E-cigarette ban is a victory for public health 3/25/2015

The writer is a resident of Kensington and a senior director at the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20150325/OPINION/150329562/1014/e-cigarette-ban-is-a-victory-for-public-health&template=gazette

E-cigarette companies claim their products are intended for adults, but there is abundant evidence that their marketing heavily targets kids. Advertisements for e-cigarettes have proliferated on TV shows watched by teens, and kid-friendly flavors such as Cherry Crush, Creamy Milk Chocolate and Captain Crunch are readily available online.

<snip>

E-cigarettes have not been shown to be “safe” — in fact, they expose users to formaldehyde and other potentially hazardous chemicals. Public-health experts agree that more research is needed to understand the effects of e-cigarettes on their users and the nonusers around them.

Yet, a federally funded study released last year revealed that the popularity of e-cigarettes among teens is now higher than that of traditional cigarettes. This finding suggests what may be the biggest danger posed by e-cigarettes — that they are making smoking “cool” again among kids.

This much is clear: There is no reason for kids to use e-cigarettes. The Montgomery County bill, which was introduced by Councilwoman Nancy Floreen and approved unanimously, will discourage e-cigarette use and help to protect the health of our kids.

Steven Weiss, Kensington

E-cigs may be cleaner, but not necessarily safer says Mid-Atlanic ALA, timeleader.com (PA) 19 Feb 2014

http://timesleader.com/news/extras/1201037/E-cigs-may-be-cleaner-but-not-necessarily-safer

If it’s Deborah Brown, president and CEO of the American Lung Association of the Mid-Atlantic, the story behind electronic cigarettes isn’t all that rosy.

“No brand has been submitted for evaluation of their safety,” Brown said. “In some initial lab tests in 2009, the (Food and Drug Administration) did find some detectable levels of toxic, cancer-causing chemicals, including an ingredient used in anti-freeze

……

The association claims the e-cigarette industry is using marketing tactics of the tobacco industry by using celebrity spokespeople to glamorize its products, making unproven health claims, encouraging smokers to switch instead of quit, and creating candy- and fruit-flavored products to attract youth.

….

“We are faced with a deep-pocketed, ever-evolving tobacco industry that’s determined to maintain its market share at the expense of our kids and current smokers,” Brown continued.

ACS opposes bill aimed at stopping children from using electronic cigarettes, Columbus Dispatch 14 Nov 2013

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/11/14/e-cigarette-bill-passes-house-despite-criticism.html

With the sales of electronic cigarettes reaching an estimated $1.7 billion in 2013, Rep. Stephanie Kunze, R-Hilliard, said her bill is focused on banning sales of the nicotine-infused products to people younger than 18. She said a national study recently found that the number of middle- and high-school students who have tried e-cigarettes doubled in one year.

“This new product is opening up an entirely new generation that can be addicted to nicotine,” Kunze said. “There is also an alarming trend of e-cigarettes being used as the vehicle for other drugs.”

When the user inhales, an e-cigarette heats up nicotine-infused liquid inside, releasing a vapor that is inhaled and exhaled. They come in a variety of flavors, including chocolate, cotton candy and Dr Pepper.

Rep. Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, said keeping e-cigarettes away from children is important, but the bill defines the products under a new category that protects them from state cigarette taxes and laws such as the indoor smoking ban.

…..

Kunze said the bill does not prevent future tax changes and she doesn’t understand why groups including the American Cancer Society and heart and lung associations are opposing it when they backed a similar measure last year in Indiana.

The Cancer Society has said that it did not become aware until recently that the bills were part of a nationwide push by the tobacco industry to avoid having the products taxed like regular cigarettes.

The Cancer Society says higher taxes are more effective at keeping tobacco products away from teenagers than laws restricting sales to youths.

E-cigarettes “contain nicotine, which is highly addictive and derived from tobacco,” said Jeff Stephens of the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network of Ohio. “There is no reason to give these products special treatment in the (law).”

ALA Minnesota basically admits anti-ecig position has nothing to do with lungs or health, nujournal.com 12 Feb 14

http://www.nujournal.com/page/content.detail/id/548527/Sleepy-Eye-OKs-e-cigarette-sales-moratorium.html?nav=5009

“It’s like the wild west. This is a poisonous product without regulations,” said ALA Program Manager Erin Simmons. “I could make this stuff in the trunk of my car and sell it.”

Note that the policy they were supporting was a sales ban, not quality control regulation.

ACS pretends opposition to ban on ecig sales to minors is because it might miss some, KUMN New Mexico, 6 Feb 14

http://kunm.org/post/lawmakers-advance-ban-e-cigarette-sales-minors

Sandra Adondakis is with the American Cancer Society.  She says this version of the bill might not ban every type of e-cigarette because the definition of the devices is too vague.

“It would be better for us to wait for FDA to tell us ‘no sales to minors,’” Adondakis said.  She added her group would also support a clearer legislative bill that has good definitions covering all the products that are currently on the market and that define e-cigarettes as within the definition of tobacco products.

ALA declares ecigs “deadly” and denigrates harm reduction, KOAM Oklahoma, 11 Mar 13

Another from the SteveVape archive

http://stevevape.com/oklahoma-proposes-ecig-tax-ala-against-it/ outsources to http://www.koamtv.com/story/21577607/oklahoma-lawmakers-consider-tighter-regulations-for-electronic-cigarettes

The Oklahoma proposal also would tax e-cigarettes like regular tobacco.  However, Oklahoma’s American Lung Association is against the bill’s new regulations writing:  “…it would effectively have the state of Oklahoma endorse and promote deadly products as ‘harm reduction’ solutions.”

Note, the first line of this (by the reporter) is wrong — the proposed tax on e-cigarettes was quite a lot lower than existing taxes on other tobacco products.  But this seems not to relate to the ALA quote, which seems to want nothing short of a ban.  Does not explain why they opposed the tax when a ban was not on the table, though.

ALA claims switching to ecigs is still smoking, KSDK Missouri, 29 Apr 13

Another from the @SteveVape archive

http://stevevape.com/tv-station-reports-acs-expert-on-definition-of-smoking/ outsources to http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/378118/3/Electronic-cigarette-health-risks-and-benefits

Critics say too little is known about the safety of electronic cigarettes because they’re not regulated. Michelle Bernth handles communications for the American Lung Association St. Louis, which opposes e-cigarettes.

“Right now there’s a lot of misinformation about electronic cigarettes,” said Bernth. “The first is that they’re not harmful to your health which is not true because nicotine which we know is harmful to your health. They also contain chemicals we don’t fully understand. Right now they’re not being regulated by the FDA. And so we want to learn more about what goes on with them before we can understand how harmful or not harmful they are to people.”

…

The American Cancer Society, like the American Lung Association, opposes e-cigarettes. “As long as you’re inhaling nicotine and other toxic chemicals into your lungs, you’re still smoking,” said Michelle Bernth.

ALA ACS AHA success in keeping RI from banning ecig sales to minors, Providence Journal 17 Jul 13

Another from the @SteveVape archive

http://stevevape.com/rhode-island-governor-prohibitionists-succeed-in-making-nicotine-available-to-minors/ outsources to http://www.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/content/20130717-r.i.-governor-chafee-vetoes-e-cigarette-ban-for-those-under-18.ece

PROVIDENCE — Governor Chafee has vetoed legislation prohibiting anyone under the age of 18 from purchasing e-cigarettes and other “vapor products” that heat liquid nicotine into a smokable vapor.

The American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, the American Lung Association, and other health advocacy groups, had called on Chafee to veto the measure.

…

In his veto message, Chafee said, “The sale of electronic cigarettes to children should be prohibited, but it is counter-productive to prohibit sales to children while simultaneously exempting electronic cigarettes from laws concerning regulation, enforcement, licensing or taxation.

“As a matter of public policy, electronic cigarette laws should mirror tobacco product laws, not circumvent them,” Chafee said.

ALA’s Wimmer thinks ecigs are bad if they are different from cigarettes, or if they are similar, CNN 6 Jan 14

Another from the @SteveVape archives

http://stevevape.com/cnn-gives-ton-digital-ink-ala-spread-utter-misinformation/ outsources to http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/06/opinion/wimmer-ecigarette-danger/

by Harold P. Wimmer is the president and CEO of the American Lung Association.

For the makers of electronic cigarettes, today we are living in the Wild West — a lawless frontier where they can say or do whatever they want, no matter what the consequences. They are free to make unsubstantiated therapeutic claims and include myriad chemicals and additives in e-cigarettes.

Big Tobacco desperately needs new nicotine addicts and is up to its old tricks to make sure it gets them. E-cigarettes are being aggressively marketed to children with flavors like Bazooka Bubble Gum, Cap’n Crunch and Cotton Candy. Joe Camel was killed in the 1990s, but cartoon characters are back promoting e-cigarettes.

Many e-cigarettes look like Marlboro or Camel cigarettes. Like their old-Hollywood counterparts, glamorous and attractive celebrities are appearing on TV promoting specific e-cigarette brands. Free samples are even being handed out on street corners.

The above is the rather unique part of this, but the rest is a nearly fully catalog of ALA anti-THR claims.

A report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shows the promotion of e-cigarettes is reaching our children with alarming success. In just one year, e-cigarette use doubled among high school and middle school students, and 1 in 10 high school students have used an e-cigarette. Altogether, 1.78 million middle and high school students nationwide use e-cigarettes.

The three largest cigarette companies are all selling e-cigarettes. Because tobacco use kills more than 400,000 people each year and thousands more successfully quit, the industry needs to attract and addict thousands of children each day, as well as keep adults dependent to maintain its huge profits.

Nicotine is a highly addictive substance, whether delivered in a conventional cigarette or their electronic counterparts. The potential harm from exposure to secondhand emissions from e-cigarettes is unknown. Two initial studies have found formaldehyde, benzene and tobacco-specific nitrosamines (a well-known carcinogen) coming from those secondhand emissions. We commend New York City recently for banning the use of e-cigarettes indoors.

No e-cigarette has been approved by the FDA as a safe and effective product to help people quit smoking. Yet many companies are making claims that e-cigarettes help smokers quit. When smokers are ready to quit, they should call 1-800-QUIT NOW or talk with their doctors about using one of the seven FDA-approved medications proven to be safe and effective in helping smokers quit.

According to one study, there are 250 different e-cigarette brands for sale in the U.S. today. With so many brands, there is likely to be wide variation in the chemicals — intended and unintended — that each contain.

In 2009, lab tests conducted by the FDA found detectable levels of toxic cancer-causing chemicals — including an ingredient used in anti-freeze — in two leading brands of e-cigarettes and 18 various e-cigarette cartridges.

There is no safe form of tobacco. Right now, the public health and medical community or consumers have no way of knowing what chemicals are contained in an e-cigarette or what the short and long term health implications might be.

Commonsense regulation of e-cigarettes by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is urgently needed. In the absence of meaningful oversight, the tobacco industry has free rein to promote their products as “safe” without any proof.

A proposal to regulate e-cigarettes and other tobacco products has been under review at the White House Office of Management and Budget since October 1, 2013. The Obama administration must move forward with these rules to protect the health of everyone, especially our children.

ACS just wants ecig taxes, not minor sales bans, Columbus Dispatch 14 Nov 13

Another from the @SteveVape archives:

http://stevevape.com/iowa-ignores-ala-acs-decides-to-protect-kids-instead/ outsources to http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/11/14/e-cigarette-bill-passes-house-despite-criticism.html

Kunze said the bill does not prevent future tax changes and she doesn’t understand why groups including the American Cancer Society and heart and lung associations are opposing it when they backed a similar measure last year in Indiana.

The Cancer Society has said that it did not become aware until recently that the bills were part of a nationwide push by the tobacco industry to avoid having the products taxed like regular cigarettes.

The Cancer Society says higher taxes are more effective at keeping tobacco products away from teenagers than laws restricting sales to youths.

ALA and ACS basically admit goal of sneaking in rules to prevent policies from treating products differently, Columbus Dispatch 22 Jul 13

Thanks to the huge archive at stevevape.com, there are a lot to be found from this search: http://stevevape.com/?s=American+Lung+Association (e-cigarette information site, by vendor blogger @SteveVape).  The highlights will each get a separate entry for sorting purposes, starting with:

http://stevevape.com/prohibitionists-to-ohio-kids-vape-em-if-you-got-em/ outsources to http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/07/22/e-cigarette-bill-called-trojan-horse.html

(more or less an admission by ALA and ACS that their goal is to sneak in rules that prevent regulators from making thinking decisions to treat low-risk products different from cigarettes)

“When we looked at the bill title, we thought it was something we were behind,” said Jeff Stephens, director of state policy for the American Cancer Society in Ohio. “But as we looked and shared it with our national office, they said, ‘Oh my God, this is happening all over the country.”

Anti-smoking advocates say that below the surface of House Bill 144 is a tobacco-industry-crafted “Trojan horse” designed to ensure that the emerging electronic-cigarette market and other alternative nicotine products remain taxed at a lower rate than traditional cigarettes and stay outside the state’s indoor smoking ban.

“What they’re trying to do is carve out a new definition that will muddy the waters for many other tobacco products now, and new and emerging products that we don’t know about yet,” Stephens said.

…

But others warn that data on the health effects of the 3-year-old products are incomplete. Kunze said that as a mom of two teenage daughters, she saw the legislation as a way to handle “an immediate threat to our minors and our youth.”

But Stephens and Shelly Kiser, advocacy director for the American Lung Association in Ohio, say youth-access laws are among the least-effective ways to prevent minors from getting hold of tobacco products — so tobacco companies lose little by advocating the provision. But higher taxation, they argue, is a key deterrent.

Kunze said she is surprised by the opposition, which focuses on the bill’s new definition of alternative nicotine products.

Kunze said the definition is designed to cover new tobacco-industry products without having to change the law each time. “This is generic enough to allow the things they are coming out with, like lozenges,” she said.

Nine states have passed bills similar to the one introduced in Ohio, over objections from anti-smoking groups. Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee last week vetoed a similar, but somewhat more-restrictive bill, calling it “counterproductive to prohibit sales to children while simultaneously exempting electronic cigarettes from laws concerning regulation, enforcement, licensing or taxation.”

Other states passed e-cigarette access bills before the American Cancer Society became aware of the national push.

Stephens and Kiser said they have proposed a simpler way to block the sale of e-cigarettes to minors without creating a new category of alternative nicotine products.

Kunze, pointing to a recent legal opinion from the non-partisan Legislative Service Commission, argues that the bill does not change the current tax status of e-cigarettes, and that nothing would stop advocates from pushing for a higher tax rate in the future.

Cathy Callaway, associate director of state and local campaigns for the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network, agrees, but she said the bill sets the stage for treating e-cigarettes differently from other tobacco products.

Asked if e-cigarettes should be taxed the same as regular cigarettes, Kunze said: “I don’t think there is enough information yet. We just don’t know to what extent they are more or less harmful.”

Ex-ALA chief supports ecigs, USNews 27 Sep 13

h/t @prerunne

This is not strictly on-topic, but it is worth dropping in a note here about the fact that Connor is now a THR supporter.  (And the article has shout-outs to CASAA and our research, so can’t complain about that.)

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/09/27/american-lung-association-electronic-cigarettes-regulation

(no pull quotes because there are no statements about or by ALA per se — Connor does slam the segment of the industry that is not paying him, which would be pulled if he were still ALA and saying it, ALA cannot be blamed for that)

ALA Board Chair (Lanzafame) & CEO (Wimmer) accuse “Big Tobacco” of being “happy to hook children with a gummy bear-flavored e-cigarette” – The Gilmer Mirror, October 2013

E-cigarette use among middle school children has doubled in just one year.  Last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced that e-cigarette use also doubled among high school students in one year, and that 1 in 10 high school students have used an e-cigarette.  Altogether, 1.78 million middle and high school students nationwide use e-cigarettes.  Yet, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) still is not regulating e-cigarettes.  The absence of regulatory oversight means the tobacco industry is free to promote Atomic Fireball or cotton candy-flavored e-cigarettes to our children.  Clearly, the aggressive marketing and promotion of e-cigarettes is reaching our children with alarming success.

It is well known that nicotine is a highly addictive substance, whether delivered in a conventional cigarette or an e-cigarette.  The use of sweet flavors is an old tobacco industry trick to entice and addict young children to tobacco products, and the entrance of the nation’s largest tobacco companies into this market clearly is having an impact.   Why does Big Tobacco care about e-cigarettes?  Tobacco use kills more than 400,000 people each year and thousands more successfully quit.  To maintain its consumer ranks and enormous profits, the tobacco industry needs to attract and addict thousands of children each day, as well as keep adults dependent.   Big Tobacco is happy to hook children with a gummy bear-flavored e-cigarette, a grape flavored cigar or a Marlboro, so long as they become addicted.  We share the CDC’s concern that children who begin by using e-cigarettes may be condemned to a lifelong addiction to nicotine and cigarettes.

<snip>

The FDA has not approved e-cigarettes as a safe or effective method to help smokers quit. When smokers are ready to quit, they should call 1-800-QUIT NOW or talk with their doctors about using one of the seven FDA-approved medications proven to be safe and effective in helping smokers quit.

According to recent estimates, there are 250 different e-cigarette brands for sale in the U.S. today. With that many brands, there is likely to be wide variation in the chemicals that each contain.  In initial lab tests conducted by the FDA in 2009, detectable levels of toxic cancer-causing chemicals were found — including an ingredient used in anti-freeze — in two leading brands of e-cigarettes and 18 various e-cigarette cartridges. That is why it is so urgent for FDA to begin its regulatory oversight of e-cigarettes, which must include ingredient disclosure by e-cigarette manufacturers to the FDA.

Also unknown is what the potential harm may be to people exposed to secondhand emissions from e-cigarettes. Two initial studies have found formaldehyde, benzene and tobacco-specific nitrosamines (a well-known carcinogen) coming from those secondhand emissions. While there is a great deal more to learn about these products, it is clear that there is much to be concerned about, especially in the absence of FDA oversight.

http://www.gilmermirror.com/view/full_story/23870545/article—Cotton-Candy-and-Atomic-Fireball-flavored-electronic-cigarettes-are-forging-a-new-pathway-to-addiction–death-and-disease?instance=secondary_stories_left_column

ACS, AHA, IPHA oppose bill banning sales to minors because it doesn’t tax e-cigs, Des Moines Register 1/29/2014

h/t Alex Clark

Regarding a bill proposed in Iowa that would ban sales of e-cigarettes to minors:

Lobbyists for the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association and the Iowa Public Health Association formally opposed the bills, telling lawmakers e-cigarettes should be regulated just like traditional tobacco products — with higher taxes, a ban on use in the enclosed spaces and other restrictions.

The bill, while prohibiting access for children, actually makes further regulation more difficult, they said, because it contains definitions for “alternative nicotine products” and “vapor products” that create a legal difference between an e-cigarette and other tobacco products.

“Not including electronic smoking devices in the definition of tobacco products sets the stage for these products to be treated differently than other tobacco products here in Iowa,” said Jeneane Moody, executive director of the Iowa Public Health Association. “IPHA opposes attempts to change laws for e-cigarettes that could in the short or long term undermine existing effective tobacco controls.”

The proliferation of e-cigarettes could erode the social norms that have developed since Iowa’s statewide smoking ban was passed in 2008, Moody and others said, confusing smokers and nonsmokers alike on what is allowed under the law.

Supporters of the bill:

Rep. Chip Baltimore, R-Boone and chairman of the House subcommittee that considered the bill, dismissed those arguments.

“To try to define this as a tobacco product is simply an effort to pull it into a smoke-free act or a taxation scheme that I don’t think is necessarily appropriate,” he said.

<snip>

Baltimore also questioned whether applying tobacco taxes and regulations to e-cigarettes was good policy at all.

“Given the choice between smoking a carcinogenic cigarette or a non-carcinogenic e-cigarette I think that we ought to, in the interest of public health, preserve the financial incentives that would drive consumers toward e-cigarettes,” Baltimore said.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20140129/NEWS10/301290064/-1/content/Health-advocates-say-e-cigarette-bills-fall-short

ACS, AHA, IPHA oppose ban on sales to minors–Iowa Watchdog, 1/30/2014

“Public health groups: Don’t ban sale of e-cigarettes to minors”

Regarding a bill introduced in Iowa that would ban sales of e-cigarettes to minors:

The Iowa Legislature’s first try at regulating e-cigarettesgot off to an unusual start, as public health groups strongly opposed bills introduced to prevent the use of the devices by minors.

Their opposition is based on a desire to have e-cigarettes classified as tobacco products, even though the devices contain no tobacco.

<snip>

The only opposition to the bill came from the American Cancer Society, theAmerican Heart Association and the Iowa Public Health Association. All three objected to the fact the bill was drafted with no input from public health experts. But the their primary objection was that the bill doesn’t not define e-cigarettes as a tobacco product.

http://watchdog.org/126175/iowa-e-cigarettes/

ALA employee opinion piece in Duluth News Tribune 9/8/13

E-cigarettes also are not approved for smoking cessation. There are many options, including similar nicotine inhalers, that are proven to help people treat their addiction. Switching to e-cigarettes is not quitting.

Allise Wuorio of Duluth is a student in the University of Minnesota School of Public Health and works as a program manager for the American Lung Association in Minnesota.

http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/277302/

ALA, utsandiego.com, 28 Jan 2014

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2014/Jan/28/e-cigarettes-lively-discussion-la-mesa/?#article-copy

Ewin spoke to the city’s recent “F” grade given by the American Lung Association in its recent “State of Tobacco Control 2014 – California Local Grades.” Lemon Grove and Santee also were graded “F,” with El Cajon earning a “B.”

Debra Kelley, regional Director, Programs & Advocacy for the American Lung Association in California, also spoke at La Mesa’s meeting, decrying the devices.

“This product is completely unregulated,” Kelley said. “Nicotine known to cause birth defects. All kinds of carcinogenic vapors are going into the air. A lot of people will say it’s water vapor, but that’s just not true.”

ALA and ACS, ABCNews website, 24 Sept 2013

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/facts-cigarettes/story?id=20345463#

For now, the devices remain uncontrolled by any governmental agency, a fact that worries experts like Erika Seward, the assistant vice president of national advocacy for the American Lung Association.

“With e-cigarettes, we see a new product within the same industry — tobacco — using the same old tactics to glamorize their products,” she said. “They use candy and fruit flavors to hook kids, they make implied health claims to encourage smokers to switch to their product instead of quitting all together, and they sponsor research to use that as a front for their claims.”

…

However, Seward said because e-cigarettes remain unregulated, it’s impossible to draw conclusions about all the brands based on an analysis of two.

“To say they are all safe because a few have been shown to contain fewer toxins is troubling,” she said. “We also don’t know how harmful trace levels can be.”

Thomas Glynn, the director of science and trends at the American Cancer Society, said there were always risks when one inhaled anything other than fresh, clean air, but he said there was a great likelihood that e-cigarettes would prove considerably less harmful than traditional smokes, at least in the short term.

“As for long-term effects, we don’t know what happens when you breathe the vapor into the lungs regularly,” Glynn said. “No one knows the answer to that.”

…

Seward said many of her worries center on e-cigarettes being a gateway to smoking, given that many popular brands come in flavors and colors that seem designed to appeal to a younger generation of smokers.

“We’re concerned about the potential for kids to start a lifetime of nicotine use by starting with e-cigarettes,” she said.