[ Just paste broken links shown in purple directly into your browser - the extra line doesn't matter. Pls. PM me if you have more recent info. about proposed/actual legislation, if you think I've missed an important story, or if you want more tweaks to the formatting program. ]
1) WA state appears safe for this legislative season - tax bill dies at the last minute. Good job!
2) MN house bill HF 1974 apparently ammended to remove the clean indoor air act extension - if the ammendment remains, MN is also in the clear for this legislative session, unless SF 2027 passes the Sen. and its clean air act extension is approved by the house.
3) Daly City CA mayor wants moratorium on new vape stores, worries that they may be corrupting minors in nearby school. No hearing date set.
4) Cerritos CA extends clean air act to cover vaping inside and on municipal property (except sidewalks) but doesn't extend it to private businesses.
5) Rep. Ray of UT recounts his valiant last-minute dramatic effort to save the innocent teenagers of Utah by resuscitating HB 112, but it seems that a copy of the lastest draft couldn't be obtained before the clock ran down. Pity the children.
6) New 'study' suggests that smokers relapse because the absence of nicotine interferes with their will power. (Is that 'news?' Apparently: see below.)
Coverage US domestic only, states: NH, NJ, MD, OH, IL, LA, MN, WI, UT, WA, CA
Also: Revealing and lengthy Twin Cities Public TV interview with Sen. Kathy Sheran of Manketo MN (a hotbed of anti-vaping activity along with neighboring towns N. Manketo and Sleepy Eye). Clearly, she's been well briefed and prepped by the sophisticated and well-funded Tobacco Control org. Sen Sheran is the sponsor of SF 2027, which combines a minor sales/possession ban with an extension of MN's indoor/outdoor clean air act that would define indoor and outdoor vaping as smoking. What's fascinating about the Sen. Sheran interview is that it demonstrates how effectively the Tobacco Control Industry is, when it comes to carefully briefing and preparing politicians to echo their talking points. Studies and surveys get done, memes get developed by public relations experts, and then elected officials are primed to deliver the message on behalf of the Tobacco Control Industry. In short, politicians are being turned into spokespeople for the industry. We've seen this with Rep. Ray of UT, who seems rather familiar with the term "renormalizing," as well as with the speeches given by members of the Los Angeles City Council. In an extremely revealing portion of the interview, Sen. Sheran seems to slip up when describing a survey done by the Tobacco Control organization CLEARWAY MN, and says that "we" did the survey. See below (MN area).
***
BLOGS, STUDIES, ETC.
Title: Brain links weakened by nicotine withdrawal may explain smokers' relapse
(Questionable medical collection site) http://www.medicalnewstoday
.com/articles/274018.php
This site often puts out garbage, although the original study was published in JAMA Psychiatry. That said, after Dutra & Gltantz's paper was published ten days ago, one could be forgiven for being nnoplussed w/ JAMA's standards (although this is thepsychiatry area, not pediatrics). No junk in the article, at least not w.r.t. vaping.
***
WORLD
Title: Can E-Cigarettes Measure Up to Traditional Smoking Cessation Products?
(US Nat'l Investment site) http://www.fool
.com/investing/general/2014/03/15/can-e-cigarettes-measure-up-to-traditional-smoking.aspx
Motely Fool takes an investor's perspective in an attempt to evaluate the relative future prospects of products which it groups into three categories: (1) NTR; (2) vaporizers; and (3) Chantix and Zyban ("pharmaceutical products"). The author seems to believe that the psychological risks associated with Chantix and Zyban are simply too great to make them good bets for investors. Your Correspndent wasn't surprised to read that "E-cigarettes deliver vaporized nicotine to the lungs and emulate the physical sensation of smoking -- a key strength that GSK, J&J, and other companies have tried to copy with new nicotine inhalers." (Looks as if they haven't yet succeeded. Maybe they should give up and join the party.) What was surprising is that "Pfizer believes that delivering a nicotine- and tobacco-free smoking cessation drug could be a preferable solution." (Have they considered 0% e-liquid?) The Foolish Takeaway: "All of these smoking cessation products have clear benefits and drawbacks. However, the growth of e-cigarettes in contrast to traditional smoking cessation products like Nicorette and Chantix can't be ignored." No junk. (Note: although the piece seems to mix US and global sales figures, it's general enough in nature that I've classified it as int'l.)
***
US NATIONAL
Title: Republic Tobacco takes 50% stake in Johnson Creek Enterprises
(Milwaukee WI US local paper) http://www.jsonline
.com/business/republic-tobacco-takes-50-stake-in-johnson-creek-enterprises-b99225307z1-250341621.html
Heads up, JC afficiandos (in the interests of full disclosure: I was a big fan of JC before DIY'g). No junk in this piece - and some fun facts to boot: JC already makes the e-juice in Blus, which is quite likely why these are better than the other disposables; and Republic tobacco not only makes Top cigarette papers and Drum tobacco, but also the Top-O-Matic (again in the interests of full disclosure: my RYO machine, when I was still doing analogs). In short, the proverbial "cute couple." They're also both Midwestern - JC is based in Hartland WI, and Republic is based in Genview IL. JC founder Christian Berkey expects 2014 sales to grow to $25M this year (from $16M in 2013), and intends to add 15-20 employees in the next three months along with a third shift.
Title: Poll: 50% of employers have not addressed e-cigarettes in their smoking policy
(HR consulting firm web site) http://hr.blr
.com/HR-news/Performance-Termination/Smoking-Workplace/The-results-of-a-BLR-HR-poll-show-that-half-of-res
It's not clear how many employers were polled, but it seems there were only three possible responses: (a) policy doesn't address vaping (50% selected); (b) haven't yet considered the Q (31%); and (c) vaping=smoking (i.e. banned whereever tobacco cigarettes are prohibited - 19%). No junk.
Title: E-cigarettes should be kept from minors, convenience store group says
(AHA web site) http://blog.heart
.org/e-cigarettes-should-be-kept-from-minors-convenience-store-group-says/
AHA applauds the decision to recommend age verification to all its members whenever PV sales are involved, by the Nat'l ...'n for Convenience and Food Retailing (which they incorrectly identify as the "National Association of Convenience Stores.") Not surprisingly, information about vaporizers and tobacco cigarettes is mixed together, since they're both allegedly indistinguishable. But what caught your correspondent's eye was this gem, refering to the CDC 2011/12 survey: "The survey also found that more than three quarters of the students who used e-cigarettes within the past 30 days had also smoked regular cigarettes." Hmm. I guess that means that tobacco cigarettes are a gateway to PVs? Maybe we should do something about the alarming prevalence of tobacco cigarette usage among minors, then? Also note the manner in which they cropped a stock photo of an attractive woman vaping, in order to emphasize the vapor, and minimize her facial features. (So what if they can't get their talking points down properly? At least they know how to use PhotoShop.)
---
US: NEW HAMPSHIRE
Title: Ex-Smokers Breathe Easier: E-Cigarettes Rise in Popularity But Health Questions Unanswered
(W. Lebanaon NH US local paper collection site) http://www.vnews
.com/news/townbytown/strafford/11078801-95/ex-smokers-breathe-easier-e-cigarettes-rise-in-popularity-but-health-questions-unanswered Title: Smokers turn to e-cigarettes to cut costs, quit smoking
(Concord NH US local paper) http://www.concordmonitor
.com/news/11149566-95/smokers-turn-to-e-cigarettes-to-cut-costs-quit-smoking
This is the third rather rambling article in today's review, in which a reporter has decided that the relevant question to ask is whether vaping is "safe." And it's the third such article in which the consulted MDs predictably say that they just don't know whether vaping is "safe," albeit without parroting the Tobacco Control Industry's talking points. So we get this kind of rambling back-and-forth: "Generally, the vapor is not believed to be as harmful to a smoker’s lungs as tobacco tar, and Tanski, the pediatrician, said she suspects it is safer than cigarette smoking. But just because concert-goers can safely tolerate propylene glycol vapor at a show doesn’t mean that they should breathe it directly into their lungs, Tanski said. 'There has never been a long-term study on the use of propylene glycol in a cartridge like this,' she said. 'We also don’t know what happens if someone uses multiple cartridges a day.' Users are also simply feeding an underlying addiction and doing nothing to address the issue, said Alan Rogers, a family physician with Valley Regional Hospital. 'Nicotine is an addictive drug,' said Rogers, who practices in Newport. 'Yes, you’re getting rid of all the tar and carcinogens being embedded in your lungs, but you still are addicted to nicotine.' [Apparently the GP thinks that nicotine is what kills people who smoke tobacco cigarettes.] Every week, patients of all ages tell Rogers that they have begun using e-cigarettes as a way to stop smoking. He is most concerned for his younger patients, who are attracted to the image of smoking and believe vaping is absolutely safe. 'We still don’t know what it does to young people,' he said. The American Lung Association has said it is 'very concerned about the potential safety and health consequences' from using electronic cigarettes. And yet, many people who use e-cigarettes say their personal health has improved." [And from here on out, we discover more about the positive experience of vapers. Para breaks omitted]
Once again, perhaps hearing that most MDs (rather prectictably) can't say that anything unaproved by the FDA is is 'safe' is hardly surprising, and the absence of Tobacco Control Industry talking points is always a plus. What about running into yet another MD who thinks that nicotine addiction is the real problem with cigarettes (as opposed to the other aspects of smoking)? Or who doesn't know that vaping delivers about the same amount of nicotine as NRT? That's hardly "man bites dog," either.
[ NH passed a simple minor sales ban in 2010. If you know of any legislation pending during this session, please PM me. ]
---
US: NEW JERSEY
Title: State legislature considers e-cigarette tax; many communities banning public use
(Edison NJ US News 12 affiliate) http://newjersey.news12
.com/news/state-legislature-considers-e-cigarette-tax-many-communities-banning-public-use-1.7398802
Short report doesn't say much, but quotes Karen Blumenfeld of GASP (without identifying her as a professional ANTZ) as saying that "'There are numerous studies that have grave concerns about these chemicals that are in the liquid,' she says. 'That, as well as being exposed to the second-hand vapor smoke.' ... 'Communities want to encourage healthful environments where kids hang out,' says Blumenfeld. 'And it's really to normalize smoke-free environments and to not give kids mixed messages about using tobacco.' [boldface added]"
No other junk.
[ NJ's house bill A1080 was originally proposed as a ban on tobacco smoking in parks and beaches, but was immediately ammended to include vaping as soon as it got on to the house floor. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ng-all-public-parks-beaches.html#post12349761
Also, Gov. Christie says he wants to tax vaping at the same rate as analogs:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ual-2-70-pack-cigarette-tax.html#post12450301
And:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/03/call-to-action-new-jerseys-governor.html ]
---
US: MARYLAND
Title: Bill Would Ban E-cigarette Use in Public Places
(Capital News Service, College Pk MD US) http://cnsmaryland
.org/2014/03/14/bill-would-ban-e-cigarette-use-in-public-places/ http://somd.com/news/headlines/2014/17939
.shtml
You have to hand it to this reporter for at least attempting to cover all "sides" of the issue. It's rare to read an article in which we find that there is no "conclusive evidence that the vapor produced" is harmful [to bystanders]." So far, so good. "However, supporters of the proposed ban [on vaping wherever smoking is prohibited] believe that the glamorous portrayal of e-cigarettes in advertisements could be sending the wrong message to the youth. Many e-cigarette advertisements utilize sex appeal to sell their product, not unlike the tobacco and alcohol industries. E-cigarette use more than doubled among U.S. middle and high school students from 2011 to 2012, according to data published by the CDC. 'E-cigarettes could be a gateway product to a lifelong addiction of nicotine,' [bill sponsor] Miller said."[para breaks omitted]
All in all, that's not too awful for the amount of junk in a standard piece, although it would've been nicer if the reporter had access to sources that could've provided more insight into the bogus minor gateway argument. At the very least, it seems that local ANTZ either hadn't properly prepped the bill's sponsor in the more typical scurrilous talking points, and/or weren't given the chance to cite them by the reporter.
[ MD's HB 1291 would define vaping as smoking for Indoor Clean Air act purposes. Hearing 3/5/14. http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-maryland-e-cigarette.html also see smokeless tobacco tax increase which will likely affect vaping next year: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-maryland-wants-to-raise.html explained here: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...tronic-smoking-devices-hearing-march-5-a.html and (smokeless tobacco only):
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...s-tobacco-3-can-cigars-but-no-tax-e-cigs.html ]
---
US: OHIO
Title: Physicians back Kasich’s tobacco tax
(Columbus OH US local paper) http://www.dispatch
.com/content/stories/local/2014/03/14/physicians-back-kasichs-tobacco-tax.html
Very little here about vaping, but as most readers of this space probably know by now, Gov. Kasich is backing a proposal to take vaping. The actual amount isn't known yet, no bill is currently in the OH legislature. When asked why vapor products were being taxed, since they aren't known to carry the same costs to society as tobacco products, "Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols responded: 'Forgive me if I’m a little wary of health advice from tobacco lobbyists.'". No junk.
---
US: ILLINOIS
Title: Hanover Park to vote on electronic cigarette regulations [simple minor sales/possession ban]
(S. Chicago IL US suburban paper collection site) http://www.dailyherald
.com/article/20140314/news/140318952/
Local officials cite CDC stats, no apparent indication that the March 20th vote by the Hannover Park village trustees will morph into an extension of the indoor clean air act.
[ IL currently considering two bills that require vaping supplies (but not non-cigarette tobacco) to be behind the counter, see: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...counter-exempts-tobacco-specialty-stores.html and one bill that would require special packaging: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-e-cig-products-sold-il-protect-children.html Also worth watching: SB2659, which would ban smoking in cars containing a minor - however the definition doesn't currently include vaping (and is still in the Public Health Cmte, with a status of "postponed." See: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/Bil...GAID=12&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=78165&SessionID=85 And HB 689, which would mandate special packaging in order to protect children (which only has one sponsor at the moment: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-e-cig-products-sold-il-protect-children.html ]
---
US: LOUISIANA
Title: E-Cigarette trend more than blowing smoke
(Baton Rouge LA US CBS affiliate) http://www.wafb
.com/story/24980932/e-cigarette-trend-more-than-blowing-smoke
Another general-purpose article written with the intent of introducing lay readers to the subject. Generous amounts of space are provided for the feedback from a vaper who has quit smoking and now manages a vape store. Not badly done, but of course an "expert" has to be consulted. And hence we (rather predictably) discover that: "The answer is, we don't know how safe these cigarettes are," said oncology and hematology specialist Dr. Vince Cataldo [...] 'We need to have some degree of safety data that is offered to us in order to make a statement on whether or not this is a safe delivery system for nicotine,' said Cataldo [para breaks omitted]. The moral of the story is simple. Don't ask an MD with no public health background whether the tomatoes from your garden are 'safe.' You'll probably always get the same answer: if the FDA haven't approved them, they could be no less dangerous than radioactive waste. There's just no way to tell. (No junk in the story, other than that.)
[ LA's SB 12 - simple minor sales ban introduced 2/11/14, no additional developements or other threats. ]
---
US: MINNESOTA
Title: CAPITOL REPORT: Regulating E-Cigarettes [hearings + LONG revealing interview w/ Sen Sheran]
(MN State Sen. Media) http://www.youtube
.com/watch?v=-73Yefyr8lM
As readers of this space know, Sen Kathy Sheran of Manketo MN indicated on Feb 16th that she would submit a bill to extend MN's clean indoor air act to cover vaping (which became SF 2027 - it also contains a ban on minor sales/possession).
I've spent quite a bit of time dissecting this interview, because I think it's incredibly revealing about the strategy pursued by the Tobacco Control Industry - paricularly the very media-savvy and sophisticated CLEARYWAY MN, which is funded by BP and your tax dollars. Sen. Sheran has evidently been thoroughly briefed and prepared. Let's observe how she handles some of these delicate issues ...
Video begins with a short snippet from the hearings in which Sen. Sheran says that the indoor vaping/outdoor ban makes sense because there's allegedly no information whatsoever about what's in the e-liquid. Cuts to an interview with Julie Bartkey of Twin Cities PBS, in which Sen. Sheran says that she's "particularly happy to be here to discuss this subject." Goes on to say that the research is "inconclusive" about whether the "smoke" that the user exhales is "safe" or whether "the product actually does help people quit smoking, although there's some anectdotal stories that some people have experienced that." Also adds, "we don't want to expose children to it, either by selling it to them or by making it visible for people to observe or inhale in public places." When asked why the time for regulation is now - when the studies are "inconclusive" - the Sen. says: "First of all, we have done a survey, and 80% of the public has said that they do not want to take the risk that these products are harmful [emphasis in her tone]."
That survey is almost certainly the one done by CLEARWAY MN which was touted in a paid advertisement placed with Reuters, reported in this space on Feb 26th:
http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/02/26/mn-restrictecigpoll-idUSnPnCGvJc1X+169+PRN20140226 ... yet the survey's questions and polling methodology were never disclosed (for example, did they use the terms "smoke" and "e-cigarette" which would likely confuse respondents into thinking that the poll addressed tobacco cigarettes?).
Oh, and one more thing ... let's go back to 5:46 <sound of tape rewinding> ... "First of all, we have done a survey ...
WHOA! Who's the "we" in that sentence, Sen. Sheran? Are you talking about CLEARWAY MN at 5:46? Are you their spokesperson? Or are you perhaps reciting their talking points - and forgetting to adjust the pronouns? [Okay, now back to our regularly scheduled interview coverage ...]
At this point, the Sen. goes off on a rather odd tangent which may be a reference to nicotine in the exhalations (one has to wonder if she knows that nic. inhalers are basically the same in this regard): "And the reason why it's important is the same as it is for other mood-altering chemicals ... it's not unusual for us to say, that until a product can be proved to be fairly safe for the public, that we don't allow pharmaceutical companies to sell it - until they've demonstrated safety, rather than ask the public to take a risk on a substance like this, and then to find out later that it was problematic. So we've sort of divided that down: if an adult wants to take that risk in their own lives, and with their own lungs and their own brain, well we'll keep it legal. But we're saying that the general public does not want to take that risk on a product that hasn't been tested. So in a nutshell, the argument is that exhaled vapor is an untested nicotine delivery system for bystanders (rather like nicotine inhalers).
Next, the moderator switches gears, and points out that business is projected to top $1.5B this year. Sen. Sheran - who can't seem to help herself - interrupts the moderator mid-sentence, in an apparent effort to get the next talking point out ...
"That's a fabulous income, isn't it? And it's being marketed in ways that are directed at young people, because we know that the brain chemistry of young people is very, very aborbent of these addictive substances. So if you can get someone addicted to nicotine early in life, they are highly likely to stay connected to either the e-cigarettes or tobacco."
Whoa. Let's rewind. Q: How exactly do we know that these products are being marketed to children? The answer is simple. If a teen gets addicted to nicotine, they might be a customer for life. THEREFORE (drumroll), it logically follows that vaping IS being marketed to children. Got that? Of course this would also apply to alcohol, caffiene, processed sugar, and so forth. Since a child who gets accustomed to these products will likely be a customer in adulthood, this fact BY ITSELF forces us to conclude that these products ARE UNQUESTIONABLY being marketed to children, no matter what else is true.
Next she cites a NYT article which is presumably based on Dutra & Glantz re:the allegation that vaping is a "gateway" to becoming a regular tobacco smoker. This factoid apparently justifies not only a minor sales and possession ban, but also: "We don't want to have it in public places where modelling [i.e. children who emulate adult behavior] occurs, where they're [children] going to be able to see the glamor [uses her fingers for quote marks] of the entire product ... we want to see regulation developed first, on how it can be marketed, on who it can be marketed to, we want to see studies done that are able to say if you put this product in one of these capsules, that it's going to have this impact on the vapor. We simply just don't have that information. So until we do, 80% of the public are saying [probably another reference to the CLEARWAY MN study] 'we don't want to take the risk with the users of e-cigarettes.'"[emphasis added, note that the public places argument would also apply to a sidewalk usage ban, since presumably children use sidewalks]
[Watching this interview, I get the feeling that I'm seeing an eager student who has diligently memorized a lecture in order to pass an exam, but who doesn't genuinely understand the material. The talking points come tumbling out in a disorganized mass - as if the viewer has opened up a closet stuffed to the bursting point - with some of them (health issues) getting mixed up with others (the minor gateway-to-tobacco argument).]
Later ... "Many cities have already implemented various forms of restrictions on e-cigarettes. Those cities are coming forward and saying we really need the statewide policy, and not have this kind of variation on laws throughout the state like we did before with the smoking ban in public places. (emphasis added)."
Finally: it turns out that HF 1974 (which started out being essentially the same as Sheran's SF 2027) has been amended to take out the clean air act extension, and leave a simple minor ban in place according to this video (at 9:03). Moderator asks whether Sheran would be willing to live w/o the clean air act extension, just to get the minor sales ban passed.
Sen. S. says: "Well, I think it would be short-sighted [to pass a minor sales ban without a ban on vaping in public places] ... because the modelling behavior [i.e. the tendency of children to emulate adults] and the marketing behavior [i.e. we're absolutely certain that vaping is being marketed to children, because nicotine is addictive to children] around this [vaping] is really targeted to young people."
In other words it makes no difference whether vaping poses a risk to bystanders - the alleged minor gateway-to-tobacco effect alone is enough to justify the clean air act extensions. Voila: the strategy laid bare.
[ For MN vapers updates, see: http://mnvapers.com/
and the MN Vapers FB page for organizing: http://www.facebook.com/groups/MNVapersAdvocacy/
And: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-minnesota-e-cigarette.html ]
---
WISCONSIN
Title: Maureen Busalacchi, Lisa Davidson, Chris Klein and Sara Sahli: Don't exempt e-cigarettes from workplace laws
(Madison WI US local paper) http://host.madison
.com/news/opinion/column/maureen-busalacchi-lisa-davidson-chris-klein-and-sara-sahli-don/article_0ef2a57a-939b-5689-93cd-94f20f217fda.html#ixzz2w2yhz9dE
This is in ref. to WI's SB 440, which just passed out of a sen. cmte yesterday. It's the only currently-live bill in the US which would explicitly exempt vaping from indoor clean air acts (along with the WI house counterpart, AB 762). Turns out the authors are all professional ANTZ, so the content shouldn't be surprising. (Note the word "shouldn't.") Frankly, I've seen better hit jobs done by a two-bit cub reporter with just 20 minutes to churn out a 200-word piece about a car tire punctured by a discarded cartridge. Apparently these ANTZ left their "violin cases" at home. The best they can do is to emphasize the "unknowns and concerns," along with a fairly lame job of citing Dutra & Glantz: "A recent study found kids who smoke e-cigarettes are more likely to also smoke regular tobacco. With youth e-cigarette use on the rise, there is the potential for youth smoking to also rise. Flavors like gummy bear, cherry crush and bubble gum reveal the real targets of e-cigarette marketing: our kids." (That's all they have?? What happened to "seven times more likely?" Or the antifreeze, tin nanoparticles, diethylene glycol, volatile organic compounds, and the fact that vaping is "unproven" as a THR/cessation tool, because it leads to "more tobacco cigarette smoking, not less?" And all they can say is that the "safety level" is unknown, and that WI would be taking a step backwards by "normalizing smoking?" Good heavens. Fire these folks at once!
[ WI has two bills that would explicitly exempt from the state Indoor Clean Air Act, which CASAA strongly supports: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-updated-support.html Also see report by Kirstin: http://wivapers.blogspot.com/2014/03/my-two-days-in-wisconsins-capitol.html and: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...6240-wisconsin-updates-wisconsin-updates.html ]
Title: Businesses, Health Advocates Debate e-Cigarettes
(Green Bay WI US ABC affiliate) http://www.wbay
.com/story/24980547/2014/03/14/businesses-health-advocates-debate-e-cigarettes
Another story about WI's SB 440, citing ANTZ: "'We don't know what the health effects are. We don't know what's in this vapor. We don't know what youth and adults are breathing in the chemicals that come with e-cigarettes,' Wendy Vander Zanden of Community Action for Healthy Living Inc. said. In Kaukauna, members of Community Action for Healthy Living are working to find those answers. 'To open up a law that not many people are educated about. In exempting something that we don't have enough information on is scary,' Vander Zanden said. 'We need to take a step back and really think about what it's going to look like when it comes to compromising the clean air that we already have.'" As before, it appears that WI's ANTZ are much less virulent than their fellow travellers in many other states. (Don't they have internet access in WI?) Vapers interviewed as well. Not much in this short piece, and no other junk besides what was just quoted.
Title: Green Bay school district to ban e-cigarettes
(AP) http://www.washingtontimes
.com/news/2014/mar/14/green-bay-school-district-to-ban-e-cigarettes/
Very brief junk-free AP story
Title: Green Bay School District to Ban E-Cigarettes
(Green Bay WI US NBC affiliate) http://www.jrn
.com/nbc26/news/Green-Bay-School-District-to-Ban-E-Cigarettes-250344271.html
Green Bay school district bans vaping everywhere for everyone. Assoc. Principal at Pulaski H.S. says they've had "two a week for each of the past three weeks. (Horrors - an epidemic.)
"What are the chemicals that are in that, that came from that cartridge are things that we don't know. Anti-freeze yes we know is in there, but what else,' said Community Action for Healthy Living Executive Director, Wendy Vander Zanden. [boldface added.]" No other junk, as if that weren't plenty.
Title: E-cigarettes banned from Green Bay school campuses
(Appleton WI US local paper) http://www.postcrescent
.com/article/20140314/APC0101/303140193/E-cigarettes-banned-from-Green-Bay-school-campuses
No real junk in this story, but allegedly parents don't know that some PVs contain nicotine. And apparently the "responsible authorities" (as well as the story's writer) don't realize that some PVs lack nicotine, because they cite a new policy that refers to nicotine. Parents will be sent a letter warning them that students can't bring PVs to school. No junk (amazingly - given both the source and the subject).
Title: Local school districts crack down on e-cigarettes
http://www.wearegreenbay
.com/1fulltext-news/d/story/local-school-districts-crack-down-on-e-cigarettes/25627/yn54ibiIG0mwjZlBsQT1_w (Green Bay WI US CBS affiliate)
Similar to the other GB stories, but no obvious junk except these rather amusing statements: "'It has more become a way of starting smoking and more kids are doing it and it is kind of a lead in drug so to speak, or a lead in to cigarettes' says Tony Klaubauf, District Administrator for Denmark [...] 'As far as I know in Denmark [schools] we have had no instances of use, I think we are trying to get a little ahead of the curveball' says Klaubauf. [boldface added]"
---
US: UTAH
Title: E-Cigarette bill failed but regulations still come down on vapor companies and users
(SLC UT US ABC affiliate) http://www.4utah
.com/story/d/story/e-cigarette-bill-failed-but-regulations-still-come/79577/2O24ldbXGkyS020EOFiYyg
Breathlessly-written story about the heroic endeavors of Super Hero "save the children" Rep. Ray's last-ditch eleventh-hour effort to revive HB 112 before the clock struck noon ...
"It was a rush to get House Bill 112 pass the State Senate and back to the House before the clock ran out of time. 'It's 11:58 at that time and they are looking all over the Dias for the bill because we physically have to have the bill to take action on it and they couldn't find it. So time ran out on us,' said Representative Paul Ray." [para break omitted]"
(Alas, the lives of more innocent cherubs will be forever changed.) Despite what the story title says, there's nothing in it to suggest that any regulations are pending in UT. Aaron Frazier, of UT Vapers is quoted as saying that he was willing to work w/ Rep. Ray's desire for age verification. No junk. No other threats are pending in UT, the legislative session is over for 2014.
---
US: WASHINGTON (STATE)
Title: E-Cigarette Tax Hike Dies in Washington Legislature
(ATR web site) http://www.atr
.org/e-cigarette-tax-hike-dies-washington-legislature
Representative Reuven Carlyle, the Seattle Democrat who proposed the 95 percent tax in the House noted, 'There was a very strong, fierce, overwhelming opposition from the Senate.'" No junk. This appears to be the last threat remaining from Washington legislation for the year.
---
US: CALIFORNIA
Title: Daly City Considers Banning E-Cigarettes, Fears Boom of Vape Shops
(SF CA US CBS affiliate) http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal
.com/2014/03/14/daly-city-considers-banning-e-cigarettes-fears-boom-of-vape-shops/
"The mayor of Daly City said Friday his community needs to take a stand against the growing number of vape stores fleeing south as neighboring San Francisco considers an e-cigarette ban. Mayor David Canepa and others are concerned about the appeal e-cigarettes hold for children, despite age restrictions on who can enter the so-called vape stores that have popped up around Daly City. 'Several of these stores are conveniently located next to schools,' he said, pointing to Vape Dreams at 16 Washington Street, just across from Holy Angel School. [para breaks omitted]"
[And there you have it. Vape shops, tatoo parlors, lingerie stores with live pole dancers. The neighborhood is getting run down. Soon there will be drug dealers on every corner. Think of the children.]
Mayor wants moratorium on vape shops, because there are already three. Reporter interviwed the owner of Vape Dreams (the store that poses a threat to Holy Angel students' salvation), who says that no one under 18 is allowed in his store (and has a sign that says so on the door). No hearing date was set, and no junk in this story except what you see quoted above. Also see:
Title: Daly City mulls ban on e-cigarette sales
http://abclocal.go
.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/peninsula&id=9467022
this one implies that the mayor wants an outright ban, but it's only one paragraph.
[ CA is under threat from a wide variety of legislation, such as an internet sales ban: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-shipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california.html ]
Title: Cerritos prohibits e-cigarette use around city buildings
(Orange Co. CA US local paper) http://www.ocregister
.com/articles/cigarettes-605689-city-ordinance.html
City Council unanimously prohibits vaping in and around city buildings, but doesn't extend it to private busineses. "Councilwoman Carol Chen said the city should eventually update the ordinance to restrict the use of e-cigarettes in private facilities like restaurants and bars. Councilman George Ray, however, said he would not want to regulate e-cigarettes past civic property until he sees data released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or sees movement from federal or state government on the issue. 'If we get some data, and they say definitely these are harmful or more harmful, than cigarettes then I would certainly support it ....Otherwise, we’re going to be kind of out there by ourselves,' Ray said. 'We’ve got time, too.'" (Hmm, I wonder if the good Councilman knows how many CA cities have already extended their indoor clean air acts to cover private businesses. I sense that the local ANTZ are already mobilizing.) No junk.
Title: Long Beach prepares to roll out new e-cigarette ordinance
(LB CA US suburban general web site) http://www.signaltribunenewspaper
.com/?p=22983
In a nutshell, health officials are going around to local vape stores and issuing stern warnings about indoor vaping - sampling is only allowed if the customer is outdoors, 25 feet away from any doorway. From the Tobacco Control officials, we get the usual: (1) no proven value as a cessation tool; (2) no evidence that they're "safe"; (3) CDC figures on minor use. However no "tin nanoparticles" or diethelyne glycol or citations to Dutra/Glantz.
***
COLLECTION: FDA TOO SLOW ON E-CIG. REGULATIONS / REGULATIONS OVERDUE (BLOOMBERG NEWS SERVICE)
First published by Bloomberg News Service, this junky piece started in CT and is now migrating from the NE. At least two titles have been used so far, and more will likely come. So far, the "clone count" is up to a dozen or so.
Look for the first line: "Could someone please send the Food and Drug Administration a copy of the latest study on teenagers and e-cigarettes? The agency obviously needs a push to come out with its overdue regulations." (Refers to the Dutra & Glantz paper released last week which claims that e-cigarettes are a gateway for minors to tobacco smoking. And that's the point: FDA action is required, given that teens are being 'hooked' on vaping, and then becoming regular tobacco cigarette smokers - according to the junk statistics in the paper.)
Title: Editorial: Planned regulations on e-cigarettes are overdue by FDA
(Lorain OH US local paper) http://www.morningjournal
.com/opinion/20140314/editorial-planned-regulations-on-e-cigarettes-are-overdue-by-fda
Title: Editorial: Planned regulations on e-cigarettes are overdue by FDA
(Willoughby OH US local paper) http://www.news-herald
.com/article/20140314/NEWS/140319777&template=printart
***
Google Tips
to see whether there are bad things happening where you live, try this Google search (example for Rhode Island) -
rhode site:casaa.org
(Replace rhode with a single word that describes your city, county, or state. For ex., if you live in Eau Claire, WI - you might use "Claire" to see if something is being proposed at the city level. Don't forget the : (colon), and be sure that there's nothing before or after the colon (not even spaces or tabs.)
You can also try replacing site:casaa.org with e-cigarette to find out what the media is reporting in your area. This is usually most helpful if you use the search tools to search by date. (CASAA doesn't generally issue calls or alerts until a bill is out of a state legislative committee, or is scheduled for a local city or county hearing.)
1) WA state appears safe for this legislative season - tax bill dies at the last minute. Good job!
2) MN house bill HF 1974 apparently ammended to remove the clean indoor air act extension - if the ammendment remains, MN is also in the clear for this legislative session, unless SF 2027 passes the Sen. and its clean air act extension is approved by the house.
3) Daly City CA mayor wants moratorium on new vape stores, worries that they may be corrupting minors in nearby school. No hearing date set.
4) Cerritos CA extends clean air act to cover vaping inside and on municipal property (except sidewalks) but doesn't extend it to private businesses.
5) Rep. Ray of UT recounts his valiant last-minute dramatic effort to save the innocent teenagers of Utah by resuscitating HB 112, but it seems that a copy of the lastest draft couldn't be obtained before the clock ran down. Pity the children.
6) New 'study' suggests that smokers relapse because the absence of nicotine interferes with their will power. (Is that 'news?' Apparently: see below.)
Coverage US domestic only, states: NH, NJ, MD, OH, IL, LA, MN, WI, UT, WA, CA
Also: Revealing and lengthy Twin Cities Public TV interview with Sen. Kathy Sheran of Manketo MN (a hotbed of anti-vaping activity along with neighboring towns N. Manketo and Sleepy Eye). Clearly, she's been well briefed and prepped by the sophisticated and well-funded Tobacco Control org. Sen Sheran is the sponsor of SF 2027, which combines a minor sales/possession ban with an extension of MN's indoor/outdoor clean air act that would define indoor and outdoor vaping as smoking. What's fascinating about the Sen. Sheran interview is that it demonstrates how effectively the Tobacco Control Industry is, when it comes to carefully briefing and preparing politicians to echo their talking points. Studies and surveys get done, memes get developed by public relations experts, and then elected officials are primed to deliver the message on behalf of the Tobacco Control Industry. In short, politicians are being turned into spokespeople for the industry. We've seen this with Rep. Ray of UT, who seems rather familiar with the term "renormalizing," as well as with the speeches given by members of the Los Angeles City Council. In an extremely revealing portion of the interview, Sen. Sheran seems to slip up when describing a survey done by the Tobacco Control organization CLEARWAY MN, and says that "we" did the survey. See below (MN area).
***
BLOGS, STUDIES, ETC.
Title: Brain links weakened by nicotine withdrawal may explain smokers' relapse
(Questionable medical collection site) http://www.medicalnewstoday
.com/articles/274018.php
This site often puts out garbage, although the original study was published in JAMA Psychiatry. That said, after Dutra & Gltantz's paper was published ten days ago, one could be forgiven for being nnoplussed w/ JAMA's standards (although this is thepsychiatry area, not pediatrics). No junk in the article, at least not w.r.t. vaping.
***
WORLD
Title: Can E-Cigarettes Measure Up to Traditional Smoking Cessation Products?
(US Nat'l Investment site) http://www.fool
.com/investing/general/2014/03/15/can-e-cigarettes-measure-up-to-traditional-smoking.aspx
Motely Fool takes an investor's perspective in an attempt to evaluate the relative future prospects of products which it groups into three categories: (1) NTR; (2) vaporizers; and (3) Chantix and Zyban ("pharmaceutical products"). The author seems to believe that the psychological risks associated with Chantix and Zyban are simply too great to make them good bets for investors. Your Correspndent wasn't surprised to read that "E-cigarettes deliver vaporized nicotine to the lungs and emulate the physical sensation of smoking -- a key strength that GSK, J&J, and other companies have tried to copy with new nicotine inhalers." (Looks as if they haven't yet succeeded. Maybe they should give up and join the party.) What was surprising is that "Pfizer believes that delivering a nicotine- and tobacco-free smoking cessation drug could be a preferable solution." (Have they considered 0% e-liquid?) The Foolish Takeaway: "All of these smoking cessation products have clear benefits and drawbacks. However, the growth of e-cigarettes in contrast to traditional smoking cessation products like Nicorette and Chantix can't be ignored." No junk. (Note: although the piece seems to mix US and global sales figures, it's general enough in nature that I've classified it as int'l.)
***
US NATIONAL
Title: Republic Tobacco takes 50% stake in Johnson Creek Enterprises
(Milwaukee WI US local paper) http://www.jsonline
.com/business/republic-tobacco-takes-50-stake-in-johnson-creek-enterprises-b99225307z1-250341621.html
Heads up, JC afficiandos (in the interests of full disclosure: I was a big fan of JC before DIY'g). No junk in this piece - and some fun facts to boot: JC already makes the e-juice in Blus, which is quite likely why these are better than the other disposables; and Republic tobacco not only makes Top cigarette papers and Drum tobacco, but also the Top-O-Matic (again in the interests of full disclosure: my RYO machine, when I was still doing analogs). In short, the proverbial "cute couple." They're also both Midwestern - JC is based in Hartland WI, and Republic is based in Genview IL. JC founder Christian Berkey expects 2014 sales to grow to $25M this year (from $16M in 2013), and intends to add 15-20 employees in the next three months along with a third shift.
Title: Poll: 50% of employers have not addressed e-cigarettes in their smoking policy
(HR consulting firm web site) http://hr.blr
.com/HR-news/Performance-Termination/Smoking-Workplace/The-results-of-a-BLR-HR-poll-show-that-half-of-res
It's not clear how many employers were polled, but it seems there were only three possible responses: (a) policy doesn't address vaping (50% selected); (b) haven't yet considered the Q (31%); and (c) vaping=smoking (i.e. banned whereever tobacco cigarettes are prohibited - 19%). No junk.
Title: E-cigarettes should be kept from minors, convenience store group says
(AHA web site) http://blog.heart
.org/e-cigarettes-should-be-kept-from-minors-convenience-store-group-says/
AHA applauds the decision to recommend age verification to all its members whenever PV sales are involved, by the Nat'l ...'n for Convenience and Food Retailing (which they incorrectly identify as the "National Association of Convenience Stores.") Not surprisingly, information about vaporizers and tobacco cigarettes is mixed together, since they're both allegedly indistinguishable. But what caught your correspondent's eye was this gem, refering to the CDC 2011/12 survey: "The survey also found that more than three quarters of the students who used e-cigarettes within the past 30 days had also smoked regular cigarettes." Hmm. I guess that means that tobacco cigarettes are a gateway to PVs? Maybe we should do something about the alarming prevalence of tobacco cigarette usage among minors, then? Also note the manner in which they cropped a stock photo of an attractive woman vaping, in order to emphasize the vapor, and minimize her facial features. (So what if they can't get their talking points down properly? At least they know how to use PhotoShop.)
---
US: NEW HAMPSHIRE
Title: Ex-Smokers Breathe Easier: E-Cigarettes Rise in Popularity But Health Questions Unanswered
(W. Lebanaon NH US local paper collection site) http://www.vnews
.com/news/townbytown/strafford/11078801-95/ex-smokers-breathe-easier-e-cigarettes-rise-in-popularity-but-health-questions-unanswered Title: Smokers turn to e-cigarettes to cut costs, quit smoking
(Concord NH US local paper) http://www.concordmonitor
.com/news/11149566-95/smokers-turn-to-e-cigarettes-to-cut-costs-quit-smoking
This is the third rather rambling article in today's review, in which a reporter has decided that the relevant question to ask is whether vaping is "safe." And it's the third such article in which the consulted MDs predictably say that they just don't know whether vaping is "safe," albeit without parroting the Tobacco Control Industry's talking points. So we get this kind of rambling back-and-forth: "Generally, the vapor is not believed to be as harmful to a smoker’s lungs as tobacco tar, and Tanski, the pediatrician, said she suspects it is safer than cigarette smoking. But just because concert-goers can safely tolerate propylene glycol vapor at a show doesn’t mean that they should breathe it directly into their lungs, Tanski said. 'There has never been a long-term study on the use of propylene glycol in a cartridge like this,' she said. 'We also don’t know what happens if someone uses multiple cartridges a day.' Users are also simply feeding an underlying addiction and doing nothing to address the issue, said Alan Rogers, a family physician with Valley Regional Hospital. 'Nicotine is an addictive drug,' said Rogers, who practices in Newport. 'Yes, you’re getting rid of all the tar and carcinogens being embedded in your lungs, but you still are addicted to nicotine.' [Apparently the GP thinks that nicotine is what kills people who smoke tobacco cigarettes.] Every week, patients of all ages tell Rogers that they have begun using e-cigarettes as a way to stop smoking. He is most concerned for his younger patients, who are attracted to the image of smoking and believe vaping is absolutely safe. 'We still don’t know what it does to young people,' he said. The American Lung Association has said it is 'very concerned about the potential safety and health consequences' from using electronic cigarettes. And yet, many people who use e-cigarettes say their personal health has improved." [And from here on out, we discover more about the positive experience of vapers. Para breaks omitted]
Once again, perhaps hearing that most MDs (rather prectictably) can't say that anything unaproved by the FDA is is 'safe' is hardly surprising, and the absence of Tobacco Control Industry talking points is always a plus. What about running into yet another MD who thinks that nicotine addiction is the real problem with cigarettes (as opposed to the other aspects of smoking)? Or who doesn't know that vaping delivers about the same amount of nicotine as NRT? That's hardly "man bites dog," either.
[ NH passed a simple minor sales ban in 2010. If you know of any legislation pending during this session, please PM me. ]
---
US: NEW JERSEY
Title: State legislature considers e-cigarette tax; many communities banning public use
(Edison NJ US News 12 affiliate) http://newjersey.news12
.com/news/state-legislature-considers-e-cigarette-tax-many-communities-banning-public-use-1.7398802
Short report doesn't say much, but quotes Karen Blumenfeld of GASP (without identifying her as a professional ANTZ) as saying that "'There are numerous studies that have grave concerns about these chemicals that are in the liquid,' she says. 'That, as well as being exposed to the second-hand vapor smoke.' ... 'Communities want to encourage healthful environments where kids hang out,' says Blumenfeld. 'And it's really to normalize smoke-free environments and to not give kids mixed messages about using tobacco.' [boldface added]"
No other junk.
[ NJ's house bill A1080 was originally proposed as a ban on tobacco smoking in parks and beaches, but was immediately ammended to include vaping as soon as it got on to the house floor. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ng-all-public-parks-beaches.html#post12349761
Also, Gov. Christie says he wants to tax vaping at the same rate as analogs:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ual-2-70-pack-cigarette-tax.html#post12450301
And:
http://blog.casaa.org/2014/03/call-to-action-new-jerseys-governor.html ]
---
US: MARYLAND
Title: Bill Would Ban E-cigarette Use in Public Places
(Capital News Service, College Pk MD US) http://cnsmaryland
.org/2014/03/14/bill-would-ban-e-cigarette-use-in-public-places/ http://somd.com/news/headlines/2014/17939
.shtml
You have to hand it to this reporter for at least attempting to cover all "sides" of the issue. It's rare to read an article in which we find that there is no "conclusive evidence that the vapor produced" is harmful [to bystanders]." So far, so good. "However, supporters of the proposed ban [on vaping wherever smoking is prohibited] believe that the glamorous portrayal of e-cigarettes in advertisements could be sending the wrong message to the youth. Many e-cigarette advertisements utilize sex appeal to sell their product, not unlike the tobacco and alcohol industries. E-cigarette use more than doubled among U.S. middle and high school students from 2011 to 2012, according to data published by the CDC. 'E-cigarettes could be a gateway product to a lifelong addiction of nicotine,' [bill sponsor] Miller said."[para breaks omitted]
All in all, that's not too awful for the amount of junk in a standard piece, although it would've been nicer if the reporter had access to sources that could've provided more insight into the bogus minor gateway argument. At the very least, it seems that local ANTZ either hadn't properly prepped the bill's sponsor in the more typical scurrilous talking points, and/or weren't given the chance to cite them by the reporter.
[ MD's HB 1291 would define vaping as smoking for Indoor Clean Air act purposes. Hearing 3/5/14. http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-maryland-e-cigarette.html also see smokeless tobacco tax increase which will likely affect vaping next year: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-maryland-wants-to-raise.html explained here: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...tronic-smoking-devices-hearing-march-5-a.html and (smokeless tobacco only):
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...s-tobacco-3-can-cigars-but-no-tax-e-cigs.html ]
---
US: OHIO
Title: Physicians back Kasich’s tobacco tax
(Columbus OH US local paper) http://www.dispatch
.com/content/stories/local/2014/03/14/physicians-back-kasichs-tobacco-tax.html
Very little here about vaping, but as most readers of this space probably know by now, Gov. Kasich is backing a proposal to take vaping. The actual amount isn't known yet, no bill is currently in the OH legislature. When asked why vapor products were being taxed, since they aren't known to carry the same costs to society as tobacco products, "Kasich spokesman Rob Nichols responded: 'Forgive me if I’m a little wary of health advice from tobacco lobbyists.'". No junk.
---
US: ILLINOIS
Title: Hanover Park to vote on electronic cigarette regulations [simple minor sales/possession ban]
(S. Chicago IL US suburban paper collection site) http://www.dailyherald
.com/article/20140314/news/140318952/
Local officials cite CDC stats, no apparent indication that the March 20th vote by the Hannover Park village trustees will morph into an extension of the indoor clean air act.
[ IL currently considering two bills that require vaping supplies (but not non-cigarette tobacco) to be behind the counter, see: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...counter-exempts-tobacco-specialty-stores.html and one bill that would require special packaging: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-e-cig-products-sold-il-protect-children.html Also worth watching: SB2659, which would ban smoking in cars containing a minor - however the definition doesn't currently include vaping (and is still in the Public Health Cmte, with a status of "postponed." See: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/Bil...GAID=12&DocTypeID=SB&LegId=78165&SessionID=85 And HB 689, which would mandate special packaging in order to protect children (which only has one sponsor at the moment: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-e-cig-products-sold-il-protect-children.html ]
---
US: LOUISIANA
Title: E-Cigarette trend more than blowing smoke
(Baton Rouge LA US CBS affiliate) http://www.wafb
.com/story/24980932/e-cigarette-trend-more-than-blowing-smoke
Another general-purpose article written with the intent of introducing lay readers to the subject. Generous amounts of space are provided for the feedback from a vaper who has quit smoking and now manages a vape store. Not badly done, but of course an "expert" has to be consulted. And hence we (rather predictably) discover that: "The answer is, we don't know how safe these cigarettes are," said oncology and hematology specialist Dr. Vince Cataldo [...] 'We need to have some degree of safety data that is offered to us in order to make a statement on whether or not this is a safe delivery system for nicotine,' said Cataldo [para breaks omitted]. The moral of the story is simple. Don't ask an MD with no public health background whether the tomatoes from your garden are 'safe.' You'll probably always get the same answer: if the FDA haven't approved them, they could be no less dangerous than radioactive waste. There's just no way to tell. (No junk in the story, other than that.)
[ LA's SB 12 - simple minor sales ban introduced 2/11/14, no additional developements or other threats. ]
---
US: MINNESOTA
Title: CAPITOL REPORT: Regulating E-Cigarettes [hearings + LONG revealing interview w/ Sen Sheran]
(MN State Sen. Media) http://www.youtube
.com/watch?v=-73Yefyr8lM
As readers of this space know, Sen Kathy Sheran of Manketo MN indicated on Feb 16th that she would submit a bill to extend MN's clean indoor air act to cover vaping (which became SF 2027 - it also contains a ban on minor sales/possession).
I've spent quite a bit of time dissecting this interview, because I think it's incredibly revealing about the strategy pursued by the Tobacco Control Industry - paricularly the very media-savvy and sophisticated CLEARYWAY MN, which is funded by BP and your tax dollars. Sen. Sheran has evidently been thoroughly briefed and prepared. Let's observe how she handles some of these delicate issues ...
Video begins with a short snippet from the hearings in which Sen. Sheran says that the indoor vaping/outdoor ban makes sense because there's allegedly no information whatsoever about what's in the e-liquid. Cuts to an interview with Julie Bartkey of Twin Cities PBS, in which Sen. Sheran says that she's "particularly happy to be here to discuss this subject." Goes on to say that the research is "inconclusive" about whether the "smoke" that the user exhales is "safe" or whether "the product actually does help people quit smoking, although there's some anectdotal stories that some people have experienced that." Also adds, "we don't want to expose children to it, either by selling it to them or by making it visible for people to observe or inhale in public places." When asked why the time for regulation is now - when the studies are "inconclusive" - the Sen. says: "First of all, we have done a survey, and 80% of the public has said that they do not want to take the risk that these products are harmful [emphasis in her tone]."
That survey is almost certainly the one done by CLEARWAY MN which was touted in a paid advertisement placed with Reuters, reported in this space on Feb 26th:
http://www.reuters
.com/article/2014/02/26/mn-restrictecigpoll-idUSnPnCGvJc1X+169+PRN20140226 ... yet the survey's questions and polling methodology were never disclosed (for example, did they use the terms "smoke" and "e-cigarette" which would likely confuse respondents into thinking that the poll addressed tobacco cigarettes?).
Oh, and one more thing ... let's go back to 5:46 <sound of tape rewinding> ... "First of all, we have done a survey ...
WHOA! Who's the "we" in that sentence, Sen. Sheran? Are you talking about CLEARWAY MN at 5:46? Are you their spokesperson? Or are you perhaps reciting their talking points - and forgetting to adjust the pronouns? [Okay, now back to our regularly scheduled interview coverage ...]
At this point, the Sen. goes off on a rather odd tangent which may be a reference to nicotine in the exhalations (one has to wonder if she knows that nic. inhalers are basically the same in this regard): "And the reason why it's important is the same as it is for other mood-altering chemicals ... it's not unusual for us to say, that until a product can be proved to be fairly safe for the public, that we don't allow pharmaceutical companies to sell it - until they've demonstrated safety, rather than ask the public to take a risk on a substance like this, and then to find out later that it was problematic. So we've sort of divided that down: if an adult wants to take that risk in their own lives, and with their own lungs and their own brain, well we'll keep it legal. But we're saying that the general public does not want to take that risk on a product that hasn't been tested. So in a nutshell, the argument is that exhaled vapor is an untested nicotine delivery system for bystanders (rather like nicotine inhalers).
Next, the moderator switches gears, and points out that business is projected to top $1.5B this year. Sen. Sheran - who can't seem to help herself - interrupts the moderator mid-sentence, in an apparent effort to get the next talking point out ...
"That's a fabulous income, isn't it? And it's being marketed in ways that are directed at young people, because we know that the brain chemistry of young people is very, very aborbent of these addictive substances. So if you can get someone addicted to nicotine early in life, they are highly likely to stay connected to either the e-cigarettes or tobacco."
Whoa. Let's rewind. Q: How exactly do we know that these products are being marketed to children? The answer is simple. If a teen gets addicted to nicotine, they might be a customer for life. THEREFORE (drumroll), it logically follows that vaping IS being marketed to children. Got that? Of course this would also apply to alcohol, caffiene, processed sugar, and so forth. Since a child who gets accustomed to these products will likely be a customer in adulthood, this fact BY ITSELF forces us to conclude that these products ARE UNQUESTIONABLY being marketed to children, no matter what else is true.
Next she cites a NYT article which is presumably based on Dutra & Glantz re:the allegation that vaping is a "gateway" to becoming a regular tobacco smoker. This factoid apparently justifies not only a minor sales and possession ban, but also: "We don't want to have it in public places where modelling [i.e. children who emulate adult behavior] occurs, where they're [children] going to be able to see the glamor [uses her fingers for quote marks] of the entire product ... we want to see regulation developed first, on how it can be marketed, on who it can be marketed to, we want to see studies done that are able to say if you put this product in one of these capsules, that it's going to have this impact on the vapor. We simply just don't have that information. So until we do, 80% of the public are saying [probably another reference to the CLEARWAY MN study] 'we don't want to take the risk with the users of e-cigarettes.'"[emphasis added, note that the public places argument would also apply to a sidewalk usage ban, since presumably children use sidewalks]
[Watching this interview, I get the feeling that I'm seeing an eager student who has diligently memorized a lecture in order to pass an exam, but who doesn't genuinely understand the material. The talking points come tumbling out in a disorganized mass - as if the viewer has opened up a closet stuffed to the bursting point - with some of them (health issues) getting mixed up with others (the minor gateway-to-tobacco argument).]
Later ... "Many cities have already implemented various forms of restrictions on e-cigarettes. Those cities are coming forward and saying we really need the statewide policy, and not have this kind of variation on laws throughout the state like we did before with the smoking ban in public places. (emphasis added)."
Finally: it turns out that HF 1974 (which started out being essentially the same as Sheran's SF 2027) has been amended to take out the clean air act extension, and leave a simple minor ban in place according to this video (at 9:03). Moderator asks whether Sheran would be willing to live w/o the clean air act extension, just to get the minor sales ban passed.
Sen. S. says: "Well, I think it would be short-sighted [to pass a minor sales ban without a ban on vaping in public places] ... because the modelling behavior [i.e. the tendency of children to emulate adults] and the marketing behavior [i.e. we're absolutely certain that vaping is being marketed to children, because nicotine is addictive to children] around this [vaping] is really targeted to young people."
In other words it makes no difference whether vaping poses a risk to bystanders - the alleged minor gateway-to-tobacco effect alone is enough to justify the clean air act extensions. Voila: the strategy laid bare.
[ For MN vapers updates, see: http://mnvapers.com/
and the MN Vapers FB page for organizing: http://www.facebook.com/groups/MNVapersAdvocacy/
And: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-minnesota-e-cigarette.html ]
---
WISCONSIN
Title: Maureen Busalacchi, Lisa Davidson, Chris Klein and Sara Sahli: Don't exempt e-cigarettes from workplace laws
(Madison WI US local paper) http://host.madison
.com/news/opinion/column/maureen-busalacchi-lisa-davidson-chris-klein-and-sara-sahli-don/article_0ef2a57a-939b-5689-93cd-94f20f217fda.html#ixzz2w2yhz9dE
This is in ref. to WI's SB 440, which just passed out of a sen. cmte yesterday. It's the only currently-live bill in the US which would explicitly exempt vaping from indoor clean air acts (along with the WI house counterpart, AB 762). Turns out the authors are all professional ANTZ, so the content shouldn't be surprising. (Note the word "shouldn't.") Frankly, I've seen better hit jobs done by a two-bit cub reporter with just 20 minutes to churn out a 200-word piece about a car tire punctured by a discarded cartridge. Apparently these ANTZ left their "violin cases" at home. The best they can do is to emphasize the "unknowns and concerns," along with a fairly lame job of citing Dutra & Glantz: "A recent study found kids who smoke e-cigarettes are more likely to also smoke regular tobacco. With youth e-cigarette use on the rise, there is the potential for youth smoking to also rise. Flavors like gummy bear, cherry crush and bubble gum reveal the real targets of e-cigarette marketing: our kids." (That's all they have?? What happened to "seven times more likely?" Or the antifreeze, tin nanoparticles, diethylene glycol, volatile organic compounds, and the fact that vaping is "unproven" as a THR/cessation tool, because it leads to "more tobacco cigarette smoking, not less?" And all they can say is that the "safety level" is unknown, and that WI would be taking a step backwards by "normalizing smoking?" Good heavens. Fire these folks at once!
[ WI has two bills that would explicitly exempt from the state Indoor Clean Air Act, which CASAA strongly supports: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-updated-support.html Also see report by Kirstin: http://wivapers.blogspot.com/2014/03/my-two-days-in-wisconsins-capitol.html and: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...6240-wisconsin-updates-wisconsin-updates.html ]
Title: Businesses, Health Advocates Debate e-Cigarettes
(Green Bay WI US ABC affiliate) http://www.wbay
.com/story/24980547/2014/03/14/businesses-health-advocates-debate-e-cigarettes
Another story about WI's SB 440, citing ANTZ: "'We don't know what the health effects are. We don't know what's in this vapor. We don't know what youth and adults are breathing in the chemicals that come with e-cigarettes,' Wendy Vander Zanden of Community Action for Healthy Living Inc. said. In Kaukauna, members of Community Action for Healthy Living are working to find those answers. 'To open up a law that not many people are educated about. In exempting something that we don't have enough information on is scary,' Vander Zanden said. 'We need to take a step back and really think about what it's going to look like when it comes to compromising the clean air that we already have.'" As before, it appears that WI's ANTZ are much less virulent than their fellow travellers in many other states. (Don't they have internet access in WI?) Vapers interviewed as well. Not much in this short piece, and no other junk besides what was just quoted.
Title: Green Bay school district to ban e-cigarettes
(AP) http://www.washingtontimes
.com/news/2014/mar/14/green-bay-school-district-to-ban-e-cigarettes/
Very brief junk-free AP story
Title: Green Bay School District to Ban E-Cigarettes
(Green Bay WI US NBC affiliate) http://www.jrn
.com/nbc26/news/Green-Bay-School-District-to-Ban-E-Cigarettes-250344271.html
Green Bay school district bans vaping everywhere for everyone. Assoc. Principal at Pulaski H.S. says they've had "two a week for each of the past three weeks. (Horrors - an epidemic.)
"What are the chemicals that are in that, that came from that cartridge are things that we don't know. Anti-freeze yes we know is in there, but what else,' said Community Action for Healthy Living Executive Director, Wendy Vander Zanden. [boldface added.]" No other junk, as if that weren't plenty.
Title: E-cigarettes banned from Green Bay school campuses
(Appleton WI US local paper) http://www.postcrescent
.com/article/20140314/APC0101/303140193/E-cigarettes-banned-from-Green-Bay-school-campuses
No real junk in this story, but allegedly parents don't know that some PVs contain nicotine. And apparently the "responsible authorities" (as well as the story's writer) don't realize that some PVs lack nicotine, because they cite a new policy that refers to nicotine. Parents will be sent a letter warning them that students can't bring PVs to school. No junk (amazingly - given both the source and the subject).
Title: Local school districts crack down on e-cigarettes
http://www.wearegreenbay
.com/1fulltext-news/d/story/local-school-districts-crack-down-on-e-cigarettes/25627/yn54ibiIG0mwjZlBsQT1_w (Green Bay WI US CBS affiliate)
Similar to the other GB stories, but no obvious junk except these rather amusing statements: "'It has more become a way of starting smoking and more kids are doing it and it is kind of a lead in drug so to speak, or a lead in to cigarettes' says Tony Klaubauf, District Administrator for Denmark [...] 'As far as I know in Denmark [schools] we have had no instances of use, I think we are trying to get a little ahead of the curveball' says Klaubauf. [boldface added]"
---
US: UTAH
Title: E-Cigarette bill failed but regulations still come down on vapor companies and users
(SLC UT US ABC affiliate) http://www.4utah
.com/story/d/story/e-cigarette-bill-failed-but-regulations-still-come/79577/2O24ldbXGkyS020EOFiYyg
Breathlessly-written story about the heroic endeavors of Super Hero "save the children" Rep. Ray's last-ditch eleventh-hour effort to revive HB 112 before the clock struck noon ...
"It was a rush to get House Bill 112 pass the State Senate and back to the House before the clock ran out of time. 'It's 11:58 at that time and they are looking all over the Dias for the bill because we physically have to have the bill to take action on it and they couldn't find it. So time ran out on us,' said Representative Paul Ray." [para break omitted]"
(Alas, the lives of more innocent cherubs will be forever changed.) Despite what the story title says, there's nothing in it to suggest that any regulations are pending in UT. Aaron Frazier, of UT Vapers is quoted as saying that he was willing to work w/ Rep. Ray's desire for age verification. No junk. No other threats are pending in UT, the legislative session is over for 2014.
---
US: WASHINGTON (STATE)
Title: E-Cigarette Tax Hike Dies in Washington Legislature
(ATR web site) http://www.atr
.org/e-cigarette-tax-hike-dies-washington-legislature
Representative Reuven Carlyle, the Seattle Democrat who proposed the 95 percent tax in the House noted, 'There was a very strong, fierce, overwhelming opposition from the Senate.'" No junk. This appears to be the last threat remaining from Washington legislation for the year.
---
US: CALIFORNIA
Title: Daly City Considers Banning E-Cigarettes, Fears Boom of Vape Shops
(SF CA US CBS affiliate) http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal
.com/2014/03/14/daly-city-considers-banning-e-cigarettes-fears-boom-of-vape-shops/
"The mayor of Daly City said Friday his community needs to take a stand against the growing number of vape stores fleeing south as neighboring San Francisco considers an e-cigarette ban. Mayor David Canepa and others are concerned about the appeal e-cigarettes hold for children, despite age restrictions on who can enter the so-called vape stores that have popped up around Daly City. 'Several of these stores are conveniently located next to schools,' he said, pointing to Vape Dreams at 16 Washington Street, just across from Holy Angel School. [para breaks omitted]"
[And there you have it. Vape shops, tatoo parlors, lingerie stores with live pole dancers. The neighborhood is getting run down. Soon there will be drug dealers on every corner. Think of the children.]
Mayor wants moratorium on vape shops, because there are already three. Reporter interviwed the owner of Vape Dreams (the store that poses a threat to Holy Angel students' salvation), who says that no one under 18 is allowed in his store (and has a sign that says so on the door). No hearing date was set, and no junk in this story except what you see quoted above. Also see:
Title: Daly City mulls ban on e-cigarette sales
http://abclocal.go
.com/kgo/story?section=news/local/peninsula&id=9467022
this one implies that the mayor wants an outright ban, but it's only one paragraph.
[ CA is under threat from a wide variety of legislation, such as an internet sales ban: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-shipment-e-cigarettes-anyone-california.html ]
Title: Cerritos prohibits e-cigarette use around city buildings
(Orange Co. CA US local paper) http://www.ocregister
.com/articles/cigarettes-605689-city-ordinance.html
City Council unanimously prohibits vaping in and around city buildings, but doesn't extend it to private busineses. "Councilwoman Carol Chen said the city should eventually update the ordinance to restrict the use of e-cigarettes in private facilities like restaurants and bars. Councilman George Ray, however, said he would not want to regulate e-cigarettes past civic property until he sees data released by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or sees movement from federal or state government on the issue. 'If we get some data, and they say definitely these are harmful or more harmful, than cigarettes then I would certainly support it ....Otherwise, we’re going to be kind of out there by ourselves,' Ray said. 'We’ve got time, too.'" (Hmm, I wonder if the good Councilman knows how many CA cities have already extended their indoor clean air acts to cover private businesses. I sense that the local ANTZ are already mobilizing.) No junk.
Title: Long Beach prepares to roll out new e-cigarette ordinance
(LB CA US suburban general web site) http://www.signaltribunenewspaper
.com/?p=22983
In a nutshell, health officials are going around to local vape stores and issuing stern warnings about indoor vaping - sampling is only allowed if the customer is outdoors, 25 feet away from any doorway. From the Tobacco Control officials, we get the usual: (1) no proven value as a cessation tool; (2) no evidence that they're "safe"; (3) CDC figures on minor use. However no "tin nanoparticles" or diethelyne glycol or citations to Dutra/Glantz.
***
COLLECTION: FDA TOO SLOW ON E-CIG. REGULATIONS / REGULATIONS OVERDUE (BLOOMBERG NEWS SERVICE)
First published by Bloomberg News Service, this junky piece started in CT and is now migrating from the NE. At least two titles have been used so far, and more will likely come. So far, the "clone count" is up to a dozen or so.
Look for the first line: "Could someone please send the Food and Drug Administration a copy of the latest study on teenagers and e-cigarettes? The agency obviously needs a push to come out with its overdue regulations." (Refers to the Dutra & Glantz paper released last week which claims that e-cigarettes are a gateway for minors to tobacco smoking. And that's the point: FDA action is required, given that teens are being 'hooked' on vaping, and then becoming regular tobacco cigarette smokers - according to the junk statistics in the paper.)
Title: Editorial: Planned regulations on e-cigarettes are overdue by FDA
(Lorain OH US local paper) http://www.morningjournal
.com/opinion/20140314/editorial-planned-regulations-on-e-cigarettes-are-overdue-by-fda
Title: Editorial: Planned regulations on e-cigarettes are overdue by FDA
(Willoughby OH US local paper) http://www.news-herald
.com/article/20140314/NEWS/140319777&template=printart
***
Google Tips
to see whether there are bad things happening where you live, try this Google search (example for Rhode Island) -
rhode site:casaa.org
(Replace rhode with a single word that describes your city, county, or state. For ex., if you live in Eau Claire, WI - you might use "Claire" to see if something is being proposed at the city level. Don't forget the : (colon), and be sure that there's nothing before or after the colon (not even spaces or tabs.)
You can also try replacing site:casaa.org with e-cigarette to find out what the media is reporting in your area. This is usually most helpful if you use the search tools to search by date. (CASAA doesn't generally issue calls or alerts until a bill is out of a state legislative committee, or is scheduled for a local city or county hearing.)
Last edited:
