Utah - a novel approach
- Thread starter Orb Skewer
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Very encouraging. I hope Utah Vapers will keep their blog updated on the results as they happen.
- Apr 2, 2009
- 5,171
- 13,288
- 67
The Davis County Health Dept. regulations that Aaron Frazier is advocating (based on this article and another one several months ago) would ban the sale of virtually all e-cig products in Davis County, Utah.
Perhaps Aaron or someone else can explain how Davis County Health Dept staff are going to inspect e-cig manufacturing plants throughout the US and in China.
Does anyone think that Lorillard, Reynolds, Altria, njoy or the vast majority of other e-cig manufacturers and importers are going to allow Davis County Health Dept inspectors in their facilities? The answer is NO.
The last thing vapers and vendors should be advocating are county or state level regulatory standards for e-cig manufacturers. If a dozen different counties or states adopted their own e-cig manufacturing standards, all e-cig companies would have to make and market a dozen different products to be sold in those counties or states. And if 50 different counties or states adopted their own e-cig manufacturing standards, e-cig companies would have to make and market 50 different products to be sold in those counties and states.
California Prop 65 (enacted by naive but scared voters two decades ago) currently mandates an unhelpful warning label on all e-cig products stating that nicotine can cause birth defects. This is the only law that currently requires e-cig to contain a specific warning label.
What if all 50 states and several thousand counties imposed different manufacturing standards and different warning labels for all e-cig products?
And what if counties required different manufacturing standards and warning labels than are required by their state legislature?
And what if counties and/or states mandate different manufacturing standards and warning labels that differ from potentially forthcoming FDA regs?
The answer to all questions is the same: chaos, confusion, fewer products available, and a huge price hike for all e-cig products.
Perhaps Aaron or someone else can explain how Davis County Health Dept staff are going to inspect e-cig manufacturing plants throughout the US and in China.
Does anyone think that Lorillard, Reynolds, Altria, njoy or the vast majority of other e-cig manufacturers and importers are going to allow Davis County Health Dept inspectors in their facilities? The answer is NO.
The last thing vapers and vendors should be advocating are county or state level regulatory standards for e-cig manufacturers. If a dozen different counties or states adopted their own e-cig manufacturing standards, all e-cig companies would have to make and market a dozen different products to be sold in those counties or states. And if 50 different counties or states adopted their own e-cig manufacturing standards, e-cig companies would have to make and market 50 different products to be sold in those counties and states.
California Prop 65 (enacted by naive but scared voters two decades ago) currently mandates an unhelpful warning label on all e-cig products stating that nicotine can cause birth defects. This is the only law that currently requires e-cig to contain a specific warning label.
What if all 50 states and several thousand counties imposed different manufacturing standards and different warning labels for all e-cig products?
And what if counties required different manufacturing standards and warning labels than are required by their state legislature?
And what if counties and/or states mandate different manufacturing standards and warning labels that differ from potentially forthcoming FDA regs?
The answer to all questions is the same: chaos, confusion, fewer products available, and a huge price hike for all e-cig products.
Last edited:
As I read the blog entry, the standards would apply only to manufacturers located within the county. But as you explain it, it would apply to any products *sold* in the county. That is indeed another kettle of fish...
I guess at least they are talking with each other. Need to keep an eye on the Health Dept to make sure they aren't just pretending so they can see what vapers are thinking about when it comes to fighting draconian regulations. Hopefully they will realize this is a better thing than smoking and help to continue the availability of the products we use and need. I agree safety standards are probably a good thing, but common sense must be included in any regulation.
Hey everyone. Sorry for not participating on ECF but I’ve been quite busy locally due to the constant barrage of attempted legislation, highly negative press, blatant attacks by health departments and even highly visible public billboards telling people that ecigs are dangerous and to be avoided. It's really been a daily fight requiring tons of time spend on public education and has taken every minute of time to focus on the shops and all the negativity.
I want to clarify a few things so there are no misinterpretations on what is going on here since nobody appears to have tried to contact me to make sure they understood the total situation.
During the legislative session in 2013, we opted to change our battle tactics and push into a proactive mode. Every time a new study comes out, I send it out to all the HD's, politicians and media. If there are positive national stories in major media outlets, I send it out. I stay in regular contact with the HHS committee and the health departments and make it totally known that we will not back down. I monitor everything our politicians are doing and what they are saying in the media in the event they sneak things in. While it is much more work, it’s been netting positive results and we have put the fear into our health departments and politicians. They did not anticipate we would be well organized, well armed and vocal enough to fight back in this manner. We push the limits daily as far as we can and are not afraid to take the chance by raising a few bars to make our point. Last year, they wanted our bar set ‘here’ so we took it ‘there’. Now they are scrambling to stay up with us and their only way to fight it is by being reactive and slinging mud. Fortunately, they now realize that the specialty stores are not the problem (as admitted) but it doesn't stop their slinging and negativity.
We have been working with one of our county health departments (we requested shared participation from all) for the last 7 months on this to try and get the language right in the county regulations. They had been monitoring (shall I say spying) the industry in the state for quite some time and had been secretly been purchasing liquids and sending out for testing to try and understand the overall safety of it (based on nic content only). As we progressed in the relationship, it became apparent to them (and us) they knew nothing about the industry they wanted to be involved in and were eager to engage with us to ensure they did not negatively impact the industry.
Fast forward a few months and we brought AEMSA into the meeting to review the liquid standards so they could find a happy medium in between no regulation and AEMSA regulation. We have coordinated every step of the way with AEMSA, CASAA and all the retailers in the state; all whom are happy with the approach. Every speciality retailer in the county are 100% supportive of this and testified at the recent public hearing accordingly. They did provide some additional input on cleaning up language which they have taken on board and are reviewing. We have also partnered with a new local Harm Reduction organization in the state which has provided us positive visibility throughout the health community and we are seen as a group truly working to help people statewide.
So on the regulations...Ultimately this is about the regulation of the e-liquid and health/safety of the consumers; not about hardware at all. The Utah Vapers, our member consumers and industry side are of the opinion that this is a consumable product and much like all other consumables, should have some level of regulation. The standards, most of which follow AEMSA guidelines, are considered best practices and are in the best interest of the consumer.
On to a few of the comments made above:
1) The county regulations would not do anything to ban ANY product in the state. We are still working on the regulations with them but there is zero intention or language currently present which would impact the sale of electronic cigarettes; just regulate liquid manufacturing (only in the county), labels and bottling (also possible for county manufactured only).
2) We have consulted heavily with Njoy and NATO and the HD’s consulted with other ‘national’ brands. Additional language is being reviewed which will may address the national brands (in progress as we speak). They understand that anything that negatively impacts the national industry may result in unintended legal action that they are very keen to avoid.
3) The regulations will not do anything to elevate the costs of the products here (or very minor if it does) as at least 75% of the liquid manufacturers are already operating at or near the proposed levels. This has been a year long process to get the manufacturers to this stage knowing that either the Health Departments or the Legislation would require it in 2014 anyway (which is exactly what is happening).
4) The inspections will be a yearly inspection at license renewal time to ensure that the agreed upon regulations are being followed. Much like a health department inspection at your favorite restaurant, the liquid manufacturers will go through unannounced inspections and the liquids will be sent off for testing to ensure the nicotine content is within the pharmaceutical industry standard range (+/- 10%).
5) Labeling is an area that our industry needs to mature with and adopt. Again this is a consumable product and as a consumer, I want to know what I’m consuming. You can find this pretty much on every consumable product in some form or fashion. Listing the ingredients is responsible. Listing the amount of nicotine per mL is responsible. Including a warning label that nicotine can be dangerous, is responsible.
6) The bottling/labeling regulation MAY only apply to liquids manufactured in the county as they realize it is really not feasible to enforce a county wide restriction on product mixed in Chicago. This is a discussion point right now. However this is one area that the representative we fight did mention he was going to bring into the 2014 session so if it becomes state law, I do anticipate it will apply to all liquids sold here.
Ultimately, our consumers want this - our retailers believe in it and most of our manufacturers are already doing this. From an organizational standpoint, this demonstrates to our politicians and health departments we are responsible corporate stewards and are doing what we can to ensure consumer safety. I’m not saying it’s going to work perfectly and mistakes won't be made however we are working intimately close with the HD to try and avoid this. Keep in mind that our state officials would have taken this step with or without us so by working closely with them, helped to preserve the industry in the state. We may not get all the wins we want, but we believe the worst impact will be avoided.
In closing, please remember that what you see on the media and what you read on the Utah Vapers website or social media is only part of the story. Not everything gets discussed publicly. This is very much like poker where you do not reveal your full hand until the time is right. If anyone has any questions about any of this, you are always welcome to contact me via email linked on the Utah Vapers website.
I want to clarify a few things so there are no misinterpretations on what is going on here since nobody appears to have tried to contact me to make sure they understood the total situation.
During the legislative session in 2013, we opted to change our battle tactics and push into a proactive mode. Every time a new study comes out, I send it out to all the HD's, politicians and media. If there are positive national stories in major media outlets, I send it out. I stay in regular contact with the HHS committee and the health departments and make it totally known that we will not back down. I monitor everything our politicians are doing and what they are saying in the media in the event they sneak things in. While it is much more work, it’s been netting positive results and we have put the fear into our health departments and politicians. They did not anticipate we would be well organized, well armed and vocal enough to fight back in this manner. We push the limits daily as far as we can and are not afraid to take the chance by raising a few bars to make our point. Last year, they wanted our bar set ‘here’ so we took it ‘there’. Now they are scrambling to stay up with us and their only way to fight it is by being reactive and slinging mud. Fortunately, they now realize that the specialty stores are not the problem (as admitted) but it doesn't stop their slinging and negativity.
We have been working with one of our county health departments (we requested shared participation from all) for the last 7 months on this to try and get the language right in the county regulations. They had been monitoring (shall I say spying) the industry in the state for quite some time and had been secretly been purchasing liquids and sending out for testing to try and understand the overall safety of it (based on nic content only). As we progressed in the relationship, it became apparent to them (and us) they knew nothing about the industry they wanted to be involved in and were eager to engage with us to ensure they did not negatively impact the industry.
Fast forward a few months and we brought AEMSA into the meeting to review the liquid standards so they could find a happy medium in between no regulation and AEMSA regulation. We have coordinated every step of the way with AEMSA, CASAA and all the retailers in the state; all whom are happy with the approach. Every speciality retailer in the county are 100% supportive of this and testified at the recent public hearing accordingly. They did provide some additional input on cleaning up language which they have taken on board and are reviewing. We have also partnered with a new local Harm Reduction organization in the state which has provided us positive visibility throughout the health community and we are seen as a group truly working to help people statewide.
So on the regulations...Ultimately this is about the regulation of the e-liquid and health/safety of the consumers; not about hardware at all. The Utah Vapers, our member consumers and industry side are of the opinion that this is a consumable product and much like all other consumables, should have some level of regulation. The standards, most of which follow AEMSA guidelines, are considered best practices and are in the best interest of the consumer.
On to a few of the comments made above:
1) The county regulations would not do anything to ban ANY product in the state. We are still working on the regulations with them but there is zero intention or language currently present which would impact the sale of electronic cigarettes; just regulate liquid manufacturing (only in the county), labels and bottling (also possible for county manufactured only).
2) We have consulted heavily with Njoy and NATO and the HD’s consulted with other ‘national’ brands. Additional language is being reviewed which will may address the national brands (in progress as we speak). They understand that anything that negatively impacts the national industry may result in unintended legal action that they are very keen to avoid.
3) The regulations will not do anything to elevate the costs of the products here (or very minor if it does) as at least 75% of the liquid manufacturers are already operating at or near the proposed levels. This has been a year long process to get the manufacturers to this stage knowing that either the Health Departments or the Legislation would require it in 2014 anyway (which is exactly what is happening).
4) The inspections will be a yearly inspection at license renewal time to ensure that the agreed upon regulations are being followed. Much like a health department inspection at your favorite restaurant, the liquid manufacturers will go through unannounced inspections and the liquids will be sent off for testing to ensure the nicotine content is within the pharmaceutical industry standard range (+/- 10%).
5) Labeling is an area that our industry needs to mature with and adopt. Again this is a consumable product and as a consumer, I want to know what I’m consuming. You can find this pretty much on every consumable product in some form or fashion. Listing the ingredients is responsible. Listing the amount of nicotine per mL is responsible. Including a warning label that nicotine can be dangerous, is responsible.
6) The bottling/labeling regulation MAY only apply to liquids manufactured in the county as they realize it is really not feasible to enforce a county wide restriction on product mixed in Chicago. This is a discussion point right now. However this is one area that the representative we fight did mention he was going to bring into the 2014 session so if it becomes state law, I do anticipate it will apply to all liquids sold here.
Ultimately, our consumers want this - our retailers believe in it and most of our manufacturers are already doing this. From an organizational standpoint, this demonstrates to our politicians and health departments we are responsible corporate stewards and are doing what we can to ensure consumer safety. I’m not saying it’s going to work perfectly and mistakes won't be made however we are working intimately close with the HD to try and avoid this. Keep in mind that our state officials would have taken this step with or without us so by working closely with them, helped to preserve the industry in the state. We may not get all the wins we want, but we believe the worst impact will be avoided.
In closing, please remember that what you see on the media and what you read on the Utah Vapers website or social media is only part of the story. Not everything gets discussed publicly. This is very much like poker where you do not reveal your full hand until the time is right. If anyone has any questions about any of this, you are always welcome to contact me via email linked on the Utah Vapers website.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
