University of California Tobacco Ban (not just tobacco)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cycles Gladiator

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 18, 2013
82
62
Portland, OR
I knew that a campus wide tobacco ban (anything but nicotine patch/gum ban is what it should be called) was going to be implemented on all UC campuses in 2014. Here is an email I just received, notice what product is banned as well. What really sucks is our campus has no way to cross the street and simply be off campus, it's in the redwoods, forget about walking off campus. Parking is extremely limited and pricey, forget about driving off campus. Waiting for a bus to take you to and from will be a 40 minute adventure. I see people smoking illegal substances on sides paths or tucked in the woods, it won't be hard to smoke cigs in the woods, and hell it will be easy to stealth vape. Thank god I'm about to graduate, won't have to put up with this BS.


To: UCSC Community
From: Chancellor Blumenthal
Re: Update on UC tobacco-Free Policy



As you may know, University of California President Mark Yudof has directed all UC campuses to become tobacco-free no later than January 1, 2014. When the campus implements that policy on January 1, the use of cigarettes, cigars, oral tobacco, electronic cigarettes, and all other tobacco products will be prohibited on the UCSC campus and at all other properties owned or leased by UCSC. For example, the policy will also apply to Long Marine Lab and the Seymour Marine Discovery Center, Mt. Hamilton, MBEST, Big Creek Nature Reserve, Delaware Avenue and Shaffer Road buildings, University Extension, and the University Affiliated Research Center; and it will apply to campus-owned or leased housing, such as student residential buildings and apartments, college provost houses, and employee rental housing.



Implementing a tobacco-free policy will benefit our entire community. Tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke are the leading causes of preventable disease and death worldwide. Cigarette butts and smoke degrade the quality of our air, water, forests, and beaches; and cigarette butts, which are non-biodegradable, account for one-third of all the litter in California. This policy is intended to protect our community from these adverse health and environmental impacts.


Executive Vice Chancellor Alison Galloway and I have asked Associate Vice Chancellor of Risk and Safety Services Jean Marie Scott and Director of Risk Services Saladin Sale to co-chair a campus committee that will oversee implementation of this new policy. A first draft of the campus's plan will be available next month for review and input by students, staff, and faculty. That plan will include ensuring that tobacco users at UCSC have access to a variety of free and low-cost tobacco-cessation services, in addition to those provided by health insurance, to support anyone who wants to kick the tobacco habit.


This is the right time to go tobacco-free. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services recently called for smoke- and tobacco-free policies at all universities across the United States. Nationwide, more than 1,000 colleges and universities have already adopted such policies. All of our community members deserve a healthy place in which to learn, work, and live, and I look forward to your partnership in implementing this new UC policy.
 

zyglrox

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 28, 2013
143
221
Florida
Implementing a tobacco-free policy will benefit our entire community. Tobacco use and exposure to secondhand smoke are the leading causes of preventable disease and death worldwide. Cigarette butts and smoke degrade the quality of our air, water, forests, and beaches; and cigarette butts, which are non-biodegradable, account for one-third of all the litter in California. This policy is intended to protect our community from these adverse health and environmental impacts.
Uhhhhh...butwhatdoesthathavetodowithecigs?

If anything, you would want to at least allow e-cigs. Giving people that option = fewer tobacco users. All they've done here is irritated the hell out of a lot of people who they should already know damn well are not going to quit because you made it so they can't smoke somewhere.

Probably still patting themselves on the back for it. Too bad 20% of people on campus now hate them.

That plan will include ensuring that tobacco users at UCSC have access to a variety of free and low-cost tobacco-cessation services, in addition to those provided by health insurance, to support anyone who wants to kick the tobacco habit.
AHAHAHA WILL THEY NOW?
 
Last edited:

yzer

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Nov 23, 2011
5,248
3,870
Northern California
The Yudof letter stated that "enforcement should be primarily educational" so I don't see a lot busts happening, but who knows? Times have changed since my undergraduate days at UC Davis. In the early 1970's both faculty and students smoked in classrooms.

Extension of the tobacco ban to include e-cigarettes is not science-based. Too bad UC is knuckling under to political and social pressure in adopting this ban. Note that smoking another product that happens be an economically important cash crop in California is not covered in this ban. :lol:
 

Berylanna

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 13, 2012
2,043
3,287
south Bay Area, California
www.facebook.com
I knew that a campus wide tobacco ban (anything but nicotine patch/gum ban is what it should be called) was going to be implemented on all UC campuses in 2014. Here is an email I just received, notice what product is banned as well. What really sucks is our campus has no way to cross the street and simply be off campus, it's in the redwoods, forget about walking off campus. Parking is extremely limited and pricey, forget about driving off campus. Waiting for a bus to take you to and from will be a 40 minute adventure. I see people smoking illegal substances on sides paths or tucked in the woods, it won't be hard to smoke cigs in the woods.

I suggest you send the paragraph above and some of this from my CA letter to firedept @ ucsc.edu: (remove spaces)

This rule would damage campus health, not improve it. There is
NO risk from second-hand vapor. And no blood-nicotine uptake from
second-hand vapor. Risk from 1st-hand vapor is 99% less than from
combustible cigarettes. I am not asking you to take my word for it,
see E‐cigarettes and Smoke‐free Policies

This will remove the ability of U.C. to encourage switching to an increasingly popular
non-combustion system, resulting in MORE fire danger on campus, as well as more second-hand smoke.

Please bring the dangers of smoke inhalation to the attention of the Chancellors.
 
Last edited:

Cycles Gladiator

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 18, 2013
82
62
Portland, OR
I've only seen 3 people with PVs and 2 with a Blu or njoy or something similar, but wouldn't it be awesome for a campus to ban on cigs and sell/give out (they did say they would give out free or low cost options) electronic cigarettes? I feel like our campus has less than the 1/5 of smokers CA has, but with all the students staff and faculty, it is probably around that ratio. Not sure of the exact number, but it's probably about 4000 people. Could you imagine getting them all off of analogs and onto an e-cig or PV? Nope not an option with this ban. Not even that swedish snus, that dangerous stuff with its no cancer and lowering smoking rates.
 

Cycles Gladiator

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 18, 2013
82
62
Portland, OR
I doubt my voice will be heard, but I do want to send something - to the school, to the UC regents, to the government, to the local paper, to the school paper, to how ever I can. Would anyone mind giving me some constructive feed back? Points to focus on, things to add/delete. This is just a draft so far I free wrote. I'm sure there are some spelling/grammar areas or problems with structure, but I would just like some help with content:

Do you know the success rate with cessation products for nicotine addiction? Patches and gum only have a success rate of 15% after one year. Swedish Snus has been used for about 300 years in with no links to cancer, not to mention according to the NCBI Sweden has the lowest smoking rate in the world. However, with this ban, that will be banned. I am no longer a smoker. I can attribute by success to the electronic cigarette. But, that will be banned too. I thought this was a tobacco ban? It appears this is a nicotine ban. I will never be able to continue to lower my nicotine intake with my e-cig by lowering concentrations over time if a ban like this is implemented. Cessation devices may satisfy the nicotine withdrawal but will never satisfy the mental association.

Without my e-cig I would likely relapse and start to smoke again. If the ban wants to rid second-hand smoke and litter of cigarette butts, then what is the reason for banning electronic cigarettes? Harm reduction should be a major focus of this campus, but instead an all out ban is called for. At least an electronic cigarette could provide a means for current cigarette smokers to have an option that provides a similar experience and allow for the same rituals of smoking while on campus. They would not be smoking on campus and allowing for e-cigs on campus could actually have users switch if they like the product enough (no one is completely ignorant to the health affects of tobacco smoke). Cessations products will not provide the same option, the students/teachers/administrators/workers will smoke when they get home/off campus.

I did quit cold turkey: I could not focus in school and my quality of work went down as well. A ban like this will likely ruin the productivity of a lot of students – nor will it cause students to quit. It will cause going to school to become a hassle, a place where they are stressed because they know they will not be able to smoke, chew, dip or vape. At least students can go home if they are living off campus. Teachers and all other campus staff members would not have this option, and are stuck through the workday without an effective product for replacement – just one that gets them through the day, waiting for that smoke on the car ride home.

While I to believe quitting harmful tobacco products is a great step anyone can take, this ban will not be an effective manner to curb use. This ban will not even consider harm reduction or provide an effective means for students, staff and facility to actually quit their nicotine use. Many UC campuses have a way to cross the street to be off campus. UCSC does not. This ban will be very difficult to enforce and will cause unnecessary time and money to be spent that could have been focused on our raising tuitions, layoffs, and budget cuts.
 

Cycles Gladiator

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 18, 2013
82
62
Portland, OR
Note that smoking another product that happens be an economically important cash crop in California is not covered in this ban. :lol:
Which I see all the time when I take a short cut through the woods, go hiking, etc.

I suggest you send the paragraph above and some of this from my CA letter to firedept @ ucsc.edu: (remove spaces)

This rule would damage campus health, not improve it. There is
NO risk from second-hand vapor. And no blood-nicotine uptake from
second-hand vapor. Risk from 1st-hand vapor is 99% less than from
combustible cigarettes. I am not asking you to take my word for it,
see E‐cigarettes and Smoke‐free Policies

This will remove the ability of U.C. to encourage switching to an increasingly popular
non-combustion system, resulting in MORE fire danger on campus, as well as more second-hand smoke.

Please bring the dangers of smoke inhalation to the attention of the Chancellors.
Didn't see this before I replied again. Also, you do mean less right?

Edit: never mind, I misread it, i thought the last part was in reference to the e-cig.
 
Last edited:

zyglrox

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 28, 2013
143
221
Florida
Honestly, I think it's perfect. That is just the kind of letter that will get consideration from someone who actually cares about the people they reside over. Send it!

But if you wanna strengthen your arguments and predictions a little, it might be helpful to have some good citations to back up your claims and predictions. I don't think it would be necessary as your wording makes your points very clear and understandable, but it might help.
 
Last edited:

Cycles Gladiator

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 18, 2013
82
62
Portland, OR
Honestly, I think it's perfect. That is just the kind of letter that will get consideration from someone who actually cares about the people they reside over. Send it!

But if you wanna strengthen your arguments and predictions a little, it might be helpful to have some good citations to back up your claims and predictions. I don't think it would be necessary as your wording makes your points very clear and understandable, but it might help.

Thanks, for what I email I will send a copy of the e-cig/smokefree policies as well (I skimmed it but really liked it has references, I should look at them though).

I avoided this link for months but once I looked at it I LOVE it.

My personal favorite is the "8 Myths about E-cigarettes" -- is has just the right combination of information and snark.

There will be a meeting soon with the regents first draft. I will be there with this in hand, as well as my PV. I can see a combustible tobacco ban, but everything else? I'm not sure if a public university even has the power to do this, well it does because I doubt many will fight it. I will though. Maybe I'll even post this around campus, try to get support for this.
 

astounded

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 21, 2013
256
273
vancouver bc
Wow - I sympathize with your frustration at some very strange policy decisions.

Your letter is really good. One thing you might want to consider from a tactical viewpoint is to put a really strong emphasis on the fact that for some people their quit plan relies on ecigs (or snus) and that the proposed inclusion of these items in the ban does nothing to achieve the stated objectives (2nd hand smoke, cig butts etc) while risking the success of these people's tobacco cessation programs. If possible, I would suggest you ask for some support from your doctor stating that you are using ecigs in your tobacco-cessation program as patches and gum were not successful for you. You would then be in a more powerful position of asking them:

Instead of at least permitting a couple of outside vaping areas, you are suggesting that I ignore medical advice on my personal tobacco-cessation program despite the fact that it is not harmful to others, while realizing that the stress and wild fluctuations in nicotine levels on and off campus are likely to impair the success of my tobacco cessation program.

If you could ask for a written response from them on that issue of "impeding you from following medical advice in your personal tobacco-cessation program"

then I would think that might be a strong position as I suspect they might be very reluctant to put in writing that yes this is what they will be doing.

Just a suggestion, may not be practical and certainly there are so many other points about what a ridiculous policy this is ... However they may not respond to common sense or logical evidence - whereas they might at least provide outside vaping areas if you could corner them with the medical advice/tobacco cessation buzzwords that are more likely to make them nervous (especially if you are able to cite figures indicating a higher success rate for ecigs in smoking cessation compared to patches or gum). I think they would not want to put in writing that they are implementing a policy that may impede the success of someone's tobacco cessation program.

The person who mentioned increased fire risk makes a really valid point - at one time that policy would not have stopped me smoking, it would just have me out hiding in the forest for my smokes. The mind boggles at how they think they are going to enforce the ban against oral tobacco ... Hard to imagine them getting away with gloved mouth checks on a university campus.

And if I was you, just as a safeguard I would invest in one of those mods that looks like an asthma inhaler ...
 
Last edited:

Bellerine

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jan 27, 2013
135
68
Florida
Astounded, above, made some fantastic points. My favorite was:

ask for some support from your doctor stating that you are using ecigs in your tobacco-cessation program as patches and gum were not successful for you. You would then be in a more powerful position of asking them:

Instead of at least permitting a couple of outside vaping areas, you are suggesting that I ignore medical advice on my personal tobacco-cessation program despite the fact that it is not harmful to others, while realizing that the stress and wild fluctuations in nicotine levels on and off campus are likely to impair the success of my tobacco cessation program.

If you could ask for a written response from them on that issue of "impeding you from following medical advice in your personal tobacco-cessation program"

All of her points were great though.

The only thing I would add is to be as succinct as possible. Maybe even use some bullet points. When we are passionate, we tend to be loquacious. People reading it are unlikely to have as much attention span for the topic without some subheads or bulletpoints to get points across quickly and make them read the rest more carefully.

Post an e-mail address to whoever signed that initial letter. I, for one, would email him and I'm guessing others would as well.
 

Cycles Gladiator

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 18, 2013
82
62
Portland, OR
Thank you everyone for the input. "A first draft of the campus's plan will be available next month for review and input by students, staff, and faculty." I will definitely be there, I will try to get something from my doctor and have a list of the 8 myths, and my letter. The chancellor can be reached at: Contact I'm currently on spring break, by the end I will have a well written letter. I'll probably have two copies, a formal letter, and a letter with bullet points with the most important points. Thanks again!
 

kristin

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Aug 16, 2009
10,446
21,118
CASAA - Wisconsin
casaa.org
I knew that a campus wide tobacco ban (anything but nicotine patch/gum ban is what it should be called) was going to be implemented on all UC campuses in 2014. Here is an email I just received, notice what product is banned as well.

To the OP (and anyone else fighting campus bans):

I have a CASAA paper I authored specifically to address vaping on campuses called "Promoting Campus Health and Electronic Cigarettes." (It's not posted on the site because I still need to get image approval, but I've been letting people use it.) It's a PDF so I will have to email you. Email me at board@casaa.org. Just put "Attention Kristin" in the subject line and I will send it.

I avoided this link for months but once I looked at it I LOVE it.

My personal favorite is the "8 Myths about E-cigarettes" -- is has just the right combination of information and snark.

That's one of mine, as well. Glad you like it! "Snark," lol! I love that. :D
 

yzer

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Nov 23, 2011
5,248
3,870
Northern California
Some very good points are made in this thread. California typically leads the nation in anti-tobacco legislation, setting many national examples first. Keep in mind that UC is not exactly on the cutting edge of imposing an e-cig ban on campus. They are following the leaders. This leads me to believe that maybe there was some dissent within the policy-makers that delayed this decision. Your input may help tip the results.
 

Berylanna

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 13, 2012
2,043
3,287
south Bay Area, California
www.facebook.com
Some very good points are made in this thread. California typically leads the nation in anti-tobacco legislation, setting many national examples first. Keep in mind that UC is not exactly on the cutting edge of imposing an e-cig ban on campus. They are following the leaders. This leads me to believe that maybe there was some dissent within the policy-makers that delayed this decision. Your input may help tip the results.

Although most U.C.'s aren't in forests with high fire danger, they ARE mostly residential schools, especially for freshmen. I observed the commuter schools jumping on these bans a lot faster.

But the ALA is trying to save kids from nicotine and has put stamping out tobacco AHEAD of lung health in their mission statement and is very aggressively pursuing this agenda of ignorance concerning the dangers of INHALED SMOKE from COMBUSTIBLE CIGARETTES:
Our Mission and Goals - American Lung Association
Our Mission and Goals
When you join the American Lung Association in the fight for healthy lungs and healthy air, you help save lives today and keep America healthy tomorrow.

Our Mission: To save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease.

Mission Goals

The American Lung Association will eliminate tobacco use and tobacco-related lung disease.
The American Lung Association will improve the air we breathe so it will not cause or worsen lung disease.
The American Lung Association will reduce the burden of lung disease on patients and their families.
The American Lung Association has a dedicated board of directors and nationwide assembly, volunteers who donate their time to help the organization plan and achieve its goals, which are clearly identified in the Lung Association's five-year strategic plan.

From a governance and oversight perspective, the Lung Association's board and assembly convene regularly in order to monitor progress toward achieving these goals. A performance based management system enables the Lung Association to track and report on progress toward not only meeting its longer-term goals but also shorter-term objectives related to fulfilling the mission of the organization.
 

DC2

Tootie Puffer
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 21, 2009
24,161
40,974
San Diego
Do you know the success rate with cessation products for nicotine addiction? Patches and gum only have a success rate of 15% after one year.
Your 15% success rate is WAY overstated...

You can safely say 5% after one year.
And around 2% after 20 months.

These results are somewhere in the PDF from the following study...
Effectiveness and safety of nicotine replacement therapy assisted reduction to stop smoking: systematic review and meta-analysis

I'm not sure where they are, but Elaine Keller from CASAA has posted this before, so I know it's in there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread