cases quitting all use of nicotine products.
Elaine will be suceeded by CASAA's very able legislative director, Julie Woessner. See:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/the-passing-of-torch-message-from-out.html
Please join me by replying to this post with your thanks to Elaine, your best wishes to Julie, and your heartfelt thanks to CASAA for all that has been done on our behalf. (BTW if someone wants to post something on another Forum, you have my blessings ;-) ... I don't think many rank-and-file ECF members quite understand what Elaine and CAsAA have done for all of us.)
***
MEDIA ROUNDUP FOR 4/3/14 - 4/6/14
[ Just paste broken links shown in purple directly into your browser - the extra line doesn't matter. Pls. PM me if you have more recent info. about proposed/actual legislation, if you think I've missed an important story, or if you want more tweaks to the formatting program. ]
As many of you may have guessed, I got a little off track as a result of all the poison stories. I'm going to do a double-update today, so I can get fully caught up. Hopefully the next barrage of media stories won't be coming for a while. As I've noted in another post, US vapers are facing a well-organized professionally-run issue-oriented campaign. Vaping opponents will need to either take their case to the US Congress very soon, or temporarily suspend their onslaught of junk science and alarmist hysteria-mongering until the end of the summer. (I believe a well-known American political strategist once said something about how difficult it was to market a war over the summer holidays.)
1) Recent critical state legislative updates - NY, OH, IL. Check legislation forum or see below for CASAA call to action links and ECF thread links: NY - SB 3969 introduced to ban the sale of e-liquid; OH - HB 472 introduced to cover Kasich's massive tax increase; and IL - HB 5689 which would ban the sale of e-liquids until the health dep't issues regulations.
2) Vote in St. Joseph MO tomorrow on referendum to extend clean indoor air act to ban vaping, see:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/local-alert-st-joseph-missouri-april-8.html
3) Hancock Co. IN hearing tomorrow on Bd's (prior) decision to interpret co.'s clean indoor air act to cover vaping. Would also ban outdoor vaping in certain areas, and establish a perimeter around doorways.
4) City of Del Mar CA hearing tomorrow on second reading of extension of city clean indoor air act to cover vapiing. Would also ban outdoor vaping in certain areas, and establish a perimeter around doorways. Del Mar is also looking at a ban on vaping in multi-unit apartments.
5) Yolo Co. CA (and City of Davis) looking at vaping=smoking extensions to their clean indoor air acts.
6) NJ's A1080 passes assembly, ready for NJ senate. Would ban vaping on public beaches, parks, etc. Statute was originally justified as a litter control and fire prevention measure, but ammended on the house (assembly) floor to cover vaping.
7) Reaction to proposal by Health Min. Drakeford to ban indoor vaping in Wales continues.
8) Something's going on in Coconino Co. AZ (Flagstaff area), but the AZ Sun pulled the story. Area vapers are encouraged to inquire - this seems to have something to do with a vaping=smoking ord. that covers unincorp'd areas of the co.
Coverage: Turkey; UK (nat'l/Wales); Canada, US States: MA, NY, NJ, PA, NC, FL, OH, IN, IL, TX, NE, AZ, CA
Also: CASAA presentation to FDA listening session in SD CA; ANR tries to defame non-BT cigAlike co.s and vaper orgs; questions about the Nutt et al. paper published in European Addiction Research; Clive Bates' response to CAP's advertising directive, and much more by Dr. Phillips, Gary Cox, and Dr. Siegel.
***
STUDIES, BLOGS, ETC.
Title: CASAA presents at FDA listening session in San Diego
(CASAA's site)
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/casaa-presents-at-fda-listening-session.html
Transcript of presentation by CASAA President Elaine Keller and Scientific Director Carl Phillips at the FDA's Office of Science in the Center for Tobacco Products in San Diego, on Friday 4/4.
Title: Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights Disseminating Misleading and Potentially Defamatory Statements About Electronic Cigarette Groups
(Dr. Siegel's Blog)
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/americans-for-nonsmokers-rights.html
Americans for Nonsmokers Rights attempts to smear vaping cigAlike manufacturers and vaping advocacy groups with the legacy of Big Tobacco.
Title: Please don’t cite the new Nutt et al. paper as evidence for tobacco harm reduction
(C.V. Phillips' blog)
http://antithrlies.com/2014/04/05/please-dont-cite-the-new-nutt-et-al-paper-as-evidence-for-thr/
Dr. Phillips explains why a recent paper entitled Estimating the Harms of Nicotine-Containing Products Using the MCDA Approach published in the Journal European Addiction Research used potentially flawed methods to estimate harm reduction.
Title: RCP Renews E-Cig Advocacy
(ECF's InfoZone)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/rcp-renews-e-cig-advocacy.html
Gary Cox analyzes a recent paper from the Royal College of Physicians, which has also been discussed at ECF here:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ou-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes.html
Title: As Calls to Poison Control Centers Increase, FDA Still Hasn't Released Electronic Cigarette Regulations
(Dr. Siegel's blog)
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/as-calls-to-poison-control-centers.html
Dr. Siegel on the recent media blitz by the CDC (in tandem with its hysteria-mongering press release) over calls to poison control centers regarding e-liquid and other reports of adverse outcomes related to vaping.
Title: 1% of French Population Switches to Vapes!
(ECF's InfoZone)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/1-french-population-switches-vapes.html
Gary Cox analyzes the remarkable amount of smoking cessation due to vaping reported in France, first reported on C.V. Phillips' blog last week.
Title: Why using the term 'ENDS' [Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems] for e-cigarettes is unwise and unethical
(C.V. Phillips' blog)
http://antithrlies.com/2014/04/07/why-using-the-term-ends-is-unethical/
Dr. Phillips explains why he believes that "ENDS" is an acronym that vapers should avoid using.
Title: Ottawa Fumes While Canada Vapes On
(ECF's InfoZone)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/ottawa-fumes-canada-vapes.html
Gary Cox on the strange situation in Canada - a kind of "don't ask, but do tell" modus vivendi in which the sale of vaping equipment and supplies is technically illegal, but effetively tolerated. Gary analyzes a story out of Ottawa about a vape vendor, which is also covered briefly below in the Canada area.
Title: E-cigarette advertising code consultation
(Clive Bates' Blog)
http://www.clivebates.com/?p=2091
Clive Bates' response to the UK CAP's (Committee on Advertising Practices) consultation document on PV advertising which was released in late Feb.
***
TURKEY
Title: SMOKING KILLS - DOES "VAPING" DO THE SAME?
(Nat'l paper based in Istanbul) http://www.dailysabah
.com/columns/halit-yerebakan/2014/04/06/smoking-kills-does-vaping-do-the-same
It's not clear whether the MD who wrote this piece was trying to do a hit job on vaping, or explain why combustible cigarettes are particularly unhealthy. The article seems to bounce back and forth between the two, although it does tell us that VG "contains nicotine" (possibly a badly-written sentence: what was probably meant was that VG-based e-liquid contains nic.), cites FDA '09 (he missed the diethelyne glycol and went for the formaldehyde), and blithely asserts that vaping is "market[ed] to nonsmokers, especially teenagers." That said, the good Dr. is no expert on how to write an anti-vaping piece, and appears to have very little desire to do so - certainly not by comparison to the the MDs here in the states who are normally hired for just that purpose. In a country that appears to have one of the highest rates of tobacco smoking on the planet, that's probably a good thing.
***
UK NATIONAL
Title: The e-cigarettes phenomenon
(BBC) http://www.bbc
.com/news/uk-26852649
For a survey article in a "health" section, this one is incredibly tame - almost postive. That's especially significant because "health" reporters often have some kind of health industry background, and share the usual biases reflected by medical professionals all over the world. The sole questionable assertion in this entire piece is that "e-cigarettes contain nicotine [emphasis added]."
Title: The rise of the e-cigarette
(UK Nat'l Paper) http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/technology/technology-topics/10741828/The-rise-of-the-e-cigarette.html
Another survey article that contains essentially no junk. It's hard to imagine a US national paper.
Title: Would you work with electronic cigarette brands?
(UK mkting trade 'zine) http://www.mediaweek
.co.uk/article/1288382/work-electronic-cigarette-brands
First sentence:
"Agencies that are tempted to explore the burgeoning e-cigarette market face an ethical dilemma, David Benady writes.
Because we all know that e-cigarettes are a net negative to society, right? One has to wonder whether BP's tentacles have managed to penetrate into the UK advertising industry. Or does one?
---
UK: WALES
Title: Proposal to ban use of electronic cigarettes indoors sparks angry backlash
(UK Nat'l paper) http://www.mirror
.co.uk/news/uk-news/proposal-ban-use-electronic-cigarettes-3342480
This extremely brief exchange between an ASH Wales rep. and a rep. of Quit.org contains two surprising attributes, at least from a US perspective.
1) ASH Wales CEO Elen De Lacy says:
"The use of e-cigarettes in smoke-free places could 're-normalise' smoking. This may undermine public health efforts to deter young people from getting addicted. It is vital we ensure adult e-cigarette users who are trying to reduce their harm from tobacco are not treated in the same way as those who smoke conventional cigarettes. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Since ASH Wales does support the "medicalizing" of vaping (PVs available by prescription only, similar to nic. inhalers), I believe what's being said here is that "medical" PVs should be usable indoors. If so, this is basically the same stance that corresponding US organizations have on nicotine inhalers.
2) Quit.org opposes the ban. It seems to have a number of local NHS supporters, as well as the British Heart Foundation, and several BP firms (including Glaxo and Pfizer).
I'm finding this a bit difficult to comprehend, but my best guess is that these large BP firms anticipate enhanced profits from "medicalized" cigALikes, and would therefore prefer that cessation therapy patients can use them indoors.
Title: Craziness of the e-cigarette health police: 'Nanny state' Welsh Assembly considers ban in public paces
(UK Nat'l paper) http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/health/article-2595670/Craziness-e-cigarette-health-police-Nanny-state-Welsh-Assembly-considers-ban-public-spaces.html#ixzz2xqlHlwgh
Junk-free diatribe by columnist Stephen Robinson.
Title: Ban on E-cigarette Smoking May Be Warranted
(BP funded "newsmax" style health site) http://www.emaxhealth
.com/8782/ban-e-cigarette-smoking-may-be-warranted
This is a fairly good example of what BP is saying about the proposal by Health Min. Drakeford, which just happens to take all of its talking points from the US-based non-industry-sponsored Consumer Reports.
It's not an exaggeration to say that it was likely written in about 5 minutes. This space reviewed the underlying C-U article on the 28th. As with all claims about "second hand vapor," what we heard were context free lists of ingredients that it "was found to contain" without any description of concentration or comparitive analysis.
***
CANADA
Title: E-cig retailers stand up to Health Canada
(Ottawa ON Ca local paper)
Fascinating junk-free report on Martin Lacombe, and e-Steam of Ca. regarding the regulatory situation. Nothing in the story appears to be especially newsworthy in terms of recent developments. Although the report did cite the recent paper out of the RCP in the UK - see this ECF thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ou-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes.html
Also see Gary Cox's blog post on ECF's Infozone (also linked above):
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/ottawa-fumes-canada-vapes.html
***
US NATIONAL
Title: E-cig rule coming 'very soon,' U.S. FDA [Comm'r Hamburg] says
(Reuters) http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/04/03/us-fda-ecigarettes-idUSBREA321SC20140403
Most of you are already familiar with this article, I'm putting the link here as a service to those who aren't. Of particular note: the CDC press release on poison control center calls was timestamped than two hours before Hamburg started testifying. What a coincidence. No junk, other than from the CDC.
Title: Are E-Cigarettes Really Ineffective?
(US Nat'l general-interest web site) http://heartdisease.about
.com/od/smokinglinks/fl/Are-E-Cigarettes-Really-Ineffective.htm
As soon as I saw that this piece was written by an MD, my first thought was "Oh no, here we go again."
That said, the introductory portion wasn't all that horrible, insofar as the writer doesn't seem to actually take a position on most of these "concerns" - other than apparently embracing the idea that vapers should be stigmatized, to make sure that tobacco cigarette smokers are stigmatized: i.e. stigma-by-association, which presumably the author thinks is a good idea regardless of any possible public health utility from vaping:
"There are several reasons e-cigarettes have become controversial. Because they look 'cool,' they are said to be attractive to young people, and their adoption by non-smokers may become a 'gateway' behavior to smoking real cigarettes. The liquid nicotine used in e-cigarettes is toxic when ingested, and young children may be seriously harmed if they decide to drink the attractively-flavored liquids. People are concerned (appropriately or not) about inhaling the 'second-hand vapor' from e-cigarettes. But perhaps most of all, allowing people to smoke e-cigarettes in public may undo the hard-won stigma that has become attached to smoking behavior in our culture. These are all legitimate concerns, and society will have to work out the appropriate usage of e-cigarettes - when they ought to be allowed, and where, and under what safeguards. As we in the public deliberate on these matters, however, we have a right to expect that any scientific data that are advanced in support of one side or the other ought to be presented fairly and accurately. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
That said, at least this piece is highly critical of Grana et al. This is the first article that I've ever seen by a US MD other than Dr. Siegel which dared to suggest that there could be something wrong with the conclusions drawn by the authors. It's too bad that the author of this piece doesn't seem to be aware of The Lancet study. (But then, he's an MD, right? That means he knows all there is to know about vaping from a public health perspective - by definition.)
The ultimate conclusion isn't so terribly bad, considering that the author believes that vapers should be socially stigmatized in order to be sure that smokers get their physician-prescribed dose of scorn, hatred, disgust, and villification (and also to encourage vapers to switch, of course) ...
"It seems a shame to me that we seem so ready to declare e-cigarettes an unmitigated evil, and to severely curtail their availability or even to ban them, if they can help some smokers quit a habit that predictably accelerates cardiovascular disease and produces cancer."
Alas, we are cited to what's described as a "reasonably objective discussion on the drawbacks of e-cigarettes" - which is itself not so dreadful, given that it (at least) critcizes NRT, although it does seem to mention FDA '09:
http://quitsmoking.about
.com/od/smokingalternatives/f/electroniccigarettes.htm
Title: Can Smokers Save on [Life] Insurance by Switching to E-Cigarettes?
(US Nat'l news site) http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/policygenius/can-smokers-save-on-insur_b_5051897.html
While I have no way of evaluating the truth of these statements, it looks as if life insurance companies don't buy into the concept of NRT, perhaps because they can't distinguish between an NRT user and a smoker. It also says:
"Insurers usually test for nicotine usage over the past three weeks at most. These tests don't return a positive result for second-hand or passive smoke, but they'll identify a one-time use if it happened within the testing window."
Apparently life insurers have ways of determining via social media, etc. whether they're hearing the truth. So (one hears) do employers. So it may not be the world's best idea to brag that you've quit smoking via vaping - even if you've gone nicotine-free (since only vapers seem to know about this option). No junk.
[Repost due to new title/resyndication]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Researchers examine risks and benefits of E-cigarettes
(Questionable medical news site) http://www.news-medical
.net/news/20140403/Researchers-examine-risks-and-benefits-of-E-cigarettes.aspx
Title: E-cigarettes: No smoke, no danger? [original article]
(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: CDC Publishes Poison Center Data on E-Cigarette Liquids
(US Convenience Store trade 'zine) http://www.cspnet
.com/category-management-news-data/tobacco-news-data/articles/cdc-publishes-poison-center-data-e
Interesting only because of the caveat at the end, which no other media outlet in the world added to the CDC press release:
"[Editor's Note: CSP Daily News does not necessarily endorse the opinions, assertions, conclusions or recommendations of any report it covers as news.] [square brackts in original, which was also italicized]"
Also - for readers who haven't yet seen it, here's the softball SFATA statement:
"The Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association (SFATA) issued the following statement regarding the CDC study: 'We are aware of reports of increased calls to poison control centers that involve e-liquid and support federal age restrictions on the purchase of vapor products, childproof caps and proper labeling to safeguard against accidental ingestion of e-liquid by minors or adults. As the use of personal vaporizing products has grown rapidly in popularity, SFATA has advocated for the use of childproof packaging and clear warning labels. In addition, we encourage parents of small children to take precautions with liquids containing nicotine, just as they would with other household products that could be toxic if ingested. As an industry, we do not market to children or teens. These products are for adult smokers who are looking for a better alternative to combustible cigarettes.'"
No junk, other than from the CDC's own press release.
Title: Could U.S. tobacco farmers produce nicotine for growing e-cig market?
(trade 'zine directed towards agribusiness) http://southeastfarmpress
.com/tobacco/could-us-tobacco-farmers-produce-nicotine-growing-e-cig-market
Your Correspondent has little patience for news stories that begin with sentences such as:
"It is believed that the nicotine for electronic cigarettes, or e-cigs, comes from China, India and maybe Eastern Europe."
[As far as he knows, tobacco used to produce water-soluable liquid nicotine is grown in China, which is the world's leading tobacco-producing nation. China and India together produce almost ten times as much as the US. Liquid nicotine can be extracted from tobacco which hasn't gone through the type of expensive curing and processing which would make it suitable for inclusion in a combustible product. Even the high-concentration nicotine used by most US suppliers is extracted abroad, typically in Canada.]
The rest of this unilluminating article consists of speculation from a farmer and an grower rep. who appear to know very little. Suffice to say that US tobacco production is not geared towards the cost structure and minimal aging/curing requirements associated with liquid nicotine. No junk.
---
US: MASSACHUSETS
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes: Smoke-free may not mean danger-free [editorial]
http://www.bostonglobe
.com/opinion/editorials/2014/04/03/cigarettes-smoke-free-may-not-mean-danger-free/OXB6vH9mKXmjJCekDJqujN/story.html
Brief editorial calls on FDA to regulate vaping because of the poison control calls frenzy. Also unhelpfully cites readers to the "may not help smokers quit" article reviewed in this space on 3/31, in which the reporter brushed aside Dr. Seigal's criticism of the Grana et al. junk letter to JAMA Internal Medicine as "fighting words" and went right on to repeat the earlier conclusion in the almost identical 3/24 piece: i.e. this is more "evidence" that vaping isn't effective as a cessation tool. Clearly the Globe and/or this writer have an agenda.
[ HB 3726 would ban vaping wherever smoking is banned, see CASAA call: http://blog.casaa.org/2013/09/call-to-action-massachusetts-e.html ]
---
US: NEW YORK
Title: Lawmaker seeks ban on e-cigarette liquids
(Long Island NY US News12 affiliate) http://longisland.news12
.com/news/lawmaker-seeks-ban-on-e-cigarette-liquids-1.7625509
Video report contains litte that wasn't in the original CDC press release. See immediately below:
[ There are THREE different things going on in NY:
1) Taxes covered by AB 8594 / SB 6610 (95% wholesale) OR SB 4365 / AB 7106 (75% wholesale). See this ECF thread with the CASAA call:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...5-95-tax-ecigs-ban-e-liquid-ban-ecig-use.html
2) Ban the sale of e-liquid (SB 3969 - see CASAA calls in above thread)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ork-state-s06939-prohibits-sale-e-liquid.html
3) Vaping=smoking indoor clean air act extension bans vaping whereever smoking is prohibited (AB 8178 / SB 6562) - CASAA call in the first thread, also discussion is here:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...bill-8178-would-ban-e-cig-use-workplaces.html ]
---
US: NEW JERSEY
Title: NJ Assembly committee passes beach no-smoking law [incorrect - A1080 passed house and is ready for the sen]
(Some US Jersey shore local paper amalgam site) http://www.shorenewstoday
.com/snt/news/index.php/brigantine/news/50950-nj-assembly-committee-passes-beach-no-smoking-law.html
What's annoying about this report is that it has not a single word in it about vaping, except for the odd reference to second-hand smoke. This is what happens when vaping becomes defined as smoking: everything bad about cigarette smoking is ascribed to vaping without so much as a second thought. Either the 4/3 dateline on this story is wrong, or the writer is way behind the times - legiscan says that the cmte on Tourism and Gaming approved it on 2/20 and it passed the house on 3/20.
[ 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. Passed by the house last month, now ready for the Sen:
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:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/03/call-to-action-new-jerseys-governor.html ]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: EDITORIAL: Taxes on e-cigarettes have merit, if ...
(Monmouth/Ocean Co. NJ US local paper) http://www.app
.com/article/20140407/NJOPINION01/304070018/EDITORIAL-Taxes-e-cigarettes-merit-?nclick_check=1
Editorial writer is suspicious that vaping taxes will be used for smoking cessation, but argues that these taxes make sense if used for public health. Why should vaping be taxed? Answer:
"It seems reasonable that a cigarette that doesn’t include burning tobacco represents a healthier alternative. But we don’t yet know the health risks of e-cigarettes. And let’s not forget: Once upon a time supporters made plenty of safety claims about regular cigarettes as well, which proved to be wildly disingenuous. It is also an open question as to whether the e-cigarettes function as a smoking cessation product, helping to wean smokers off tobacco - while still providing the nicotine - or whether they could actuallyincrease smoking by introducing more children to a cigarette habit at an earlier age. While electronic cigarettes aren’t typically marketed to children, they do come in many flavors most likely to appeal to kids."
In other words, because there are "unknowns" and "concerns" about vaping, and because tobacco cigarettes have an evil history, vaping should be taxed to support public health (even if vaping proves to be a desireable cessation technology).
---
US: PENNSYLVANIA
Title: Amato lures e-cig business
(Scranton PA local paper) http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/business/amato-lures-e-cig-business-1
.1661690
Short junk-free note about new vape shop to be combined w/ a roofing business in Wilkes-Barre. Apparently there's no opposition yet: "Jackson Twp. resident Allen Morrow plans to open Xhale Vapor Lounge and roofing business Green Rhino Builders in empty space on South Washington Street in City Centre next month. Mr. Morrow said he is moving the office for his roofing business from Dallas to downtown Wilkes-Barre and will open the e-cigarette lounge in front. He became interested in e-cigarettes after switching to them from traditional cigarettes six months ago. Former champion drag racer and developer Joe Amato, who owns the complex, said he was lucky to get the space rented "in this day and age with the economy the way it is. [para breaks omitted]"
[ PA's SB 1055 a simple minor sales ban, hasn't passed the state sen. No other threats. ]
---
US: NORTH CAROLINA
Title: Traditional tobacco going up in smoke
(Rockingham NC US local paper) http://www.yourdailyjournal
.com/news/health-home_top-localnews1-localnews5-news/4091581/Traditional-tobacco-going-up-in-smoke
Given that this little paper is based in a city of barely 10,000 and serves a county of 46,000, it's astounding that the writing and the research appear to be top-notch. Nary a scintella of junk is concealed within the flawless yet deceptively humble prose style of the reporter. Most of the piece seems to be focused on a new local vape store/lounge (and yes, indoor vaping is still legal there).
---
US: FLORIDA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Lawmakers Poised to Ban E-Cig Sales to Kids
(US S. FL US public radio) http://health.wusf
.usf.edu/post/lawmakers-poised-ban-e-cig-sales-kids
This is the proverbial "velvet gloved brass-knuckles hit job."
One sentence mentions The Lancet study, and this is immediately followed by a quote from the local ALA rep. (Who predictably tells us that smokers shouldn't even try vaping as a cessation method, because it's unregulated and the ALA has "concerns." Looks as if she forgot to add "fears and unknowns.").
After quoting a local resident who says that he wouldn't like to be around vaping "psychologically" (i.e. it looks like smoking, and he doesn't care for anything that does), the remainder of the story concerns minors and cessation:
"According to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, e-cigarette use among middle and high school students doubled between 2011 and 2012. Sherry Langston from Winter Park says her son switched from smoking to vaping with the hope that e-cigarettes would help him quit nicotine altogether. He hasn't quit and she's now ambivalent about e-cigarettes. 'I do now know that big tobacco is selling them as well, so that can never be good,' Langston said. Phillip Morris, RJ Reynolds and Lorillard have all jumped in to the e-cigarette market. The Food and Drug Administration is considering regulations and FDA researchers are looking into whether common ingredients in e-cigarettes are harmful. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Yes, it could've been a lot worse. But clearly vaping isn't a good thing, and we should all be concerned.
[ FL simple minor ban, SB 224 has passed the sen. and is ready for the house. HB 169 appears to be identical and is ready for the house floor, despite ANTZ opposition because it doesn't define e-cigarettes as a tobacco product. Also see:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...would-block-electronic-cigarettes-minors.html ]
---
US: OHIO
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Findlay considers e-cigarette regulations
http://thecourier
.com/local-news/2014/04/03/findlay-considers-e-cigarette-regulations/
ALA is specifically mentioned as an organization that's expressed "growing concerns" to the city health dep't, evidently promption the comm'r to present a vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban. Not one word in this story concens "second hand vapor" or any aspect of adult behavior - every single sentence is about the minor gateway-to-tobacco argument. That suggests to Your Correspondent that the ALA's case to the health dep't is primarily about "renomalizing smoking," and/or teens. Report has no specific information about any date which has been set for a hearing.
[ Gov. Kasich has proposed a 49% tax on vaping, see:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/03/call-to-action-ohios-governor-kasich-is.html
and this ECF thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...cigs-increasing-cigarette-otp-tax-budget.html ]
Title: Findlay reviews proposed ban on e-cigarettes in public
(Toledo OH US newspaper amalgam site) http://www.northwestohio
.com/news/story.aspx?id=1027234#.Uz6uTqJobfg
Similar to above, and with no addional info. However it also mentions the gateway argument.
---
US: INDIANA
Title: Opponents of e-cigarette ban rally for meeting [TOMORROW 4/8]
(Greenfield IN US local paper) http://www.greenfieldreporter
.com/view/local_story/Opponents-of-e-cigarette-ban-r_1396670701#.U0LKwKJobfg
Co. Health Commissioner told bd. of supervisors that the existing ord. already covered vaping. Apparently they agreed, although the story doesn't indicate that a new ord. was passed. Local vape store owner gathered 400 signatures and support, and will appear at Meeting tomorrow, 4/8 to ask for reconsideration. Call Vapor Lock 317-318-9057 for more info.
---
US: ILLINOIS
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Health 101: E-cigarettes fall between cracks with bans
(Decatur IL US local paper) http://herald-review.com/lifestyles/health-med-fit/health-e-cigarettes-fall-between-cracks-with-bans/article_1a2093ba-4c49-52a3-bd40-571cb5689caf
.html
If I've read one of these survey articles produced by small-town papers that lacks advice from a local ALA rep., smoking cessation "expert," or local MD/health dep't official, I most certainly can't recall when. (Could it be that either the editor or the reporter is a vaper? Inquiring minds would like to know how this sort of thing occurs.) Not one word of junk or anything at all that one might wish to see omitted. It even has this astonishing sentence:
"In the two years vaping has been popular, no agency has reported any short-term health effects. There is also little risk from second-hand exposure to nicotine from the exhaled vapor."
[ Most serious threat in IL right now is HB 5689, which has passed the house, and which would ban the sale of e-liquid until the IL Health Dep't issues standards:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/call-to-action-illinois-bill-would-ban.html
And this thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-e-cig-products-sold-il-protect-children.html
IL is also considering two bills that require vaping supplies (but not non-cigarette tobacco) to be behind the counter (HB 5868 = SB 3268), see: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...counter-exempts-tobacco-specialty-stores.html Also worth watching: SB2659, which would ban smoking in cars containing a minor - however the definition doesn't currently include vaping (and is still in the Public Health Cmte, with a status of "postponed." See: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/Bil...GAID=12&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=78165&SessionID=85 ]
Title: Bill Restricting E-Cigarette Displays Advances at Statehouse
(Springfield IL US ABC affiliate) http://www.wics
.com/news/top-stories/stories/vid_16437.shtml
Short note, no junk. See ECF thread above for HB 5868.
---
US: TEXAS
Title: [VOTE:] Should electronic cigarette smokers be allowed to use them in non-smoking establishments?
(Longview TX local paper) http://www.news-journal
.com/should-electronic-cigarette-smokers-be-allowed-to-use-them-in/poll_a470368e-bd83-11e3-936c-0019bb2963f4.html
No text with this, it's just an online poll. Please vote.
[ TX legislature is out of session until 2015, unless Gov. Perry wants to call a special session. ]
---
US: NEBRASKA
Title: E-cigarette ban for minors passed by Neb. senators
(Omaha NE US ABC affiliate) http://www.ketv
.com/politics/ecigarette-ban-for-minors-passed-by-neb-senators/25312020#ixzz2xrzOuFnX
Short note - last reading of LB 863, now goes to Gov. Heeineman. Simple minor ban on sales/possession, refers to vapor products (instead of tobacco products) over the objections of ANTZ orgs.
---
US: ARIZONA
Title: Coconino County added electronic cigarettes to existing smoking ban
(Flagstaff AZ US local paper) http://azdailysun.com/news/local/coconino-county-added-electronic-cigarettes-to-existing-smoking-ban/article_9ca88c06-bd5d-11e3-8303-0019bb2963f4
.html
[Note: This story seems to have been pulled by the paper, and there's no replacement.]
Apparently the co. already passed an ord. that banned "electronic cigarettes," but the report says "And now Coconino County health officials want to add other electronic smoking devices to the existing ban as well - making it illegal to vape any substance in public." The report goes on to mention e-hookahs and vape pens. Frankly it's not at all clear what precisely the BOH is asking the board of supervisors to do, unless the goal is to ban nic-free vaping.
"'There have been some studies done on the products and 10 known agents have been found that are known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity,' [Assistant Chief Health Officer for Coconino County] Oxtoby said. 'We think that is too big of a health risk to expose the population to.' [...] 'The toxins are less than a traditional cigarette, but they're still really high,' Oxtoby said. 'It goes back to the long-term studies and the lack of regulations by the FDA. No two e-cigs are made alike. It's really buyer beware. You don't know what you could be inhaling. That's attributed to the lack of regulation by the FDA.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Evidently the BOH already asked the advisory board last month to support a ban, but no hearing date before the Co. Bd. of Supervisors is set.
[ No legislative threats appear to exist at the statewide level in AZ. ]
---
US: CALIFORNIA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette ban wagon gaining steam [Cities of Oceanside and Del Mar CA]
(Encitas CA US local paper) http://www.seasidecourier
.com/news/e-cigarette-ban-wagon-gaining-steam/article_f3651646-bc21-11e3-8a9c-0017a43b2370.html
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: O'side bans e-cigs in public places
(SD CA US local paper) http://www.utsandiego
.com/news/2014/apr/02/oceanside-e-cigarettes-ban/
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Oceanside bans puffing e-cigs in public
(SD CA US local fox affiliate) http://fox5sandiego
.com/2014/04/02/oceanside-bans-puffing-on-e-cigs-in-public-places/#ixzz2y86yXgTE
[All three reports combined:]
1) Oceanside city council votes unanimously for a first reading of the vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban (no date has yet been set for final passage).
Plus unanimous vote for a minor sales ban.
Also unanimously requests city atty to propose additional licensing requirements for stores selling vaping supplies/equipment.
2) City of Del Mar to consider vaping=smokking rule on Tues April 7.
3) This is all the info. that I can find about the rationales advanced in Oceanside. although there are some comments mixed in regarding the minor gateway argument, it's not clear whether these were used to support the indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking prohibition. From the U-T:
"'This is an issue that should be regulated and treated just like tobacco,' said [Oceanside] Deputy Mayor Esther Sanchez."
From the Fox report:
"Supporters of the [Oceanside] ban pushed the city to adopt a vapor-free policy to protect residents from so-called 'secondhand aerosol exposure' - claiming e-cigs emit nicotine levels similar to secondhand smoke."
[ 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: E-cigarettes could be banned from [Yolo] county-owned buildings
(Woodland CA US local paper) http://www.dailydemocrat
.com/breakingnews/ci_25506495/e-cigarettes-could-be-banned-from-county-owned
As readers of this space know, both Davis CA and Yolo co. are separately considering indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking prohibitions:
"'The first thing the board can do is eliminate use of e-cigarettes in county buildings," [county Tobacco Education Program coordinator] Jensen said in February. 'There is concern regarding the health effects these products may have on the individuals who use them and those who inhale their secondhand vapor,' Jensen said in the report. 'These products are not currently regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and therefore the chemical content is unregulated. Device use inside buildings and other areas where cigarette use is restricted is a potential threat to public health.' There is also concern about marketing toward teens even though state law prohibits the sale of e-cigarettes to minors. A survey released in March found that the devices are widely available in Yolo County with more than 45 percent of stores selling them. 'If they're allowed to smoke e-cigarettes, kids get the message smoking is OK again,' Jensen previously said. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
It's not clear what else the co. Tobacco Education program coordinator thinks should be done, but perhaps bans in apartment buildings or a prohibition on hiring NRT users/vapers is next.
"The Davis City Council received a presentation in March regarding expanding its current ban on tobacco to include the vapor devices and could vote on restrictions in the future."
Title: It’s just distracting: Smoking e-cigs in classrooms is inappropriate and unneccessary
(Pleasant Hill CA US - Diablo Valley College Student paper) http://www.theinquireronline
.com/opinion/2014/04/02/its-just-distracting-smoking-e-cigs-in-classrooms-is-inappropriate-and-unneccessary/
This is surprising because DVC is a public institution in California (only TX appears to have educational institutions left in which outdoor vaping is permnitted on campus). Also remarkable is that is that neither Contra Costa Co. nor the city of Pleasant Hill have extended indoor/outdoor tobacco smoking bans to cover vaping. No junk in the piece, the only argument made is that classroom vaping is inappropriate.
***
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.)
CASAA President Elaine Keller is retiring, after guiding CASAA for the last 2-1/2 years, i.e. for the majority of its history (since its founding in 2009). ECF members know Elaine as Vocalek.
I'd like to humbly thank Elaine for her tireless efforts on behalf of our right to vape, as well as the larger cause of harm reduction. I sincerely believe that she and CASAA have saved and enhanced the quality of many lives, by combating ignorant, unscientific and perhaps even downright mean-spirited efforts to limit the ability of combustible tobacco users to avail themselves of better alternatives to smoking pipes, cigars, and cigarettes - and in many cases quitting all use of nicotine products.
Elaine will be suceeded by CASAA's very able legislative director, Julie Woessner. See:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/the-passing-of-torch-message-from-out.html
Please join me by replying to this post with your thanks to Elaine, your best wishes to Julie, and your heartfelt thanks to CASAA for all that has been done on our behalf. (BTW if someone wants to post something on another Forum, you have my blessings ;-) ... I don't think many rank-and-file ECF members quite understand what Elaine and CAsAA have done for all of us.)
***
MEDIA ROUNDUP FOR 4/3/14 - 4/6/14
[ Just paste broken links shown in purple directly into your browser - the extra line doesn't matter. Pls. PM me if you have more recent info. about proposed/actual legislation, if you think I've missed an important story, or if you want more tweaks to the formatting program. ]
As many of you may have guessed, I got a little off track as a result of all the poison stories. I'm going to do a double-update today, so I can get fully caught up. Hopefully the next barrage of media stories won't be coming for a while. As I've noted in another post, US vapers are facing a well-organized professionally-run issue-oriented campaign. Vaping opponents will need to either take their case to the US Congress very soon, or temporarily suspend their onslaught of junk science and alarmist hysteria-mongering until the end of the summer. (I believe a well-known American political strategist once said something about how difficult it was to market a war over the summer holidays.)
1) Recent critical state legislative updates - NY, OH, IL. Check legislation forum or see below for CASAA call to action links and ECF thread links: NY - SB 3969 introduced to ban the sale of e-liquid; OH - HB 472 introduced to cover Kasich's massive tax increase; and IL - HB 5689 which would ban the sale of e-liquids until the health dep't issues regulations.
2) Vote in St. Joseph MO tomorrow on referendum to extend clean indoor air act to ban vaping, see:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/local-alert-st-joseph-missouri-april-8.html
3) Hancock Co. IN hearing tomorrow on Bd's (prior) decision to interpret co.'s clean indoor air act to cover vaping. Would also ban outdoor vaping in certain areas, and establish a perimeter around doorways.
4) City of Del Mar CA hearing tomorrow on second reading of extension of city clean indoor air act to cover vapiing. Would also ban outdoor vaping in certain areas, and establish a perimeter around doorways. Del Mar is also looking at a ban on vaping in multi-unit apartments.
5) Yolo Co. CA (and City of Davis) looking at vaping=smoking extensions to their clean indoor air acts.
6) NJ's A1080 passes assembly, ready for NJ senate. Would ban vaping on public beaches, parks, etc. Statute was originally justified as a litter control and fire prevention measure, but ammended on the house (assembly) floor to cover vaping.
7) Reaction to proposal by Health Min. Drakeford to ban indoor vaping in Wales continues.
8) Something's going on in Coconino Co. AZ (Flagstaff area), but the AZ Sun pulled the story. Area vapers are encouraged to inquire - this seems to have something to do with a vaping=smoking ord. that covers unincorp'd areas of the co.
Coverage: Turkey; UK (nat'l/Wales); Canada, US States: MA, NY, NJ, PA, NC, FL, OH, IN, IL, TX, NE, AZ, CA
Also: CASAA presentation to FDA listening session in SD CA; ANR tries to defame non-BT cigAlike co.s and vaper orgs; questions about the Nutt et al. paper published in European Addiction Research; Clive Bates' response to CAP's advertising directive, and much more by Dr. Phillips, Gary Cox, and Dr. Siegel.
***
STUDIES, BLOGS, ETC.
Title: CASAA presents at FDA listening session in San Diego
(CASAA's site)
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/casaa-presents-at-fda-listening-session.html
Transcript of presentation by CASAA President Elaine Keller and Scientific Director Carl Phillips at the FDA's Office of Science in the Center for Tobacco Products in San Diego, on Friday 4/4.
Title: Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights Disseminating Misleading and Potentially Defamatory Statements About Electronic Cigarette Groups
(Dr. Siegel's Blog)
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/americans-for-nonsmokers-rights.html
Americans for Nonsmokers Rights attempts to smear vaping cigAlike manufacturers and vaping advocacy groups with the legacy of Big Tobacco.
Title: Please don’t cite the new Nutt et al. paper as evidence for tobacco harm reduction
(C.V. Phillips' blog)
http://antithrlies.com/2014/04/05/please-dont-cite-the-new-nutt-et-al-paper-as-evidence-for-thr/
Dr. Phillips explains why a recent paper entitled Estimating the Harms of Nicotine-Containing Products Using the MCDA Approach published in the Journal European Addiction Research used potentially flawed methods to estimate harm reduction.
Title: RCP Renews E-Cig Advocacy
(ECF's InfoZone)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/rcp-renews-e-cig-advocacy.html
Gary Cox analyzes a recent paper from the Royal College of Physicians, which has also been discussed at ECF here:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ou-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes.html
Title: As Calls to Poison Control Centers Increase, FDA Still Hasn't Released Electronic Cigarette Regulations
(Dr. Siegel's blog)
http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/04/as-calls-to-poison-control-centers.html
Dr. Siegel on the recent media blitz by the CDC (in tandem with its hysteria-mongering press release) over calls to poison control centers regarding e-liquid and other reports of adverse outcomes related to vaping.
Title: 1% of French Population Switches to Vapes!
(ECF's InfoZone)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/1-french-population-switches-vapes.html
Gary Cox analyzes the remarkable amount of smoking cessation due to vaping reported in France, first reported on C.V. Phillips' blog last week.
Title: Why using the term 'ENDS' [Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems] for e-cigarettes is unwise and unethical
(C.V. Phillips' blog)
http://antithrlies.com/2014/04/07/why-using-the-term-ends-is-unethical/
Dr. Phillips explains why he believes that "ENDS" is an acronym that vapers should avoid using.
Title: Ottawa Fumes While Canada Vapes On
(ECF's InfoZone)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/ottawa-fumes-canada-vapes.html
Gary Cox on the strange situation in Canada - a kind of "don't ask, but do tell" modus vivendi in which the sale of vaping equipment and supplies is technically illegal, but effetively tolerated. Gary analyzes a story out of Ottawa about a vape vendor, which is also covered briefly below in the Canada area.
Title: E-cigarette advertising code consultation
(Clive Bates' Blog)
http://www.clivebates.com/?p=2091
Clive Bates' response to the UK CAP's (Committee on Advertising Practices) consultation document on PV advertising which was released in late Feb.
***
TURKEY
Title: SMOKING KILLS - DOES "VAPING" DO THE SAME?
(Nat'l paper based in Istanbul) http://www.dailysabah
.com/columns/halit-yerebakan/2014/04/06/smoking-kills-does-vaping-do-the-same
It's not clear whether the MD who wrote this piece was trying to do a hit job on vaping, or explain why combustible cigarettes are particularly unhealthy. The article seems to bounce back and forth between the two, although it does tell us that VG "contains nicotine" (possibly a badly-written sentence: what was probably meant was that VG-based e-liquid contains nic.), cites FDA '09 (he missed the diethelyne glycol and went for the formaldehyde), and blithely asserts that vaping is "market[ed] to nonsmokers, especially teenagers." That said, the good Dr. is no expert on how to write an anti-vaping piece, and appears to have very little desire to do so - certainly not by comparison to the the MDs here in the states who are normally hired for just that purpose. In a country that appears to have one of the highest rates of tobacco smoking on the planet, that's probably a good thing.
***
UK NATIONAL
Title: The e-cigarettes phenomenon
(BBC) http://www.bbc
.com/news/uk-26852649
For a survey article in a "health" section, this one is incredibly tame - almost postive. That's especially significant because "health" reporters often have some kind of health industry background, and share the usual biases reflected by medical professionals all over the world. The sole questionable assertion in this entire piece is that "e-cigarettes contain nicotine [emphasis added]."
Title: The rise of the e-cigarette
(UK Nat'l Paper) http://www.telegraph
.co.uk/technology/technology-topics/10741828/The-rise-of-the-e-cigarette.html
Another survey article that contains essentially no junk. It's hard to imagine a US national paper.
Title: Would you work with electronic cigarette brands?
(UK mkting trade 'zine) http://www.mediaweek
.co.uk/article/1288382/work-electronic-cigarette-brands
First sentence:
"Agencies that are tempted to explore the burgeoning e-cigarette market face an ethical dilemma, David Benady writes.
Because we all know that e-cigarettes are a net negative to society, right? One has to wonder whether BP's tentacles have managed to penetrate into the UK advertising industry. Or does one?
---
UK: WALES
Title: Proposal to ban use of electronic cigarettes indoors sparks angry backlash
(UK Nat'l paper) http://www.mirror
.co.uk/news/uk-news/proposal-ban-use-electronic-cigarettes-3342480
This extremely brief exchange between an ASH Wales rep. and a rep. of Quit.org contains two surprising attributes, at least from a US perspective.
1) ASH Wales CEO Elen De Lacy says:
"The use of e-cigarettes in smoke-free places could 're-normalise' smoking. This may undermine public health efforts to deter young people from getting addicted. It is vital we ensure adult e-cigarette users who are trying to reduce their harm from tobacco are not treated in the same way as those who smoke conventional cigarettes. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Since ASH Wales does support the "medicalizing" of vaping (PVs available by prescription only, similar to nic. inhalers), I believe what's being said here is that "medical" PVs should be usable indoors. If so, this is basically the same stance that corresponding US organizations have on nicotine inhalers.
2) Quit.org opposes the ban. It seems to have a number of local NHS supporters, as well as the British Heart Foundation, and several BP firms (including Glaxo and Pfizer).
I'm finding this a bit difficult to comprehend, but my best guess is that these large BP firms anticipate enhanced profits from "medicalized" cigALikes, and would therefore prefer that cessation therapy patients can use them indoors.
Title: Craziness of the e-cigarette health police: 'Nanny state' Welsh Assembly considers ban in public paces
(UK Nat'l paper) http://www.dailymail
.co.uk/health/article-2595670/Craziness-e-cigarette-health-police-Nanny-state-Welsh-Assembly-considers-ban-public-spaces.html#ixzz2xqlHlwgh
Junk-free diatribe by columnist Stephen Robinson.
Title: Ban on E-cigarette Smoking May Be Warranted
(BP funded "newsmax" style health site) http://www.emaxhealth
.com/8782/ban-e-cigarette-smoking-may-be-warranted
This is a fairly good example of what BP is saying about the proposal by Health Min. Drakeford, which just happens to take all of its talking points from the US-based non-industry-sponsored Consumer Reports.
It's not an exaggeration to say that it was likely written in about 5 minutes. This space reviewed the underlying C-U article on the 28th. As with all claims about "second hand vapor," what we heard were context free lists of ingredients that it "was found to contain" without any description of concentration or comparitive analysis.
***
CANADA
Title: E-cig retailers stand up to Health Canada
(Ottawa ON Ca local paper)
Fascinating junk-free report on Martin Lacombe, and e-Steam of Ca. regarding the regulatory situation. Nothing in the story appears to be especially newsworthy in terms of recent developments. Although the report did cite the recent paper out of the RCP in the UK - see this ECF thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ou-need-know-about-electronic-cigarettes.html
Also see Gary Cox's blog post on ECF's Infozone (also linked above):
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/ottawa-fumes-canada-vapes.html
***
US NATIONAL
Title: E-cig rule coming 'very soon,' U.S. FDA [Comm'r Hamburg] says
(Reuters) http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/04/03/us-fda-ecigarettes-idUSBREA321SC20140403
Most of you are already familiar with this article, I'm putting the link here as a service to those who aren't. Of particular note: the CDC press release on poison control center calls was timestamped than two hours before Hamburg started testifying. What a coincidence. No junk, other than from the CDC.
Title: Are E-Cigarettes Really Ineffective?
(US Nat'l general-interest web site) http://heartdisease.about
.com/od/smokinglinks/fl/Are-E-Cigarettes-Really-Ineffective.htm
As soon as I saw that this piece was written by an MD, my first thought was "Oh no, here we go again."
That said, the introductory portion wasn't all that horrible, insofar as the writer doesn't seem to actually take a position on most of these "concerns" - other than apparently embracing the idea that vapers should be stigmatized, to make sure that tobacco cigarette smokers are stigmatized: i.e. stigma-by-association, which presumably the author thinks is a good idea regardless of any possible public health utility from vaping:
"There are several reasons e-cigarettes have become controversial. Because they look 'cool,' they are said to be attractive to young people, and their adoption by non-smokers may become a 'gateway' behavior to smoking real cigarettes. The liquid nicotine used in e-cigarettes is toxic when ingested, and young children may be seriously harmed if they decide to drink the attractively-flavored liquids. People are concerned (appropriately or not) about inhaling the 'second-hand vapor' from e-cigarettes. But perhaps most of all, allowing people to smoke e-cigarettes in public may undo the hard-won stigma that has become attached to smoking behavior in our culture. These are all legitimate concerns, and society will have to work out the appropriate usage of e-cigarettes - when they ought to be allowed, and where, and under what safeguards. As we in the public deliberate on these matters, however, we have a right to expect that any scientific data that are advanced in support of one side or the other ought to be presented fairly and accurately. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
That said, at least this piece is highly critical of Grana et al. This is the first article that I've ever seen by a US MD other than Dr. Siegel which dared to suggest that there could be something wrong with the conclusions drawn by the authors. It's too bad that the author of this piece doesn't seem to be aware of The Lancet study. (But then, he's an MD, right? That means he knows all there is to know about vaping from a public health perspective - by definition.)
The ultimate conclusion isn't so terribly bad, considering that the author believes that vapers should be socially stigmatized in order to be sure that smokers get their physician-prescribed dose of scorn, hatred, disgust, and villification (and also to encourage vapers to switch, of course) ...
"It seems a shame to me that we seem so ready to declare e-cigarettes an unmitigated evil, and to severely curtail their availability or even to ban them, if they can help some smokers quit a habit that predictably accelerates cardiovascular disease and produces cancer."
Alas, we are cited to what's described as a "reasonably objective discussion on the drawbacks of e-cigarettes" - which is itself not so dreadful, given that it (at least) critcizes NRT, although it does seem to mention FDA '09:
http://quitsmoking.about
.com/od/smokingalternatives/f/electroniccigarettes.htm
Title: Can Smokers Save on [Life] Insurance by Switching to E-Cigarettes?
(US Nat'l news site) http://www.huffingtonpost
.com/policygenius/can-smokers-save-on-insur_b_5051897.html
While I have no way of evaluating the truth of these statements, it looks as if life insurance companies don't buy into the concept of NRT, perhaps because they can't distinguish between an NRT user and a smoker. It also says:
"Insurers usually test for nicotine usage over the past three weeks at most. These tests don't return a positive result for second-hand or passive smoke, but they'll identify a one-time use if it happened within the testing window."
Apparently life insurers have ways of determining via social media, etc. whether they're hearing the truth. So (one hears) do employers. So it may not be the world's best idea to brag that you've quit smoking via vaping - even if you've gone nicotine-free (since only vapers seem to know about this option). No junk.
[Repost due to new title/resyndication]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Researchers examine risks and benefits of E-cigarettes
(Questionable medical news site) http://www.news-medical
.net/news/20140403/Researchers-examine-risks-and-benefits-of-E-cigarettes.aspx
Title: E-cigarettes: No smoke, no danger? [original article]
(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: CDC Publishes Poison Center Data on E-Cigarette Liquids
(US Convenience Store trade 'zine) http://www.cspnet
.com/category-management-news-data/tobacco-news-data/articles/cdc-publishes-poison-center-data-e
Interesting only because of the caveat at the end, which no other media outlet in the world added to the CDC press release:
"[Editor's Note: CSP Daily News does not necessarily endorse the opinions, assertions, conclusions or recommendations of any report it covers as news.] [square brackts in original, which was also italicized]"
Also - for readers who haven't yet seen it, here's the softball SFATA statement:
"The Smoke Free Alternatives Trade Association (SFATA) issued the following statement regarding the CDC study: 'We are aware of reports of increased calls to poison control centers that involve e-liquid and support federal age restrictions on the purchase of vapor products, childproof caps and proper labeling to safeguard against accidental ingestion of e-liquid by minors or adults. As the use of personal vaporizing products has grown rapidly in popularity, SFATA has advocated for the use of childproof packaging and clear warning labels. In addition, we encourage parents of small children to take precautions with liquids containing nicotine, just as they would with other household products that could be toxic if ingested. As an industry, we do not market to children or teens. These products are for adult smokers who are looking for a better alternative to combustible cigarettes.'"
No junk, other than from the CDC's own press release.
Title: Could U.S. tobacco farmers produce nicotine for growing e-cig market?
(trade 'zine directed towards agribusiness) http://southeastfarmpress
.com/tobacco/could-us-tobacco-farmers-produce-nicotine-growing-e-cig-market
Your Correspondent has little patience for news stories that begin with sentences such as:
"It is believed that the nicotine for electronic cigarettes, or e-cigs, comes from China, India and maybe Eastern Europe."
[As far as he knows, tobacco used to produce water-soluable liquid nicotine is grown in China, which is the world's leading tobacco-producing nation. China and India together produce almost ten times as much as the US. Liquid nicotine can be extracted from tobacco which hasn't gone through the type of expensive curing and processing which would make it suitable for inclusion in a combustible product. Even the high-concentration nicotine used by most US suppliers is extracted abroad, typically in Canada.]
The rest of this unilluminating article consists of speculation from a farmer and an grower rep. who appear to know very little. Suffice to say that US tobacco production is not geared towards the cost structure and minimal aging/curing requirements associated with liquid nicotine. No junk.
---
US: MASSACHUSETS
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarettes: Smoke-free may not mean danger-free [editorial]
http://www.bostonglobe
.com/opinion/editorials/2014/04/03/cigarettes-smoke-free-may-not-mean-danger-free/OXB6vH9mKXmjJCekDJqujN/story.html
Brief editorial calls on FDA to regulate vaping because of the poison control calls frenzy. Also unhelpfully cites readers to the "may not help smokers quit" article reviewed in this space on 3/31, in which the reporter brushed aside Dr. Seigal's criticism of the Grana et al. junk letter to JAMA Internal Medicine as "fighting words" and went right on to repeat the earlier conclusion in the almost identical 3/24 piece: i.e. this is more "evidence" that vaping isn't effective as a cessation tool. Clearly the Globe and/or this writer have an agenda.
[ HB 3726 would ban vaping wherever smoking is banned, see CASAA call: http://blog.casaa.org/2013/09/call-to-action-massachusetts-e.html ]
---
US: NEW YORK
Title: Lawmaker seeks ban on e-cigarette liquids
(Long Island NY US News12 affiliate) http://longisland.news12
.com/news/lawmaker-seeks-ban-on-e-cigarette-liquids-1.7625509
Video report contains litte that wasn't in the original CDC press release. See immediately below:
[ There are THREE different things going on in NY:
1) Taxes covered by AB 8594 / SB 6610 (95% wholesale) OR SB 4365 / AB 7106 (75% wholesale). See this ECF thread with the CASAA call:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...5-95-tax-ecigs-ban-e-liquid-ban-ecig-use.html
2) Ban the sale of e-liquid (SB 3969 - see CASAA calls in above thread)
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ork-state-s06939-prohibits-sale-e-liquid.html
3) Vaping=smoking indoor clean air act extension bans vaping whereever smoking is prohibited (AB 8178 / SB 6562) - CASAA call in the first thread, also discussion is here:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...bill-8178-would-ban-e-cig-use-workplaces.html ]
---
US: NEW JERSEY
Title: NJ Assembly committee passes beach no-smoking law [incorrect - A1080 passed house and is ready for the sen]
(Some US Jersey shore local paper amalgam site) http://www.shorenewstoday
.com/snt/news/index.php/brigantine/news/50950-nj-assembly-committee-passes-beach-no-smoking-law.html
What's annoying about this report is that it has not a single word in it about vaping, except for the odd reference to second-hand smoke. This is what happens when vaping becomes defined as smoking: everything bad about cigarette smoking is ascribed to vaping without so much as a second thought. Either the 4/3 dateline on this story is wrong, or the writer is way behind the times - legiscan says that the cmte on Tourism and Gaming approved it on 2/20 and it passed the house on 3/20.
[ 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. Passed by the house last month, now ready for the Sen:
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:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/03/call-to-action-new-jerseys-governor.html ]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: EDITORIAL: Taxes on e-cigarettes have merit, if ...
(Monmouth/Ocean Co. NJ US local paper) http://www.app
.com/article/20140407/NJOPINION01/304070018/EDITORIAL-Taxes-e-cigarettes-merit-?nclick_check=1
Editorial writer is suspicious that vaping taxes will be used for smoking cessation, but argues that these taxes make sense if used for public health. Why should vaping be taxed? Answer:
"It seems reasonable that a cigarette that doesn’t include burning tobacco represents a healthier alternative. But we don’t yet know the health risks of e-cigarettes. And let’s not forget: Once upon a time supporters made plenty of safety claims about regular cigarettes as well, which proved to be wildly disingenuous. It is also an open question as to whether the e-cigarettes function as a smoking cessation product, helping to wean smokers off tobacco - while still providing the nicotine - or whether they could actuallyincrease smoking by introducing more children to a cigarette habit at an earlier age. While electronic cigarettes aren’t typically marketed to children, they do come in many flavors most likely to appeal to kids."
In other words, because there are "unknowns" and "concerns" about vaping, and because tobacco cigarettes have an evil history, vaping should be taxed to support public health (even if vaping proves to be a desireable cessation technology).
---
US: PENNSYLVANIA
Title: Amato lures e-cig business
(Scranton PA local paper) http://thetimes-tribune.com/news/business/amato-lures-e-cig-business-1
.1661690
Short junk-free note about new vape shop to be combined w/ a roofing business in Wilkes-Barre. Apparently there's no opposition yet: "Jackson Twp. resident Allen Morrow plans to open Xhale Vapor Lounge and roofing business Green Rhino Builders in empty space on South Washington Street in City Centre next month. Mr. Morrow said he is moving the office for his roofing business from Dallas to downtown Wilkes-Barre and will open the e-cigarette lounge in front. He became interested in e-cigarettes after switching to them from traditional cigarettes six months ago. Former champion drag racer and developer Joe Amato, who owns the complex, said he was lucky to get the space rented "in this day and age with the economy the way it is. [para breaks omitted]"
[ PA's SB 1055 a simple minor sales ban, hasn't passed the state sen. No other threats. ]
---
US: NORTH CAROLINA
Title: Traditional tobacco going up in smoke
(Rockingham NC US local paper) http://www.yourdailyjournal
.com/news/health-home_top-localnews1-localnews5-news/4091581/Traditional-tobacco-going-up-in-smoke
Given that this little paper is based in a city of barely 10,000 and serves a county of 46,000, it's astounding that the writing and the research appear to be top-notch. Nary a scintella of junk is concealed within the flawless yet deceptively humble prose style of the reporter. Most of the piece seems to be focused on a new local vape store/lounge (and yes, indoor vaping is still legal there).
---
US: FLORIDA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Lawmakers Poised to Ban E-Cig Sales to Kids
(US S. FL US public radio) http://health.wusf
.usf.edu/post/lawmakers-poised-ban-e-cig-sales-kids
This is the proverbial "velvet gloved brass-knuckles hit job."
One sentence mentions The Lancet study, and this is immediately followed by a quote from the local ALA rep. (Who predictably tells us that smokers shouldn't even try vaping as a cessation method, because it's unregulated and the ALA has "concerns." Looks as if she forgot to add "fears and unknowns.").
After quoting a local resident who says that he wouldn't like to be around vaping "psychologically" (i.e. it looks like smoking, and he doesn't care for anything that does), the remainder of the story concerns minors and cessation:
"According to a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, e-cigarette use among middle and high school students doubled between 2011 and 2012. Sherry Langston from Winter Park says her son switched from smoking to vaping with the hope that e-cigarettes would help him quit nicotine altogether. He hasn't quit and she's now ambivalent about e-cigarettes. 'I do now know that big tobacco is selling them as well, so that can never be good,' Langston said. Phillip Morris, RJ Reynolds and Lorillard have all jumped in to the e-cigarette market. The Food and Drug Administration is considering regulations and FDA researchers are looking into whether common ingredients in e-cigarettes are harmful. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Yes, it could've been a lot worse. But clearly vaping isn't a good thing, and we should all be concerned.
[ FL simple minor ban, SB 224 has passed the sen. and is ready for the house. HB 169 appears to be identical and is ready for the house floor, despite ANTZ opposition because it doesn't define e-cigarettes as a tobacco product. Also see:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...would-block-electronic-cigarettes-minors.html ]
---
US: OHIO
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Findlay considers e-cigarette regulations
http://thecourier
.com/local-news/2014/04/03/findlay-considers-e-cigarette-regulations/
ALA is specifically mentioned as an organization that's expressed "growing concerns" to the city health dep't, evidently promption the comm'r to present a vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban. Not one word in this story concens "second hand vapor" or any aspect of adult behavior - every single sentence is about the minor gateway-to-tobacco argument. That suggests to Your Correspondent that the ALA's case to the health dep't is primarily about "renomalizing smoking," and/or teens. Report has no specific information about any date which has been set for a hearing.
[ Gov. Kasich has proposed a 49% tax on vaping, see:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/03/call-to-action-ohios-governor-kasich-is.html
and this ECF thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...cigs-increasing-cigarette-otp-tax-budget.html ]
Title: Findlay reviews proposed ban on e-cigarettes in public
(Toledo OH US newspaper amalgam site) http://www.northwestohio
.com/news/story.aspx?id=1027234#.Uz6uTqJobfg
Similar to above, and with no addional info. However it also mentions the gateway argument.
---
US: INDIANA
Title: Opponents of e-cigarette ban rally for meeting [TOMORROW 4/8]
(Greenfield IN US local paper) http://www.greenfieldreporter
.com/view/local_story/Opponents-of-e-cigarette-ban-r_1396670701#.U0LKwKJobfg
Co. Health Commissioner told bd. of supervisors that the existing ord. already covered vaping. Apparently they agreed, although the story doesn't indicate that a new ord. was passed. Local vape store owner gathered 400 signatures and support, and will appear at Meeting tomorrow, 4/8 to ask for reconsideration. Call Vapor Lock 317-318-9057 for more info.
---
US: ILLINOIS
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Health 101: E-cigarettes fall between cracks with bans
(Decatur IL US local paper) http://herald-review.com/lifestyles/health-med-fit/health-e-cigarettes-fall-between-cracks-with-bans/article_1a2093ba-4c49-52a3-bd40-571cb5689caf
.html
If I've read one of these survey articles produced by small-town papers that lacks advice from a local ALA rep., smoking cessation "expert," or local MD/health dep't official, I most certainly can't recall when. (Could it be that either the editor or the reporter is a vaper? Inquiring minds would like to know how this sort of thing occurs.) Not one word of junk or anything at all that one might wish to see omitted. It even has this astonishing sentence:
"In the two years vaping has been popular, no agency has reported any short-term health effects. There is also little risk from second-hand exposure to nicotine from the exhaled vapor."
[ Most serious threat in IL right now is HB 5689, which has passed the house, and which would ban the sale of e-liquid until the IL Health Dep't issues standards:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/04/call-to-action-illinois-bill-would-ban.html
And this thread:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-e-cig-products-sold-il-protect-children.html
IL is also considering two bills that require vaping supplies (but not non-cigarette tobacco) to be behind the counter (HB 5868 = SB 3268), see: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...counter-exempts-tobacco-specialty-stores.html Also worth watching: SB2659, which would ban smoking in cars containing a minor - however the definition doesn't currently include vaping (and is still in the Public Health Cmte, with a status of "postponed." See: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/Bil...GAID=12&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=78165&SessionID=85 ]
Title: Bill Restricting E-Cigarette Displays Advances at Statehouse
(Springfield IL US ABC affiliate) http://www.wics
.com/news/top-stories/stories/vid_16437.shtml
Short note, no junk. See ECF thread above for HB 5868.
---
US: TEXAS
Title: [VOTE:] Should electronic cigarette smokers be allowed to use them in non-smoking establishments?
(Longview TX local paper) http://www.news-journal
.com/should-electronic-cigarette-smokers-be-allowed-to-use-them-in/poll_a470368e-bd83-11e3-936c-0019bb2963f4.html
No text with this, it's just an online poll. Please vote.
[ TX legislature is out of session until 2015, unless Gov. Perry wants to call a special session. ]
---
US: NEBRASKA
Title: E-cigarette ban for minors passed by Neb. senators
(Omaha NE US ABC affiliate) http://www.ketv
.com/politics/ecigarette-ban-for-minors-passed-by-neb-senators/25312020#ixzz2xrzOuFnX
Short note - last reading of LB 863, now goes to Gov. Heeineman. Simple minor ban on sales/possession, refers to vapor products (instead of tobacco products) over the objections of ANTZ orgs.
---
US: ARIZONA
Title: Coconino County added electronic cigarettes to existing smoking ban
(Flagstaff AZ US local paper) http://azdailysun.com/news/local/coconino-county-added-electronic-cigarettes-to-existing-smoking-ban/article_9ca88c06-bd5d-11e3-8303-0019bb2963f4
.html
[Note: This story seems to have been pulled by the paper, and there's no replacement.]
Apparently the co. already passed an ord. that banned "electronic cigarettes," but the report says "And now Coconino County health officials want to add other electronic smoking devices to the existing ban as well - making it illegal to vape any substance in public." The report goes on to mention e-hookahs and vape pens. Frankly it's not at all clear what precisely the BOH is asking the board of supervisors to do, unless the goal is to ban nic-free vaping.
"'There have been some studies done on the products and 10 known agents have been found that are known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity,' [Assistant Chief Health Officer for Coconino County] Oxtoby said. 'We think that is too big of a health risk to expose the population to.' [...] 'The toxins are less than a traditional cigarette, but they're still really high,' Oxtoby said. 'It goes back to the long-term studies and the lack of regulations by the FDA. No two e-cigs are made alike. It's really buyer beware. You don't know what you could be inhaling. That's attributed to the lack of regulation by the FDA.' [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Evidently the BOH already asked the advisory board last month to support a ban, but no hearing date before the Co. Bd. of Supervisors is set.
[ No legislative threats appear to exist at the statewide level in AZ. ]
---
US: CALIFORNIA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette ban wagon gaining steam [Cities of Oceanside and Del Mar CA]
(Encitas CA US local paper) http://www.seasidecourier
.com/news/e-cigarette-ban-wagon-gaining-steam/article_f3651646-bc21-11e3-8a9c-0017a43b2370.html
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: O'side bans e-cigs in public places
(SD CA US local paper) http://www.utsandiego
.com/news/2014/apr/02/oceanside-e-cigarettes-ban/
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Oceanside bans puffing e-cigs in public
(SD CA US local fox affiliate) http://fox5sandiego
.com/2014/04/02/oceanside-bans-puffing-on-e-cigs-in-public-places/#ixzz2y86yXgTE
[All three reports combined:]
1) Oceanside city council votes unanimously for a first reading of the vaping=smoking indoor/outdoor ban (no date has yet been set for final passage).
Plus unanimous vote for a minor sales ban.
Also unanimously requests city atty to propose additional licensing requirements for stores selling vaping supplies/equipment.
2) City of Del Mar to consider vaping=smokking rule on Tues April 7.
3) This is all the info. that I can find about the rationales advanced in Oceanside. although there are some comments mixed in regarding the minor gateway argument, it's not clear whether these were used to support the indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking prohibition. From the U-T:
"'This is an issue that should be regulated and treated just like tobacco,' said [Oceanside] Deputy Mayor Esther Sanchez."
From the Fox report:
"Supporters of the [Oceanside] ban pushed the city to adopt a vapor-free policy to protect residents from so-called 'secondhand aerosol exposure' - claiming e-cigs emit nicotine levels similar to secondhand smoke."
[ 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: E-cigarettes could be banned from [Yolo] county-owned buildings
(Woodland CA US local paper) http://www.dailydemocrat
.com/breakingnews/ci_25506495/e-cigarettes-could-be-banned-from-county-owned
As readers of this space know, both Davis CA and Yolo co. are separately considering indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking prohibitions:
"'The first thing the board can do is eliminate use of e-cigarettes in county buildings," [county Tobacco Education Program coordinator] Jensen said in February. 'There is concern regarding the health effects these products may have on the individuals who use them and those who inhale their secondhand vapor,' Jensen said in the report. 'These products are not currently regulated by the Food and Drug Administration and therefore the chemical content is unregulated. Device use inside buildings and other areas where cigarette use is restricted is a potential threat to public health.' There is also concern about marketing toward teens even though state law prohibits the sale of e-cigarettes to minors. A survey released in March found that the devices are widely available in Yolo County with more than 45 percent of stores selling them. 'If they're allowed to smoke e-cigarettes, kids get the message smoking is OK again,' Jensen previously said. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
It's not clear what else the co. Tobacco Education program coordinator thinks should be done, but perhaps bans in apartment buildings or a prohibition on hiring NRT users/vapers is next.
"The Davis City Council received a presentation in March regarding expanding its current ban on tobacco to include the vapor devices and could vote on restrictions in the future."
Title: It’s just distracting: Smoking e-cigs in classrooms is inappropriate and unneccessary
(Pleasant Hill CA US - Diablo Valley College Student paper) http://www.theinquireronline
.com/opinion/2014/04/02/its-just-distracting-smoking-e-cigs-in-classrooms-is-inappropriate-and-unneccessary/
This is surprising because DVC is a public institution in California (only TX appears to have educational institutions left in which outdoor vaping is permnitted on campus). Also remarkable is that is that neither Contra Costa Co. nor the city of Pleasant Hill have extended indoor/outdoor tobacco smoking bans to cover vaping. No junk in the piece, the only argument made is that classroom vaping is inappropriate.
***
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:
I've always enjoyed, learned and been inspired by your posts.
