- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
Politics makes strange bedfellows. While some words in the following press release are forbidden on ECF, it is critically important to know that Cal NORML is now opposing SB 648. Sen. Ellen Corbett is a supporter of Cal NORML, and was just made aware (by Cal NORML's director) this week that her bill would also ban the use of pot vaporizers by medical pot patients in workplaces and public places throughout CA (and Cal NORML urged Corbett to oppose/defeat her own bill).
Most/all of Cal NORML supporters in the CA Assembly (and CA Senate) are liberal Democrats, and those are the voices and votes we need to defeat SB 648 (as liberal Dems control the CA Assembly). Interestingly, Corbett is now running for US Congress, and she doesn't want Cal NORML to oppose her election.
Cal NORML Release July 16, 2013
CA Bill Against E-Cigarettes Harmful to Consumer Health;
SB 648 Would Restrict Use of Vaporizers by Prop 215 Patients
SACRAMENTO - The California legislature is considering a bill that would ban the use of e-cigarettes and similar smokeless vaporizers in areas where tobacco smoking is banned (SB 648 - Sen. Corbett).
California NORML is urging the Assembly to reject SB 648 on the grounds that vaporizers offer a proven, beneficial "harm reduction" substitute for medical ......... users by reducing exposure to harmful smoke toxins while at the same time posing no second-hand smoke hazard to the public.
Though SB 648 was approved by the State Senate as a bill against tobacco e-cigarettes, it would adversely impact use of vaporizers by medical ......... patents. Current state law (HSC 110945 b) defines e-cigarettes as "device that can provide an inhalable dose of nicotine by delivering a vaporized solution.” This includes a wide range of vaporization devices now widely used for medical ......... and other herbs, as well as tobacco and nicotine.
Vaporizers are designed to eliminate the respiratory hazards of smoking by eliminating the combustion that produces the smoke. Regular pipes and cigarettes produce carcinogenic tars, particulates and other smoke toxins that are a byproduct of burning leaves. Vaporizers don’t produce these toxins because they don’t burn anything, but rather evaporate an underlying solution or preparation of nicotine, ........, etc. at much lower temperatures.
Laboratory studies sponsored by California NORML have shown that vaporizers can effectively eliminate carcinogenic tars, benzene, naphthalene, toluene, and other respiratory toxins from inhaled .........: (http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/ Second-Study-Shows -Vaporizers-Drastically-Reduce-Toxins-in-.........-Smoke).
A study by California’s Center for Medicinal ........ Research found that vaporizers are an effective alternative delivery system to smoking for medical ......... users (Dr. Donald Abrams, “Vaporization as a ‘Smokeless’ ........ Delivery System,” www.cmcr.ucsd.edu). Vaporizers have since become standard in medical ........ research and are widely used by patients in places where smoking is banned.
SB 648 would place vaporizers under the same stringent restrictions as tobacco cigarettes, banning their use in public buildings, restaurants, workplaces, hotel lobbies, playgrounds, within 20 feet of exit doors, etc.
There is no evidence that vaporizers pose an appreciable second-hand smoking risk to the public. Users are known to vaporize in elevators and crowded rooms without any detectable odor or adverse notice. Bystanders are routinely exposed to worse emissions from kitchens, grills, garden plants, buses, chimneys, detergents, room deodorizers, gas stations, etc.
The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against SB 648, arguing that the state needs to wait for better science on e-cigarettes.
In a letter to the Assembly, California NORML warns that SB 648 would adversely impact public health by discouraging safer alternatives to smoking. “Medical ........ users already find it difficult to find a legal place to medicate under current anti-smoking laws,” says California NORML Director Dale Gieringer, “Precluding the use of vaporizers will only make matters worse. The state should encourage, not discourage, the substitution of vaporizers and e-cigarettes for smoking.”
The Assembly Governmental Operations Committee is scheduled to consider SB 648 on Aug. 7th. Comments should be addressed to: <Members | Committee on Governmental Organization>
Full text of SB 648 : <http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0601-0650/sb_648_bill_20130422_amended_sen_v98.html>
Most/all of Cal NORML supporters in the CA Assembly (and CA Senate) are liberal Democrats, and those are the voices and votes we need to defeat SB 648 (as liberal Dems control the CA Assembly). Interestingly, Corbett is now running for US Congress, and she doesn't want Cal NORML to oppose her election.
Cal NORML Release July 16, 2013
CA Bill Against E-Cigarettes Harmful to Consumer Health;
SB 648 Would Restrict Use of Vaporizers by Prop 215 Patients
SACRAMENTO - The California legislature is considering a bill that would ban the use of e-cigarettes and similar smokeless vaporizers in areas where tobacco smoking is banned (SB 648 - Sen. Corbett).
California NORML is urging the Assembly to reject SB 648 on the grounds that vaporizers offer a proven, beneficial "harm reduction" substitute for medical ......... users by reducing exposure to harmful smoke toxins while at the same time posing no second-hand smoke hazard to the public.
Though SB 648 was approved by the State Senate as a bill against tobacco e-cigarettes, it would adversely impact use of vaporizers by medical ......... patents. Current state law (HSC 110945 b) defines e-cigarettes as "device
Vaporizers are designed to eliminate the respiratory hazards of smoking by eliminating the combustion that produces the smoke. Regular pipes and cigarettes produce carcinogenic tars, particulates and other smoke toxins that are a byproduct of burning leaves. Vaporizers don’t produce these toxins because they don’t burn anything, but rather evaporate an underlying solution or preparation of nicotine, ........, etc. at much lower temperatures.
Laboratory studies sponsored by California NORML have shown that vaporizers can effectively eliminate carcinogenic tars, benzene, naphthalene, toluene, and other respiratory toxins from inhaled .........: (http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/ Second-Study-Shows -Vaporizers-Drastically-Reduce-Toxins-in-.........-Smoke).
A study by California’s Center for Medicinal ........ Research found that vaporizers are an effective alternative delivery system to smoking for medical ......... users (Dr. Donald Abrams, “Vaporization as a ‘Smokeless’ ........ Delivery System,” www.cmcr.ucsd.edu). Vaporizers have since become standard in medical ........ research and are widely used by patients in places where smoking is banned.
SB 648 would place vaporizers under the same stringent restrictions as tobacco cigarettes, banning their use in public buildings, restaurants, workplaces, hotel lobbies, playgrounds, within 20 feet of exit doors, etc.
There is no evidence that vaporizers pose an appreciable second-hand smoking risk to the public. Users are known to vaporize in elevators and crowded rooms without any detectable odor or adverse notice. Bystanders are routinely exposed to worse emissions from kitchens, grills, garden plants, buses, chimneys, detergents, room deodorizers, gas stations, etc.
The San Francisco Chronicle editorialized against SB 648, arguing that the state needs to wait for better science on e-cigarettes.
In a letter to the Assembly, California NORML warns that SB 648 would adversely impact public health by discouraging safer alternatives to smoking. “Medical ........ users already find it difficult to find a legal place to medicate under current anti-smoking laws,” says California NORML Director Dale Gieringer, “Precluding the use of vaporizers will only make matters worse. The state should encourage, not discourage, the substitution of vaporizers and e-cigarettes for smoking.”
The Assembly Governmental Operations Committee is scheduled to consider SB 648 on Aug. 7th. Comments should be addressed to: <Members | Committee on Governmental Organization>
Full text of SB 648 : <http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0601-0650/sb_648_bill_20130422_amended_sen_v98.html>
Last edited:
Yeah, me too! 
