Utah Online Sales Prohibition

banned

Despite our best efforts, the state of Utah would rather destroy than protect the health of our adults and children.

As of July 1 2016, a consumer online sales prohibition goes into effect for all e-cigarette and vapor products; e-liquid, hardware, accessories…all of it. This means that no matter the location of the vendor, any business selling to a Utah resident without being physically face to face with the customer will now be illegal. This is devastating news for the over 35,000 consumers statewide. Around half of these consumers have no access to specialty retailers to purchase quality products due to our draconian zoning regulations which forces them to purchase online. We fear that this will drive these non-smokers to return to smoking combustible tobacco and elevating the states smoking rates after historic declines thanks in part to vapor products.

The prohibition is due to language that was added into 2015 HB415 that was not discussed nor debated and was a DELIBERATE bait and switch tactic by Representative Paul Ray. He knew the language was there yet when the bill was presented to the industry,fraud the public, the legislative committees and his peers he chose NOT disclose the true intent.  We find this conduct unbecoming of an elected state representative and is the most unethical action in the 6 years of legislative activity to destroy an industry founded to eradicate combustible tobacco. In the professional world we all live in, this would amount to nothing less than fraud and we would be sued for it.

 

The online ban was Rep. Ray’s method to control the illegal purchasing by underage youth since there is little that can be done to punish them for their illegal behavior. Unfortunately by taking this path, he has done nothing more than to force ADULT consumers outside the Northern, Central and Southern Wasatch Front back to smoking deadly combustible tobacco since the zoning regulations prohibit the opening of qualified vapor specialty retailers. This is bad for the public health and bad for the consumers, their children and loved ones who will once again be forcibly exposed to second hand tobacco smoke.

The UTSFA has been working on resolving this for a few months but we only received news on Wednesday that there was nothing we can do at this time. We are working on other avenues but it will take time and funding to resolve thus there is nothing that can be done about this in the short term.

If you are a consumer in Utah who will be affected by this, we strongly encourage you to reach out to your representatives and senators and ask that they repeal this ban in the upcoming session. Without a voice, your elected representatives do NOT know that you are affected. You can find your elected reps here: http://le.utah.gov/GIS/findDistrict.jsp

If you would like to help the UTSFA fight this unconstitutional ban, you may donate once or as often as you can afford to help us take the steps to keep vaping available for adult consumers statewide.


 

The Utah Smoke Free Association is a registered in the state of Utah and federally recognized as a 501(c)4 non-profit trade association.  Therefore we are not a charitable organization and donations or pledges are not tax deductible as such.

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

Time to fight back

fightback

On August 8th 2016, the Vaping industry will forever be changed. Some of the effects have been felt already. If you don’t want to feel the long term effects permanently you have to do your part to fight.

Doing your part is more than just waiting for “call to actions” or requests to make calls and send letters from advocacy groups. It’s more than raising funds for advocacy groups and following the trash talk bandwagon whenever an anti-Vaping organization spreads misinformation. It’s more than making social media posts, more than being a Vape celebrity or a vape thought leader. It really is about being a vaper and talking to friends and family and educating them.

I constantly see and hear people saying “now is the time to fight” and “they can’t get rid of an entire industry”. Truth is we failed to fight, we failed to focus on the fight against the deeming regs for many years. We knew they were coming, we even knew what might be included in the final version and we did very little to prevent it. Because we failed to fight as one, it is a very real possibility they could end and entire industry.

Here’s what happens August 8th:

  • No new products can enter the market.
  • The clock starts for companies to file PMTA’s for products on the market after February 2007. Companies have two years to file with no guarantee of approval. If no approval is gained that product must be removed from the market.
  • Shops can no longer mix e-liquid, build coils, or replace atomizers or modify devices without registering with the FDA as a manufacturer. Registration deadline is Dec. 31st 2016 for manufacturers. If a shop decides to register as a manufacture they are subject to a significant amount of additional regulation that most will not be able to comply with or afford.
  • No free samples. Period. No exceptions. The FDA requires sampling to have a fee; and that fee cannot be meaningless. It must also be a nominal fee that is equivalent to the value of the sample received. This applies to consumers, employees, and wholesale as well. Say goodbye to free giveaways and free in store sampling
  • Advertisements must have a specific warning statement with special formatting requirements.
  • Flavoring companies who wish to sell to the Vaping industry must disclose their formulations to the FDA and be considered a component of a tobacco product. While this requirement is not dictated by the FDA nor does t have a compliance date of August 8th; any flavoring company who is not going to comply will cause products with their flavoring to have to be removed from the market because changing a flavoring after August 8th would make it a new product and immediately prevent it from being on the market without FDA approval.
  • We become censored. No longer can we claim that Vaping helps people quit smoking, we can no longer claim Vaping is safer than smoking or that it is tobacco harm reduction. Doing so could result in enforcement action by the FDA for a number of different violations such as misbranding or adulteration or false claims. Doing so without approval of a MRTP claim authorization is a huge mistake.
  • All online shops must have true age verification.

There is a tremendous amount of additional provisions that affect us all; mainly through the rules applied to manufacturers (which I won’t get into on here) and importers. Not all of the requirements are fully known yet either.

At this point we aren’t fighting for our rights, we are fighting for survival. Plain and simple. Don’t think for one second that you can sneak around the FDA and continue going forward as if it was 3 months ago. The FDA has the manpower to enforce their rules through Health & Human Services and the state and county health departments as well as third parties contracted by them.

Don’t buy into the notion that the black market will thrive and participating in the black market will only taunt the FDA. The FDA uses the U.S. Marshals to enforce seizures and DOJ for criminal proceedings. Don’t make the mistake of thinking they won’t use them.

The FDA thought of almost everything. Any possible loopholes have been closed up or left open to interpretation by them, not us.

For our industry and community to survive, everyone is a piece of the puzzle, compliance is not a choice, fighting is no longer a choice, they are all requirements for everyone’s survival.

It’s time for our industry and community to join together, grow and mature, and adapt.

Don’t just sit back and wait, if you don’t fight, if you don’t educate, if you don’t stand up for what you believe in, it will all go away.

~Eddie Mock, UTSFA Social Media Manager

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

Is Nicotine Carcinogenic?

Nicotine molecule chemical structure on blackboard. Chemical structure of nicotine from cigarettes written on blackboard by teacher in education of health. Nicotine molecule on green chalkboard.

People smoke for the nicotine but die from the tar” ~Michael Russell

Because of comments made by Representative Paul Ray at this week’s Health & Human Services Committee (starts at about 1hr 33min) where he claimed on public record that nicotine was carcinogenic, we felt it necessary to make sure the public was aware of the real truth rather than his desperate rhetoric he pulls from his bag of tricks.

First off, we want to address the comment regarding nicotine being a carcinogen. According to a study ordered by the Division of Lung Diseases of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), nicotine is not a significant risk of causing cancer hence all NRTs on the market today are rated as such by the FDA or other health agencies. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2725009/

Nicotine by itself does not cause cancer, but dozens of other chemicals found in tobacco products do“, according to researcher Virginia Reichert, NP; http://www.medpagetoday.com/Pulmonology/LungCancer/2039

 

 

addictionNext, we want to address the addictive nature of nicotine. According to numerous studies performed, it is the cocktail of ingredients and MAOIs in commercial tobacco which make it highly addictive. It is the substance giving the subjective pleasure of smoking. Smokers smoke for the nicotine, but die from the tar and toxic smoke.

In another study on the long-term effects of inhaled nicotine, the study could not find any increase in mortality, in atherosclerosis or frequency of tumors in the subject rats compared with controls. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8614291

Since so much credence is given to the FDA and their words of wisdom, the FDA has determined that there are no significant safety concerns with respect to long-term nicotine use. More specifically, the agency published a “Notice of Findings” in the Federal Register indicating that the long-term use of the nicotine-containing products was safe and does not appear to have significant potential for abuse or dependence. While this study was targeting Nicotine Replacement Therapy products, the nicotine used in ENDS is the same quality and source that the pharmaceutical giants use in their products. Therefore, just because the private market is using the liquid nicotine, does not change the carcinogenic nature of it.

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/04/02/2013-07528/modifications-to-labeling-of-nicotine-replacement-therapy-products-for-over-the-counter-human-use

Another study of Alzheimer’s patients showed that those who used nicotine without A conceptual look at Alzheimers disease, and some of the problems it brings.smoking were better able to remember and pay attention than those who didn’t. Another study showed that nicotine boosted cognitive function in older people who didn’t have Alzheimer’s, but were showing signs of age-related mental decline.

According to Dr. Paul Newhouse, director of Vanderbilt University’s Center for Cognitive Medicine; “nicotine by itself isn’t very addictive at all and seems to require assistance from other substances found in tobacco to get people hookedIt seems very safe even in nonsmokers. In our studies we find it actually reduces blood pressure chronically. And there were no addiction or withdrawal problems, and nobody started smoking cigarettes. The risk of addiction to nicotine alone is virtually nil.”

http://www.tampabay.com/news/health/study-finds-nicotine-safe-helps-in-alzheimers-parkinsons/2175396

We can’t say this loud enough but ask that he and others in public health making any of these claims to actually review ALL research to avoid making public statements that are dangerous to the public you serve. Just one month of continued smoking is more dangerous than a lifetime of ENDS usage.

research

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

Open statement from LorAnn Oils

LorAnnOpen statement from LorAnn regarding FDA compliance with their flavorings. If you are using them for your e-liquid recipes, you NEED to reformulate and have your reformulation invoiced by end of business on August 7th. Please see the following attachment for full details.

LorAnn May 2016 Statement Regarding FDA Tobacco Control Act

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

UTSFA in Washington DC

utsfa_capitol

Last week, 9 representatives from the Utah Smoke Free Association Board and our membership attended the first Vapor Technology Association Conference in Washington D.C.  It was an amazing experience and I would encourage everyone to take part in it if the opportunity comes around again. For those of you that are unfamiliar with the VTA, they have been around about 8 months and have been involved in the industry for a few years now but officially became an association in fall of 2015. Tony Abboud, President of the Vapor Technology Association is a highly accomplished Government Relations Specialist, Lawyer and Lobbyist and it showed all week.

Tony Abboud kicked off the conference with Stacy Ehrlich following Tony’s introduction. Stacy is a partner at Kleinfeld, Kaplan and Becker LLP. She has also worked closely with the FDA in the regulation of tobacco products since early in the legislative process of the Family Smoking Control Act. Azim Chowdhury from Keller and Heckman followed Stacy with his take on the FDA regulations and what it will take for Retailers and Manufactures to comply with each individual deadline in the Deeming Rule. Next up on the Speaker list on Tuesday was Seth Mailhot, a Partner at Michael Best & Friedrich LLP. Mr. Mailhot worked for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from 1994 to 2006 in positions ranging from researcher, engineer, investigator and compliance officer. Following Seth Mailhot, a Lawyer named Marc J. Scheineson spoke in further detail about the Deeming Rule and his experiences with the FDA.

The Deeming Rule is going to affect this industry in a way that is nerve-racking to even anticipate but its important to recognize a few things. The amount of paperwork, studies and costs involved in PMTA’s are far from achievable for much of the industry. That being said, there are still things we can do. Supporting HR2058 and the Cole-Bishop Amendment is key. Both bills are now bi-partisan and making some great traction.

Tuesday evening we attended a surprise evening event across from the Capitol for a private screening of A Billion Lives presented by Aaron Biebert himself. Several staff members of various Senators across the nation attended and from what we heard, they received the information well.

utsfa_handcheckOn Wednesday June 8th, 2016 we began the day with a speech from Ashley Davis of West Front Strategies. Ashley is part of the lobbying team for the VTA and orchestrated the meetings on Capitol Hill with each of our State Senators and their staff. We individually met with the staff of Senators Mike Lee, Orrin Hatch, and Rob Bishop. In addition to asking for each of their support on the Cole-Bishop Amendment, we took the opportunity to educate our Senators about the products we use and the technology that has the opportunity to save 480,000 lives a year. Most were very receptive, interested in what we had to say and seemed like they wanted to help. We finished the day with a meeting with Mia Love and her staff. Her staff was the most engaged by far, took down several pages of notes and couldn’t hear enough from us. Once Senator Love came out of her office, it was nothing short of amazing. She offered her support of the Cole-Bishop Amendment and also made clear that once the Amendment in the Agricultural Bill is actually submitted as it’s own bill, she will support that as well! Senator Love is anti regulatory laws and committed to do whatever she can to help us out to save the industry and the jobs our industry provides.

UTSFA_MiaL

All in all, it was a very successful trip and we were able to educate individuals that know virtually nothing about our industry. If you haven’t sent your story to your Senators and Representatives, I would encourage you to do so as soon as possible. The standard assumption is that your voice may not be heard and your time wasted. I can promise you after the last few weeks, more State officials are becoming very interested in this matter and more then willing to listen. We have made some great progress as of late but the fight is far from over. If you have any further questions about what was discussed at the Conference, please contact Grant Hiller, Eddie Mock or Darrel Schildknecht for more info. Thanks for everything each of you are doing to keep this industry alive. Have a great day and we look forward to seeing you soon.

~Grant Hiller, Industry Director

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

UTSFA joins the Vapor Technology Association

vta

For Immediate Release
June 16, 2016

Utah Smoke Free Association Joins Vapor Technology Association

Salt Lake City, UT – Today, the Utah Smoke Free Association (UTSFA), a trade association and advocacy group with a focus on Tobacco Harm Reduction (THR) through the use of vapor products and electronic cigarettes, announced that it will be joining the Vapor Technology Association (VTA) to advance its work improving the greater health of the Utah public.

VTA is the vapor industry’s premier public policy and advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C. and is a leading advocate for manufacturers, wholesalers, small business owners and entrepreneurs who have developed innovative and quality vapor products, providing adult consumers with a safer alternative to traditional combustible products.

“VTA has proven to be the national association best aligned with the UTSFA in leadership and legislative principals,” remarked Aaron Frazier, Utah Smoke Free Association Executive Director. “VTA is unrelenting in their advocacy of the vapor industry, and we are thrilled to partner in their efforts in Washington, DC, here in Utah and across the country.”

“The Utah Smoke Free Association will be critical in our fight not only to protect the rights of citizens who use vapor products as a healthier alternative to tobacco, but also to advocate for Cole-Bishop as a way to preserve the vapor industry as a whole,” said Tony Abboud, VTA National Legislative Director. “We are excited to join forces with UTSFA and look forward to working together, just as we did this past week in Washington, D.C., to ensure that these life-changing products remain on the shelves for years to come.”

The Utah Smoke Free Association is a consumer-driven non-profit 501(c)4 trade organization comprised of a consumer-governed Board of Directors. Its members and leaders are passionate about the vaping industry and advocate to keep our industry legal and active in the Utah community.

To learn more about the Utah Smoke Free Association, visit http://utsmokefree.org. To learn more about the Vapor Technology Association (VTA), visit http://vaportechnology.org/

###

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

UTSFA Officer Nominations

The Utah Smoke Free Association is a consumer driven non-profit 501(c)4 trade organization comprised of a consumer governed Board of Directors. All positions are volunteer and shall serve a term of 12-24 months unless the position is resigned. All Officer positions will be nominated by the public and voted on by the UTSFA General Members along with the existing Board of Directors. Officers are not required as part of our By-Laws but add to the leadership and help spread the work out amongst a larger group.

We are currently accepting nominations for 3 positions:

  • President
  • Vice-President
  • Social Media Manager

Nominees must be passionate about the vaping industry and who have a passion for advocating to keep our industry legal and active in the Utah community. The leadership team meets regularly throughout the year to address legislative issues, work to improve the industry image through media and public relations, and work with the industry on compliance.

The time commitment can range from a few hours each week to a few hours each month depending on current activities. You must have skills in building and maintaining relationships but no prior experience is required; just a passion to serve the community which has helped so many people over the last 10 years. Self-nomination is acceptable and encouraged!

All nominations close at midnight on 31 May 2016. The Board of Directors will review all nominations and elections will begin on or about June 3rd.

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

First Do No Harm

ignorance

Sometimes I’m amazed at people. Oftentimes it’s for the amazing talents or feats of a particular individual. Unfortunately, mostly it’s due to the amazing ability some people have to ignore fact and never move outside their mind filled with lies and prejudice; even at possible great harm to others. Case in point, read this recent post about the recent groundbreaking study out of the UK (go ahead, I’ll wait).

Now, imagine an individual in a position of influence at the state level. Someone who has the power to create and pass laws at will. Got him pictured? Good. *Note* it’s probably not who you are thinking. Now imagine him sitting behind his computer or smart phone and receiving an email with details of the new study. No embellishment. No commentary. Just actual information directly from the report. Not hard to imagine, right? One would think that someone intelligent enough to get himself elected, go through medical school and be a highly respected member of society would mean they actually take the time to educate himself and has an open enough mind to recognize that science can change and, well, facts are facts. Well…..a man much wiser than I once said “People don’t want to hear the truth because they don’t want their illusions destroyed“.

So with that said, allow me to post some of his response to me and his capitol peers (in red italics) regarding this groundbreaking study he was essentially hand delivered but refused to read prior to responding. If you ask me who it was, I won’t tell you. I’m not the type of person to put an elected leader on blast publicly or hit “Reply to All” and make him appear foolish. That behavior in politics is foolish in it’s own right and simply is not productive. I just want to show my readers his foolishness so hopefully, maybe, he or one of his peers will see this and open their eyes to the truth. [edit – I’ve now received two responses so will try and address both at the same time]

  • I notice that you choose your terms carefully to avoid using the word Nicotine
    • Actually sir, none of the words are mine nor did I carefully choose anything nor avoid using any term. These are the words of the MOST RESPECTED MEDICAL ORGANIZATION IN THE BLOODY WORLD! Look em up. The Royal College of Physicians has over 35,000 doctors in it’s ranks and has been around longer than any and has influenced more groundbreaking health policy than any other.
  • Anyone who uses nicotine for any length of time whether vaping, smoking, chewing, or in patches or gums, will have a prolonged and difficult period of withdrawal if and when they try to break free of it.
    • According to the FDA, you know, those guys out East who YOU want to regulate our industry; well, they claim completely the opposite. The actually published a Notice of Findings in the Federal Register indicating that the “long-term use of the nicotine was safe and does not appear to have significant potential for abuse or dependence.”
    • Big Pharma uses study data from smokeless tobacco use in Sweden (Snus) as their basis for Nicotine Replacement Therapy. They claim, and the FDA supports the fact that “long-term nicotine consumption without smoke has no clinical significance.”
    • Lastly, according to Dr. Paul Newhouse, the director of Vanderbilt University’s Center for Cognitive Medicine (who has done extensive research into beneficial effects of nicotine on the brain); “Nicotine by itself isn’t very addictive at all. Nicotine seems to require assistance from other substances found in tobacco to get people hooked.”
  • Nicotine is the second most addicting substance that we know of (second only to heroin and the opioids).  And it is addicting in whatever form you take it.
    • While I’ll concede that nicotine creates a dependence, not addiction (there is a monumental difference and terminology is important), in those who use it; I bring you back to Dr Newhouse’s research above. His research, and that of virtually every producer of NRT products shows that “It seems very safe even in nonsmokers. In our studies we find it actually reduces blood pressure chronically. And there were no addiction or withdrawal problems, and nobody started smoking cigarettes. The risk of addiction to nicotine alone is virtually nil.”
  • Independent of the form it is taken in has been shown to cause cancers in intestines, lung, pancreas and breast.  It accelerates macular degeneration which causes blindness, and worsens emphysema and raises blood pressure.
    • I’m beginning to see something here now. When you think of vapor products, you must be able to cognitively separate nicotine from smoking. They are two separate subjects here. When nicotine is combine with tobacco smoke, you are 100% correct in that. However, nicotine by itself has never been shown to cause any cancers or the other issues you mention. Never. Ever. In fact, even the FDA, NIH and virtually every cancer center study in the world shows this.
  • Your industry continues to be dependent, as it has for many decades now, on getting yet another generation of the young addicted to nicotine
  • From second responder: We have a whole new group of people working for the tobacco companies that are simply not going to give up the billions of dollars generated from their addicted clients
    • Ahhh even more is clear. For reference, I do not work for nor does this organization receive funding from Big Tobacco. This industry is NOT Big Tobacco. This industry was NOT founded by Big Tobacco. The small business owners have zero financial ties to Big Tobacco. This industry, was founded by a…wait for it…MEDICAL DOCTOR! The over 15,000 small business owners and over 10 million adult consumers in the US are all ex-smokers who have a single goal, to eradicate combustible tobacco and Big Tobacco globally.
    • For a great history lesson (if you are even still reading at this point), here is a fantastic timeline of the industry.

I could continue but this post is already very long and frankly, I have more important things to work on than to respond to rhetoric that is spewed forth by someone who is too narrow minded to open their mind to the fact that science changes. Scientific study after study is proving that a prohibitionist approach is killing people. Claiming that we don’t know enough or there are not enough studies is doing nothing but proving ignorance or incompetence and I honestly have done everything possible to educate you. If your public that you represent along with over 300 scientific studies AND the largest, most respected and most prestigious medical organization in the world cannot convince you; then I wish you all the best in your career and I’ll pray for your patients.

I close by reminding you of an oath you took when you started your profession so very many years ago. Primum non nocere, which for those not speaking Latin is a phrase that means “first, do no harm; one of the core principals of the Hippocratic Oath. An oath YOU had to take in order to get through your prestigious university to get that fancy piece of paper on your office wall. This oath requires that you maintain an open mind and treat patients with the latest information available; not shove your head in the sand (or in other dark places) and ignore the facts.

Doing nothing or ignoring the facts is no different than doing actual harm to those you have pledged to care for. Doing nothing is tantamount to medical malpractice and the 1200 lives you allow to die because of your chosen ignorance is nothing short of genocide. But if you don’t believe in scientific advances don’t worry, it’s only A Billion dirty smokers Lives on the line….Nobody loves them, right?

harm

 

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

Society For The Study Of Addiction

ssa

The Society For The Study Of Addiction has released a study titled “A framework for evaluating the public health impact of e-cigarettes and other vaporized nicotine products” which contains the following conclusions:

  • In the US, increasing e-cigarette use has been accompanied by an unusually large reduction in adult and youth smoking prevalence.
  • These products expose users to substantially lower levels of toxicants than combustible cigarettes.
  • A multi-criteria decision analysis estimated that exclusive VNP use is associated with 5% of the mortality risks of smoking. This is comparable to the estimated risks of low-nitrosamine smokeless tobacco.
  • Studies using major biomarkers of cancer and other chemicals in e-cigarettes indicate substantially lower (e.g. 9–450 times) levels compared to cigarette smoke.
  • For dual users, VNP use may translate to a lower quantity and duration of cigarettes smoked. Both may decrease lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) risk.
  • The potential to reduce risk is likely to depend upon the age of initial dual use. Although much use now begins at later ages, VNP use is likely to occur at earlier ages in more recent cohorts of smokers, and thereby provide a greater reduction in cigarette use and toxic exposures over longer periods of use.
  • Initiating VNP use before cigarette smoking may delay or prevent smoking initiation and thereby reduce smoking risks.
  • The population health impact depends critically upon whether the never smoker who tries VNPs would have smoked cigarettes in the absence of VNPs.
  • Studies of youth and young adult use from the United States and other countries using different use measures have found current smokers to be at least 15 times more likely to use VNPs than never smokers.
  • Adolescents and young adults who use VNPs are most likely to be those at higher risk of initiating cigarette smoking.
  • Young VNP experimenters are more likely to engage in other risky behaviors and have executive function deficits like those found in cigarette smokers. These findings suggest that a common liability model is more plausible than a gateway from VNP use to cigarette smoking.
  • Because VNPs are more widely available and often more appealing to smokers than conventional NRT, they have the potential for having a larger impact on the rate of smoking cessation in the population.
  • Concerns have been raised that cigarette smoking will be re-normalized by VNP use. This issue can be addressed by the media and public health campaigns that encourage norms that are hostile to cigarette smoking and at the same time distinguishing clearly between VNP and cigarette risks, discouraging dual use and encouraging exclusive VNP use.
  • The availability of VNPs may provide a justification for stronger policies to discourage cigarette smoking because smokers, particularly those of lower socio-economic status and with mental health issues, are given a less risky and potentially less costly alternative way to service their need for nicotine.
  • Cigarette companies that have entered the smokeless tobacco market have encouraged dual rather than exclusive use, and are likely to do the same with VNPs. By contrast, VNP companies that are unaffiliated with cigarette manufacturers want smokers to switch completely from cigarettes to VNPs.
  • Product content regulations that create regulatory hurdles that only large firms can surmount are likely to favor the cigarette industry and discourage innovation by firms outside the cigarette industry.
  • Cigarette companies do not control VNPs as they do the rest of the tobacco business; many manufacturers of e-cigarettes such as NJOY do not sell cigarettes, and there are thousands of vape shops that are independent of the cigarette industry
  • Retailer point-of-sale restrictions, which limit subsidies by cigarette manufacturers to provide shelf space and price promotions, can reduce price discounting and discourage advertisement displays. This could provide greater shelf space for VNP products to be sold by independent firms.
  • From a public health perspective, VNP policies should aim to discourage experimental and regular use of VNPs by never smokers who would not have smoked otherwise while encouraging innovations in VNP products that promote smoking cessation. The evidence suggests a strong potential for VNP use to improve population health by reducing or displacing cigarette use in countries where cigarette prevalence is high and smokers are interested in quitting.
  • The primary aim of tobacco control policy should therefore be to discourage cigarette use while providing the means for smokers to more easily quit smoking, even if that means switching for some time to VNPs rather than quitting all nicotine use.

The use of vaporized nicotine products (VNPs), especially e-cigarettes and, to a lesser extent, pressurized aerosol nicotine products and heat-not-burn tobacco products, are being adopted increasingly as an alternative to smoking combusted products, primarily cigarettes. Considerable controversy has accompanied their marketing and use. We propose a framework that describes and incorporates patterns of VNP and combustible cigarette use in determining the total amount of toxic exposure effects on population health. We begin by considering toxicity and the outcomes relevant to population health. We then present the framework and define different measures of VNP use; namely, trial and long-term use for exclusive cigarette smokers, exclusive VNP and dual (cigarette and VNP) use. Using a systems thinking framework and decision theory we considered potential pathways for current, former and never users of VNPs. We then consider the evidence to date and the probable impacts of VNP use on public health, the potential effects of different policy approaches and the possible influence of the tobacco industry on VNP and cigarette use.

– Content courtesy of No More Casualties and the Society For The Study Of Addiction

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather

Nicotine without smoke


rcp-report

Today the Royal College of Physicians, the world’s oldest and most respected medical organization, has released a new 200 page report titled “Nicotine without smoke: Tobacco Harm Reduction” which concludes, among other things:

  • Smokers can be reassured and ENCOURAGED to use e-cigs, and the public can be reassured that e-cig are MUCH SAFER than smoking.
  • E-cigs are NOT a gateway to smoking.
  • E-cigs do NOT result in normalization of smoking.
  • Regulation should NOT be allowed to significantly inhibit the development and use of harm-reduction products by smokers.
  • E-cigs appear to be EFFECTIVE when used by smokers as an aid to QUITTING SMOKING.
  • E-cigs are marketed as consumer products and are proving MUCH MORE POPULAR than NRT as a substitute and COMPETITOR for tobacco cigarettes.
  • The hazard to health arising from long-term vapor inhalation is UNLIKELY TO EXCEED 5 PERCENT of the harm from smoking tobacco.
  • Evidence indicates that e-cigs are being used almost exclusively as SAFER ALTERNATIVES to smoked tobacco, by confirmed smokers who are trying to REDUCE HARM to themselves OR OTHERS from smoking, or to quit smoking completely.
  • In the interests of public health it is important to PROMOTE THE USE of e-cigs, NRT and other non-tobacco nicotine products as WIDELY as possible as a SUBSTITUTE for smoking in the UK.

This report aims to provide a fresh update on the use of harm reduction in tobacco smoking, in relation to all non-tobacco nicotine products but particularly e-cigarettes. It concludes that, for all the potential risks involved, harm reduction has huge potential to prevent death and disability from tobacco use, and to hasten our progress to a tobacco-free society.

A copy of the report can be downloaded here: Nicotine without smoke

Should you wish to discuss the report, the Utah Smoke Free Association is happy to discuss the findings at a time of your choosing. For any questions or concerns about any of the specific findings, we encourage you to reach out directly to the Royal College of Physicians or the UK Centre for Tobacco & Alcohol Studies  which is funded by the UK Clinical Research Collaboration who were the authors of the report.

We encourage all readers of this to forward this information to your legislators, mayors, city councils and health departments for their review and education.

Facebooktwitterby feather
rssby feather