Corvallis Oregon limits, use of electronic cigarettes

[webmaxed]

Corvallis limits sales, use of electronic cigarettes

By JAMES DAY, Corvallis Gazette-Times

Corvallis has banned the sale of electronic cigarettes to those under the age of 18 and also has limited their use to the same venues that currently allow tobacco use.
E-cigarettes thus cannot be used in indoor workplaces and public places and within 10 feet of doors and windows or in parks.
The ordinance was passed Dec. 16 by the Corvallis City Council and took effect Dec. 26.

“As more research findings about e-cigarettes become available we are learning that smokeless doesn’t necessarily mean harmless,” said Corvallis City Manager Jim Patterson.

“Because e-cigarettes are designed to look like cigarettes, they also pose a problem to business owners and threaten effective enforcement of the Oregon smoke-free workplace law.”

E-cigarettes are relatively new to the market. The battery-powered devices provide inhaled doses of nicotine through a vaporized solution contained in cartridges inserted into the apparatus.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, e-cigarette use nearly doubled among middle- and high-school students between 2011 and 2012.

E-cigarettes are not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Chemicals known to cause cancer and birth defects have been identified in preliminary testing of first- and second-hand vapors from e-cigarettes, bringing up concerns about health effects of long-term inhalation of the vaporized solution as well as second-hand exposure.

“One of the concerns we have with e-cigarettes is that they may be a bridge product to youth nicotine addiction, said Bruce Thomson, Benton County health officer.
“Corvallis’ decision to prevent sales of e-cigarettes to children and the use of this product indoors sends a message to our kids that smoking is still not safe.”

The new ordinance will have a limited effect on Corvallis tobacco shops, where patrons must be 18 to be in the store.

“We card people when they come into our store,” said Brett Bowen of Tony’s Smoke Shop on Northwest Ninth Street.

Bowen said that his customer base for e-cigarettes consists mainly of “older smokers looking to replace other products.

“They are becoming a real favorite among Corvallis citizens. They do very well here.”

 

[Uma]

I commented, but it's still in moderation mode.
My comment:
Well said Truthis & Russell. Even the Head Director of Global Health, Antoine Flahault, has put forth a memo to the public, stating that eCigs are much safer than real cigarettes & should not be discouraged or banned. The vapor is not smoke, is not toxic, & smokers are no longer smoking tar & carcenogens. He is disheartened by the dogmatism stature of leaders & wishes for the dogmatic approach be stopped. Here is a link to his memo Christmas 2013: Towards a PeacE-Pipe? | Centre Virchow-Villermé
In America, the Doctors who have performed the research whom the anti-eCig people have twisted into fear mongering lies, have written to the CDC to correct the CDC's false statements of what the studies really did say. They have also written the FDA. Yet, the CDC, UCSF, ACA ALA, WHO, etc still promote the lies and fear mongering propaganda. Why? Because of the huge financial rewards they receive from the TSET (tobacco settlement endowment trust) as well as the huge financial gains from the Pharmecuetical (big Pharma) industry for promoting the BP's smoking cessation products.
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(13)70495-9/fulltext A fresh look at tobacco harm reduction: the case for the electronic cigarette
CDC Belatedly Reveals That Smoking by Teenagers Dropped While Vaping Rose - Hit & Run : Reason.com Tobacco Product Use Among Middle and High School Students — United States, 2011 and 2012. The Lancet full report. http://publichealth.drexel.edu/~/media/Files/publichealth/ms08.pdf

The city manager of Corvalis, a hip and alternative town, is smothered in propaganda literature, voicings, & grant teasers. One of TSET's rules towards collecting a $100,000 grant is to ban eCigs, ban their smoke money competition, or suffer with only a smaller grant. While that may sound tempting, everyone know full well that only a Free Market, consumerism, stirs the economy in long term gains. Easy come, easy go. The grant money is a temporary drop in the bucket, used to persuade towns into going belly up in the long run. Few dare call it bribery: OK grants, e-cigs, and another brick in the wall « Watchdog.org

 

[DrMA]

I am very disappointed. I had a better opinion of Corvallis, but now it's sunk as low as Oklahoma and Utah. And all for 100K in a TSET grant.

Truly we have the best politicians money can buy.

 

[abower911]

I am very disappointed. I had a better opinion of Corvallis, but now it's sunk as low as Oklahoma and Utah. And all for 100K in a TSET grant.

Truly we have the best politicians money can buy.

Don't know about anyone else, but I would personally pay a tax on them, than have them banned outright. I live in Oklahoma, and frequented Vapor Kings in Tulsa the entire I was going to school down there. And also frequent Denali Vapor in Bartlesville and Owasso, and most people would be happy with a tax over an outright ban.

I think big tobacco needs a reality check.


edit: And most of the laws I have gone over have been to restrict minors from purchasing ecig, ecig supplies etc. (Which all vape shops in OK that I have been to have all had signs up from the start restricting entry to 18+)