For those of you who follow the media, I have a little multiple-choice quiz.
Of the following items, which represents the principal talking point mentioned by all professional tobacco Control personel, regardless of whether they work for a gov't agency at the local, state, or federal level - or a 501(c)(3) such as the ALA, ACS, AHA, CFTFK, etc. (most of which also take gov't money, and are for all intents and purposes part and parcel of the tobacco Control industry):
a) PVs aren't a provably-effective cessation or THR tool, because ... [Various reasons go here, e.g. they aren't statistically more effective than the patch which is FDA-approved, smokers use vaping as a "dual use" technology, and people take up vaping as a gateway to smoking.]
b) BT is out to hook our kids by renormalizing smoking all over again, and no other threat could be more salient. We won't get fooled again.
c) PVs are "not proven" to be safe for the user; and/or not proven to be safer for the user than analogs - therefore "we just don't know" ... [Again, fill in the blank with FDA '09, the UCR "heavy metals" investigation, the fact that there are 200+ different brands and they're unregulated and/or the lack of "longitudinal" studies, etc.]
d) PVs are "not proven" to be harmless to bystanders in either enclosed spaces or in outdoor areas because of ... [Again, fill in the blank with any of the items in c) or add "volatile organic compounds, "third-hand-smoke," etc.]
e) Look at those huge, horrible, nicotine-laden clouds. They must be dangerous. A cigarette is a cigarette is a cigarette. Let's keep it simple!
f) E-cigarettes are used by child molesters to tempt children, they generate poison control center calls, puncture tires, kill puppies, and start battery charger fires.
If you chose (b), I'd say we agree.
***
Item: Bill introduced in congress last week sets the stage - now the media is ready to presume that BT is marketing PVs to children. Let the studies, press releases, and talking points flow forth.
Item: Today's NPR story out of Boston in which the moderator had to prompt Brian King, adviser to the Office on Smoking and Health at the CDC to talk about the dangers to users and/or bystanders. Clearly Mr. King was too concerned about staying on message, where the message involved BT's efforts to encourage minors to "smoke."
Item: NYT story today about "vape pens" and "e-hookahs" being marketed to minors, in tandem with the CDC's plans to study 20,000 children's experiences, and the state of California's aim to survey 400,000.
Item: Two almost-identical stories out of Michigan today involving Dr. Matthew Davis, the state community health dir., on minor use of PVs. A very similar story coming out of CDC Atlanta. Accidental?
Item: Elegantly-choreographed oratory from Los Angeles City Councilpeople matches up perfectly with editorial by SF Councilman Eric Mar. It's all about the kids.
Item: Where once cub reporters were fumbling around with Google, in search of the standard FDA paragraph ("E-cigarettes are battery-powered devices ..."), and reporting dead puppies, charger firers, punctured car tires, poison control center calls, and all the rest ... now they're united in harmony - all singing the same tune, courtesy of press releases and interviews with Tobacco Control Industry professionals. (Note that the last three NPR stories in a row concerned chldren. Including that horrific travesty of journalism standards that relied on an 8th-grader, and which was run under the "Youth Radio" heading.)
Item: The term "renormalizing smoking" has now become second nature to both reporters and politicians. One hardly ever sees it in quotation marks any more. Look for it in the "How well do you know the news?" quizes next week. Wait 'til your spouse asks you to "renormalize" ferrying the kids from school.
***
Question: So why this focus on children, aside from the obvious emotional impact - surely harms to users and bystanders ought to be significant? And what about all those charger fires and poison control center calls - don't they count? (Not even a little love for those child molesters who were using PVs to tempt kids?)
Answer: The most effective single restriction that can be imposed on vaping is the end of internet sales to consumers, viz. a national face-to-face sales requirement.
***
Once F2F sales are mandated, then it's open season with regards to local taxes, packaging/labelling, and all other regulatory requirments. No internet will be available to circumvent the ability of local authorities to inspect the offerings of B&M outlets. And there will be no effective recourse for vapers when licenses are terminated and/or moratoriums placed on new licenses. No need for the FDA to act.
As far as banning vaping in private vehicles that are on public streets, sidewalks, multi-unit privately-owned spaces that aren't open to the general public, parks, parking lots, and even strict inspection requirements for houses that are placed on the market (you know: third hand smoke?), this is all a done deal. Once California initiates these rules, the rest of the US and most of the world will follow.
History may record that this entire conflict turned on one strategic decision. The consensus so recently achieved by the Tobacco Control Industry to use BT's history in tandem with the vulnerability of minors as the ultimate Rosetta Stone that would translate all aspects of the War against Tobacco Burning into the War against Vaping.
Future restrictions will become even easier to adopt, because - as the librarian in Santa Maria CA said this week (and Stanton himself couldn't have put it better) -
Sometimes it takes a whole child to raze a village.
Of the following items, which represents the principal talking point mentioned by all professional tobacco Control personel, regardless of whether they work for a gov't agency at the local, state, or federal level - or a 501(c)(3) such as the ALA, ACS, AHA, CFTFK, etc. (most of which also take gov't money, and are for all intents and purposes part and parcel of the tobacco Control industry):
a) PVs aren't a provably-effective cessation or THR tool, because ... [Various reasons go here, e.g. they aren't statistically more effective than the patch which is FDA-approved, smokers use vaping as a "dual use" technology, and people take up vaping as a gateway to smoking.]
b) BT is out to hook our kids by renormalizing smoking all over again, and no other threat could be more salient. We won't get fooled again.
c) PVs are "not proven" to be safe for the user; and/or not proven to be safer for the user than analogs - therefore "we just don't know" ... [Again, fill in the blank with FDA '09, the UCR "heavy metals" investigation, the fact that there are 200+ different brands and they're unregulated and/or the lack of "longitudinal" studies, etc.]
d) PVs are "not proven" to be harmless to bystanders in either enclosed spaces or in outdoor areas because of ... [Again, fill in the blank with any of the items in c) or add "volatile organic compounds, "third-hand-smoke," etc.]
e) Look at those huge, horrible, nicotine-laden clouds. They must be dangerous. A cigarette is a cigarette is a cigarette. Let's keep it simple!
f) E-cigarettes are used by child molesters to tempt children, they generate poison control center calls, puncture tires, kill puppies, and start battery charger fires.
If you chose (b), I'd say we agree.
***
Item: Bill introduced in congress last week sets the stage - now the media is ready to presume that BT is marketing PVs to children. Let the studies, press releases, and talking points flow forth.
Item: Today's NPR story out of Boston in which the moderator had to prompt Brian King, adviser to the Office on Smoking and Health at the CDC to talk about the dangers to users and/or bystanders. Clearly Mr. King was too concerned about staying on message, where the message involved BT's efforts to encourage minors to "smoke."
Item: NYT story today about "vape pens" and "e-hookahs" being marketed to minors, in tandem with the CDC's plans to study 20,000 children's experiences, and the state of California's aim to survey 400,000.
Item: Two almost-identical stories out of Michigan today involving Dr. Matthew Davis, the state community health dir., on minor use of PVs. A very similar story coming out of CDC Atlanta. Accidental?
Item: Elegantly-choreographed oratory from Los Angeles City Councilpeople matches up perfectly with editorial by SF Councilman Eric Mar. It's all about the kids.
Item: Where once cub reporters were fumbling around with Google, in search of the standard FDA paragraph ("E-cigarettes are battery-powered devices ..."), and reporting dead puppies, charger firers, punctured car tires, poison control center calls, and all the rest ... now they're united in harmony - all singing the same tune, courtesy of press releases and interviews with Tobacco Control Industry professionals. (Note that the last three NPR stories in a row concerned chldren. Including that horrific travesty of journalism standards that relied on an 8th-grader, and which was run under the "Youth Radio" heading.)
Item: The term "renormalizing smoking" has now become second nature to both reporters and politicians. One hardly ever sees it in quotation marks any more. Look for it in the "How well do you know the news?" quizes next week. Wait 'til your spouse asks you to "renormalize" ferrying the kids from school.
***
Question: So why this focus on children, aside from the obvious emotional impact - surely harms to users and bystanders ought to be significant? And what about all those charger fires and poison control center calls - don't they count? (Not even a little love for those child molesters who were using PVs to tempt kids?)
Answer: The most effective single restriction that can be imposed on vaping is the end of internet sales to consumers, viz. a national face-to-face sales requirement.
***
Once F2F sales are mandated, then it's open season with regards to local taxes, packaging/labelling, and all other regulatory requirments. No internet will be available to circumvent the ability of local authorities to inspect the offerings of B&M outlets. And there will be no effective recourse for vapers when licenses are terminated and/or moratoriums placed on new licenses. No need for the FDA to act.
As far as banning vaping in private vehicles that are on public streets, sidewalks, multi-unit privately-owned spaces that aren't open to the general public, parks, parking lots, and even strict inspection requirements for houses that are placed on the market (you know: third hand smoke?), this is all a done deal. Once California initiates these rules, the rest of the US and most of the world will follow.
History may record that this entire conflict turned on one strategic decision. The consensus so recently achieved by the Tobacco Control Industry to use BT's history in tandem with the vulnerability of minors as the ultimate Rosetta Stone that would translate all aspects of the War against Tobacco Burning into the War against Vaping.
Future restrictions will become even easier to adopt, because - as the librarian in Santa Maria CA said this week (and Stanton himself couldn't have put it better) -
Sometimes it takes a whole child to raze a village.
Last edited:
