At a boisterous NYC Council hearing on e-cigarettes, ACSH got our points across, spearheading a science-based retort to the NYC Health Commissioner s spurious assertions about chemicals in the vapor, and how hard it is to tell smoking from vaping.
Harm Reduction
Safe and effective in helping smokers quit, concerns about e-cigarettes provoke efforts to suppress their use in public by New York City. Can the City leaders not tell the difference between a cigarette, and an e-cigarette? It s not that hard.
Today is the 38th Great American Smokeout, sponsored since 1976 by the American Cancer Society. So why is the American Cancer Society trying to preserve cigarette markets and dissuade smokers from quitting?
Since 1987 the CDC has been surveying pregnant women in 40 states and New York City for health-related activities and outcomes. The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAM) recently reported on the frequency of smoking by women before, during and after pregnancy. Some of the results were good, but some were not so hot.
The grassroots "vaping community" of e-cigarette users was mainly responsible for avoiding having the EU ban, in effect, e-cigarettes. The NYTimes discussion of this public health victory focuses instead on the so-called "e-cigarette industry" and its manipulation of the EU Parliament. This is false, although some e-cig companies did try to mobilize their customers. Why not?
A new study shows the impressive success rate of e-cigarettes in reducing the use of cigarettes in a small select group, over the course of one year. Smoking was reduced in vapers and dual users, and many dual users wound up quitting cigarettes. We also comment on yet another duplicitous interview by the CDC's Tom Frieden.
A new study, reported at a cancer research meeting, shows that the "problem" of teens becoming addicted to nicotine via e-cigarettes is another in a long line of hypothetical, or phony, scares promoted by our public health authorities afraid of anything that resembles a cigarette.
The NYC Council passed a measure raising the age to purchase tobacco products to 21, highest in the nation. Thankfully, no restrictions on e-cigarettes nor the nicotine liquids many vapers prefer were included except for the age limit change. ACSH supports this change, although we don't believe it will prevent most under-21s from getting smokes if they want to.
A long NYTimes article on the current e-cigarette situation fails to shed much light on the complexities of the "debate." The writer only sought opinions from those whose opinions were already well-known. But the NYC Council will not take action against e-cigs, maybe partially thanks to ACSH.
In a surprisingly pro-public-health move, the EU Parliament voted down attempts to restrict or even ban e-cigarettes. Now we hope the FDA follows their lead.
Millions of smokers, their families, and public health experts await the FDA's ruling on how they plan to regulate e-cigarettes. If too stringent, the nascent industry will go underground and millions of smokers who switched to vaping will become criminals.
USA Today's phony "debate" on the risks and benefits of e-cigarettes showed up their agenda rather than the facts. While the "pro" side's Kessler had the facts straight, his position as CEO of Lorillard makes his status and opinions suspect in many venues.