Wednesday’s News at a glance:
No adverse health impacts from long term vaping — Study ~ E-cigarettes can help smokers quit, and public officials should take note ~ Harry’s blog 46: It’s the smoke not the tobacco ~ Campaign to legalise snus – update on the ECJ Case ~ eCigarette opportunity ‘not to be missed’ ~ Commission opposes excise tax on e-cigarettes and novel tobacco products, for now ~ Vapes and Egypt ~ World News Roundup ~ My Turn: Mike Stenhouse: Anti-tobacco fanatics, from R.I. to D.C. ~ Fishers wants to crack down on vaping in city parks ~ E-Cigarette Bills Pending in New York State Legislature ~ Business as usual for vape dealers amid pending regulation ~ Study Reveals Cigarettes Are More Addictive Than Previously Thought
Fontem Ventures, Eureka Alert
A new peer-reviewed clinical trial to be published in the February edition of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology shows that regular use of e-cigarettes does not have any negative health impact on smokers. The study, “Evaluation of the Safety Profile of an Electronic Vapour Product Used for Two Years by Smokers in a Real-life Setting”, examined 209 volunteer smokers who used a typical closed-system e-cigarette for 24 months while researchers monitored for adverse events, as well as lung function, electrocardiogram results, and exposure to nicotine and tobacco constituents.
In Tennessee, 1.1 million citizens — or 21.9 percent of the population — smoke; this is much higher than the national rate of 15.1 percent. This year alone, more than 11,000 Tennesseans will die from a smoking-related disease. In comparison to other important issues, the Tennessee Department of Health reports that 1,631 deaths in 2016 were attributable to opioid overdoses. Despite these staggering statistics, the only assistance provided to addicted smokers in the state is to offer them counseling and nicotine replacement therapy — including patches and gums. Studies related to these products have shown they fail to help smokers more than 90 percent of the time.
Language matters. In my last blog, I highlighted the campaign by Cancer Research UK to counteract the idea that e-cigarettes are just as dangerous as smoking. And part of the problem resides in conflation of ‘smoking’ and ‘tobacco’ when communicating about smoking-related death and disease and more generally the denial of accurate public health information to smokers.
Lynn Kozlowski and various colleagues have written on the ethics and legality of withholding or distorting health information
New Nicotine Alliance
The case to overturn the ban on snus in the EU now reaches a new important milestone – a hearing at the European Court of Justice on 25th January (Case number = C-151/17). Last year the ECJ asked all EU states and the EU Institutions to comment on the case. The court received five responses. On the 25th January our lawyer gets a brief opportunity to expand on our case before the court. Other parties also get this opportunity. And it IS brief – 15 minutes or so to put the main arguments.
Mawsley, Planet Of The Vapes
Egypt remained well behind the curve as other countries were busy tackling the scourge of smoking. Until recently it was still possible to smoke anywhere, and ten million people regularly did so. Odd then that the country should ban vaping, given the fact that it stands out as one of the few places where numbers of adult smokers continues to grow.
Mawsley, Planet Of The Vapes
Canada continues its war on vaping, mirroring the disinformation currently doing the rounds in Thailand. Some think the FDA can learn from Japan’s approach to harm reduction, but America is more bothered about a film star vaping in public. European vapers are being warned about batteries on planes, while councils face huge cuts to stop smoking services. It’s a good job apples and tomatoes might be rushing to the rescue.
, Providence Journal
Better something that is less harmful than more harmful. But to some, innovative new products that reduce health risks should be banned. In the tobacco and nicotine industry, the politically-correct anti-tobacco movement is advocating for the suppression of individual rights and elimination of less harmful choices, via restrictions and outright bans on products that could improve public health. In recent years, major technological breakthroughs have made new tobacco products much safer than conventional cigarettes; yet government at all levels, and some public institutions, are seeking to block access to such products, robbing consumers of their right to healthier lifestyles, and prohibiting entrepreneurs from their right to earn a living.
, Indy Star
Fishers wants to chase the vapers out of city parks. The Parks Department has introduced an ordinance to ban electronic cigarettes and other cloud-producing nicotine delivery gadgets from city parks and public spaces, just as cigarettes, cigars and pipes are banned. The new prohibition would also apply to chewing tobacco and snuff.
Troutman Sanders LLP, Lexology
Coming under scrutiny in the 2017-18 session of the New York State Legislature, electronic cigarettes and other vapor products have been the subject of various proposed bills. Pending legislation could affect excise taxation, discounts, and warning labels. Some bills would even prohibit certain types of vapor products.
On the subject of excise tax, three bills are pending: S07335 would impose upon e-liquids an excise tax of 25¢ per fluid milliliter, and A01138 and S01089 (identical) would treat e-liquid cartridges as “tobacco products” subject to a tax of 75% of the wholesale price.
Afiq Aziz, Malaysian Reserve
Vape dealers are still operating as usual six months after the government formed a committee to look into regulating the vape industry. Malaysia E-Vaporisers and Tobacco Alternative Association (Mevta) president Rizani Zakaria said local vape entrepreneurs continue to conduct business as usual, selling their products to local consumers or exporting it to the overseas market. “As we are waiting for the new law, dealers and entrepreneurs are still running their business as usual, hoping that the licensing issue is resolved as soon as possible.”
In the 1950s and 60s, tobacco companies peddled cigarettes with far-flung promises of improving digestion, aiding weight loss, and strengthening teeth amongst other outlandish claims. We’ve come a long way, and it’s common knowledge that cigarettes are a cancerous, teeth-yellowing, skin-wrinkling, and highly addictive danger to public health.
Visit Nicotine Science & Policy for more News from around the World
A look back at how things have moved on or otherwise….
Jérôme Harlay, VapingPost
Hardware have made considerable progress. Now we have products with no leakage, we have “intelligent products” that prevent dry hits, we have more powerful products that can be used by everyone. Part of the power is useful to the vaper but another part of it dissipates in the environment, and this is one of the issues that may be discussed in a close future.
But now, we have an efficient way to deliver nicotine and an increasing number of studies show the benefits of switching to vaping for smokers. Vaping extends the fun of smoking without its adverse effects, it also helps controlling the weight with positive effects on blood pressure. Unfortunately, every now and then, a new study comes and casts a shadow over vaping. In France, the media use the conditional tense but in the USA and in Germany, the results are thrown without further explanation. I however notice a positive move in Germany and in Greece.
Junican, Bolton Smokers Club
Here is the trick. Briefly, two groups of smoker volunteers were assembled. Individuals in, shall we say, Group A were sat down and a cigarette, lighter and ashtray were placed in front of them. Conversations took place and researchers waited to see when the volunteer picked the cig up and lit it. The same happened with Group B, except that, at some point, a researcher started to puff on an ecig. The smokers in Group B were inclined to pick up the cig and light it sooner than those in Group A. THEREFORE, seeing someone vaping caused the smoker to pick up and light the cig.
Jeff Stier & Gregory Conley, National Review
Earlier this month, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that from 2005 to 2010, the nation’s smoking rate experienced a measly decline, from 20.9 percent to 19.3 percent. This, despite hundreds of millions of dollars in government anti-smoking campaigns and higher cigarette taxes. The CDC now estimates that the smoking rate will be 17 percent in 2020, far short of the sub–12 percent goal set by the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act.
If there’s any chance of reaching the goal, influential anti-tobacco activist groups should quit stubbornly relying on the government to solve the problem, especially when the private sector is coming up with innovative approaches to reduce the risks related to tobacco use.