[ 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) Israel bans sale and development of PVs - usage is apparently still legal.
2) Indoor/outdoor vaping bans that affect private businesses being considered in: Calgary AB; Ft. Worth TX, and probably Waco TX. Woodbury TX and Muskogee OK seem to be all-but-authorized by the city managers.
3) Eaton Rapids MI's city manager bans smoking (and presumably vaping) in public parks, to "promote a healthy lifestyle" and "set a good example for children."
4) Dr. Rodu on Gov. Kasich's proposed tax increases on all tobacco-related products.
5) German Nat'l Cancer Research Ctr. lit. survey criticizes Drexel (Burstyn), but not much else.
6) More on MN, re: opposition to Gov. Dayton's decision not to support an indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking ban.
Coverage: Isreal, Ca(AB), US states: NY, MA, FL, OH, KY, MI, MN, KY, ND, TX, OK, NM
Not covered: Poison control call center stories are slowing to nil, I'm still collecting them. The very limited amount of excitement (if one can use the term) over the introduction of PCECAA to the US House seems to have entirely died down.
***
STUDIES, BLOGS, ETC
Title: Electronic Cigarettes - An Overview - Supplement March 2014
(German [Nat'l Gov't] Cancer Research Center) http://www.dkfz
.de/de/tabakkontrolle/download/Publikationen/RoteReihe/Band_19_e-cigarettes_an_overview_supplement_March_2014.pdf
This is basically a literature summary, and from what I can tell it is has been written with considerable care. Beyond that, I don't think I'm qualified to make more than a couple basic observations. The "gateway" section (5.4) seemed to offer very little of substance, and I was unable to discern why a national poll of Americans' attitudes towards the gateway effect was germane to the document's purpose. Few if any of the papers were critiqued to any extent, except for the Drexel (Burstyn) study, which was analyzed at length in an unfavorable light (sec. 3.4).
***
ISRAEL
Title: Law Prohibits Development or Sale of Electronic Cigarette
(Israeli Radio Station?) http://www.israelnationalnews
.com/News/Flash.aspx/289938#.Uzismc5obfg
[I have no idea whether this is a legitimate web site. I've tried unsucessfully to find a second source. The dateline on the story is 3/30 1:23pm local time. That's +2GMT, i.e. 7 hours ahead of US ET, which in turn means that it was 12 hours ago, I would've expected to see a second source by now.]
Here's the entire news flash:
"The Ministry of Health has approved a ruling against the creation, development or sale of 'electronic cigarettes.' The ruling was issued after an investigation of the product raised concerns that the electronic cigarettes contain dangerous and noxious poisons. [para break omitted]"
---
CANADA: ALBERTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Council may consider merits of banning e-cigarettes indoors
(Calgary AB Ca. local paper)
No reports of complaints and no comments from the health authorities. However:
"In the absence of any provincial direction on electronic smoking devices, [Councilperson] Colley-Urquhart believes it's important for action on the municipal level. 'To me, it's a public health policy issue that we need to deal with,' she said. 'People are promoting these as a smoking cessation substitute but a lot is unknown about the chemicals that are in them.'
[...] Colley-Urquhart believes the matter carries urgency. 'There are things that people probably feel are a bigger priority,' she said. '(But) much like the prostitution issue that I brought forward a couple of weeks ago, in the absence of the federal government or the province taking a lead on this, we need to get to work and take the lead ourselves at a community level.'[para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Apparently the process is that the council must first vote for some kind of initial investiation, and then: "... a working group would consult with AHS, Alberta Health and Wellness as well as other stakeholders and provide recommendations to the standing policy committee on community and protective services in September."
Some vape store owners and vapers express surprise, because they say that most Canadian vapers are discreet about it.
***
US NATIONAL
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-Cigarette Overdose: How Much Liquid Nicotine Would It Take To Kill You?
(San Diego CA US public radio) http://www.kpbs
.org/news/2014/mar/28/e-cigarette-overdose-how-much-liquid-nicotine-woul/
Your Correspondent has to wonder how NPR let this one by, given its usual penchant for biased reporting on all subjects vaping-related. However the explanation could be related to the first few paragraphs, which might lead one to believe that the author is buying into the poison control center call hysteria. Nothing of the kind - in fact the excellent junk-free discussion is remarkably similar to what you'll see in this existing ECF thread: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...tine-may-not-toxic-weve-been-led-believe.html
Title: With Big Three solidly in vapor game, analysts weigh in on what it might mean for category [by Melissa Vonder Haar, noted tobacco industry analyst]
(US Convenience Store trade 'zine) http://www.cspnet
.com/category-management-news-data/tobacco-news-data/articles/e-cig-lessons-cigarette-margin-squeeze
In a nutshell, this junk-free piece suggests that retailers are facing declining tobacco cigarette revenues and loss of promotional income from the manufacturers (due to MSA payments - although it's not clear from the article why these have fallen off lately). However retailers can do better in part by taking advantage of the current regulatory climate for vaping products, and the "fragmented" nature of the industry. BT's entrance into the market is no more likely to be a boon for retailers than it will be for consumers, particularly if regulations favor larger firms (as seems inevitable with the EU TPD, and perhaps likely here in the states - given that FDA's tendencies and the section 901 regulatory framework). Much of this is written in "gobbledygook," but it's a fascinating read for anyone with a background in retailing and/or an interest in the future of the vaping industry. (And if that's to your taste, you might also consider following Ms. Vonder Haar closely - she's a top notch reporter.)
Title: The E-Cig Factor
(US convenience store distribution co. site) http://mrcheckout
.net/the-e-cig-factor/
This junk-free article says what most of us probably already know: namely traditional tobacco product sales are significantly down, inventory carrying costs are up (due to lower turn), as are the overall margins (in part because of tax increases). By contrast, vape products are trending in the opposite direction, and their higher built-in margins are exceedingly attractive. That said, like all vaping articles, there are "fears, concerns and unknowns" - but in this case, these have to do w/ the regulatory climate at all levels of gov't.
---
US: NEW YORK
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study saying e-cigarettes don't help you quit disputed
(Poughkeepsie NY US local paper) http://www.poughkeepsiejournal
.com/article/20140330/NEWS06/303300042/Study-saying-e-cigarettes-don-t-help-you-quit-disputed
I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this story, which gives Dr. Siegel the last word. It's the only piece I've seen since Gana et al.'s bogus cessation "letter" was published in JAMA last week which cites any form of criticism. Unfortunately this "factiod" (vaping has been shown to have absolutely no cessation value) is now part of the media landscape. It will be interesting to see if any other local Gannet outlets pick up this excellent article.
[ NY has a vaping=smoking bill indoor ban now in the legislature. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ng-e-cigs-contain-tobacco-all-workplaces.html also tax bill: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-tax-e-cig-cartridges-75-wholesale-price.html ]
---
US: MASSACHUSETTS
[REPOST due to new title - first reviewed 3/22/14]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: It's time to ban cigarette sales
(Lowell MA US local paper) http://www.lowellsun
.com/lifestyles/ci_25452404/its-time-ban-cigarette-sales
Title: JEFF EDELSTEIN: Forget banning smoking; it's time to outlaw cigarettes
(Delaware Co. PA US local paper) http://www.delcotimes
.com/opinion/20140323/jeff-edelstein-forget-banning-smoking-its-time-to-outlaw-cigarettes
Title: Why the government should ban cigarettes but ‘grandfather' current smokers
(Lansdale PA US local paper) http://www.thereporteronline
.com/lifestyle/20140319/why-the-government-should-ban-cigarettes-but-grandfather-current-smokers
"My reasoning is simple: Because virtually all smokers start smoking as children, and I can’t believe there’s one adult smoker who looks back on that decision and thinks, 'Hey, you know what? That was a good choice I made back when I was a teenager. So glad I started smoking.' In short: No reasonable adult would ever pick up the habit. People start when they’re young, and then spend the rest of their life fighting off an addiction many studies claim is even more powerful than ....... So yeah. Enough is enough. One in five deaths in America each year would be avoided if every smoker could turn back time."
Evidently this writer doesn't know the difference between vaping and smoking. Nor is he apparently aware that not all e-juice contains nicotine. And this from someonewho describes himself as "a capitalist, as a libertarian-lite, as a 'don’t tread on me'-type of character."
Readers will not be surprised to learn that he quit cold turkey some years ago. (What is it that they say about blood being thicker than water?)
[ HB 3726 would ban vaping wherever smoking is banned, see CASAA call: http://blog.casaa.org/2013/09/call-to-action-massachusetts-e.html ]
---
US: FLORIDA
[Reposted due to re-run]
Title: E-cigarette bills draw fires
(Tampa Bay FL US local paper web site) http://highlandstoday
.com/hi/local-news/e-cigarette-bills-draw-fire-20140330/ Title: E-Cigarette Bill Draws Fire
(Miami FL US CBS affiliate) http://miami.cbslocal
.com/2014/03/27/e-cigarette-bill-draws-fire/
FL HB 169 is a minor sales/possession ban, which is very similar to SB 224 (the latter was unanmously passed by the sen. last week). However HB 169 contains one additional provision at the end:
(11) PREEMPTION - This subsection expressly preempts to the state the regulaton of products and activities under this section and supercedes any municipal or county ordinance on the subject.
Apparently the FL League of Cities and (surprise) the ALA both object to this provision. Article notes that FL's clean indoor air act also has a similar clause. In the case of HB 169, it appears that the principal effect would be to prevent local juridisctions from enacting stiffer penalties or more restrictive signage requirements (etc.). No junk.
---
US: OHIO
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Tax smokeless tobacco, e-cigarettes at lower rates [By Brad Rodu & Nantapron Plurphanswat]
(Youngstown OH US local paper) http://www.vindy
.com/news/2014/mar/30/tax-smokeless-tobacco-e-cigarettes-at-lo/
Junk-free opinion argues that if taxation policy is based on social costs, then reduced-harm nicotine delivery systems should be taxed less. Dr. Rodu is the lead author.
[ OH's simple minor sales ban HB 114 signed, but we don't know anything specific about Gov. Kasich's tax proposal yet. ]
---
US: KENTUCKY
Title: Lawmakers Could Ban Stores from Selling E-Cigarettes to Minors
(Bowling Green KY US ind. radio station) http://www.wbko
.com/news/headlines/Lawmakers-Could-Ban-Stores-from-Selling-E-Cigarettes-to-Minors-253069911.html
No junk. This piece has a little local content, but nothing of interest. It's basically a recap of the story below out of Louisville:
[Reposted due to effective re-run]
Title: House passes compromise e-cigarette ban
(Louisville KY US local paper) http://www.courier-journal
.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014/03/27/house-passes-compromise-e-cigarette-ban/6975443/
HB 299 - a simple minor sales/possession ban - which defines PVs as a "vapor product" (not as a "tobacco product") has been passed by the KY house, over the objections of the ALA and other ANTZ orgs. The language of HB 299 has been incorporated into SB 109, which is expected to be passed by the Sen. tomorrow. No junk.
[ KY also has a Vaping=smoking bill indoor clean air act ext. proposed, as well as both a 40% and 20% tax proposal, see CASAA call: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/01/kentucky-bills-to-ban-e-cigarette-usage.html Also some minor ban bills - esp. HB 309 which may morph into a tax, and SB 267 which establishes burdensome reporting requirements: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-require-reporting-e-cig-sales-retailers.html ]
---
US: MICHIGAN
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Eaton Rapids policy change bans smoking at all city parks
(Lansing MI US local paper) http://www.lansingstatejournal
.com/article/20140330/EATONRAPIDS01/303300055/Eaton-Rapids-policy-change-bans-smoking-all-city-parks?nclick_check=1
City of Eaton Rapids bans smoking in parks. Although the article says nothing about vaping, it seems rather likely that it's included. City Manager says:
"'The reason behind this is promoting healthy lifestyles. We just aren’t allowing something at our parks that is a bad example for children and doesn’t promote a healthy lifestyle.' [boldface added]
No other relevant info. in this short note.
[ MI appears to have several simple minor sales bans in the works - SB 667/8 and HB 4997 5007. SB 667/8 have passed the Sen. Most significantly, MI is under threat from HB 5393, which would effectively ban vaping sales entirely:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/legislation-news/536975-michigan-legislation.html ]
---
US: MINNESOTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Opponents worry it will re-socialize smoking
(Mankato MN US local paper) http://www.mankatofreepress
.com/local/x1387895252/Ground-shifts-on-e-cig-debate
Of course this is Sen. Sheran's home town, so naturally things are going to get ugly ... [for Gov. Dayton's position, see the last article in this section on MN]:
"We're nervous about balancing between individual freedom and public health,' health commissioner Ed Ehlinger said. 'E-cigarettes are pushing that gray area and they're pushing it on purpose.' [what does "on purpose" mean?]
There's no bright line but there's a lot of gray,' he said.
During a Monday state Senate hearing, Ehlinger cited a study that found the vapor emitted from 12 brands of e-cigarettes contains potentially toxic and carcinogenic substances. He conceded that the vapor's chemicals are at lower levels than in cigarette smoke but are 'in the air nonetheless.' The study's findings are even more ambiguous than that summary. It said that the levels of those chemicals were between nine and 450 times lower than in cigarette smoke. It concluded that using e-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers to quit warrants further study. Another study, published in the journal Inhalation Toxicology in 2012, concluded there is 'no apparent risk to human health from e-cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyzed.' To that evidence, Ehlinger asks if you would use an e-cigarette around a 3-month-old. 'Most people say they probably wouldn't,' he said. 'If that's the case on an individual level we need to think about what we're exposing other people to.'"
[At this point, the reporter seems to have completely forgotten that he's a journalist, not an advocate ...]
"So, why not put regulation on hold while e-cigarettes are standardized and studied by federal scientists? Because, from a public health perspective, the regulation of secondhand vapor is about more than just the vapor itself. It's about e-cigs' social effect on would-be smokers, especially young people, and about whether it threatens to reverse the hard-earned progress made by anti-smoking campaigns. In other words, social perception has a bigger impact on smoking rates than legal regulations do. It's already illegal to sell e-cigs to minors, and other parts of Sheran's bill would further limit how e-cigs can be marketed to children. That said, the indoor e-cig ban, the first article in the bill, might have the biggest effect on adolescents even though it's the only part that doesn't regulate their behavior."
[Okay, now we're back to playing the journalist game:]
'Taking out Article 1 is playing into the hands of the tobacco industry because they know it (the rest of the bill) will not decrease the growth' in e-cigarettes, Ehlinger said. That's especially true considering the rapid rise in e-cig use; one study showed those rates doubling among middle school students in just one year. [para breaks omitted, boldface added
So, evidently the whole point of the indoor vaping ban is really to set a good example for minors, and to keep them from wanting to vape. (At least the title is accurate.)
The article concludes with a reference to the Gana et al. junk letter concerning cessation, in which cessation results from 88 smokers who had happened to have tried vaping at least once (but who didn't express an interest in quitting) were used to justify the conclusion that vaping isn't an effective cessation tool.
[Well, we knew this one would be rough.]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Through the vapor: where to set e-cigs restrictions
(Hibbing MN US daily paper) http://www.hibbingmn
.com/news/local/through-the-vapor-where-to-set-e-cigs-restrictions/article_84d30ee4-b79f-11e3-873b-001a4bcf887a.html
Not much new in this one, but just for recap purposes, here's more from the MN Health Comm'r [see next article for Gov. Dayton's position]:
"On Monday, Ehlinger said his support of the indoor ban was, in part, because 'E-cigarettes may re-normalize smoking, making it look like an acceptable behavior that's appealing to youth.' Ehlinger was also concerned about e-cigarettes because they are not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, are made by 300 manufacturers, lack consistency in ingredients, often falsify ingredient labels and the inhalant liquid is often mixed in the same store where the device is sold. Calling it a 'major public health issue,' Ehlinger said e-cigarettes 'are being offered as a safe alternative to tobacco so then people are starting to think this is a safe way to go.' 'The state has a responsibility to act on this,' he added. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]
No other junk in this piece.
[Reposted for readers who haven't been following the story]
Title: Gov. Dayton has doubts about moves to restrict use of e-cigarettes
(Twin Cities MN US local paper) http://www.startribune
.com/politics/statelocal/252366351.html
[H/t to JustJulie for posting this link in legislation.]
It's not clear if this means that he'd veto the bills or whether he'd change his mind on them. SF 2027 is ready for a full vote in the MN sen., HF 1931 - the companion vaping=smoking indoor ban, is still in a house cmte. That said, many MN local gov'ts have already passed indoor/outdoor vaping bans.
"[Gov.] Dayton said that while he would sign a bill to restrict children's ability to buy e-cigarettes, he is likely to oppose proposed restrictions on their use indoors. 'After we came down pretty hard on smokers last session, that's probably enough for this biennium,' Dayton said. The state raised taxes on cigarettes last year. 'We did enough to smokers last session.' The governor's position may quash the growing movement at the Legislature to restrict where Minnesotans can use the newly popular smokeless devices. [...] Dayton said he does not know whether there is definitive evidence that secondhand vapors pose a danger similar to secondhand smoke.[...] Dayton said if e-cigarettes cut down on the use of regular cigarettes, as some users maintain, that may be a boon. Dayton supported an increase in cigarette taxes partly as a way to curb smoking. 'A lot of people are trying to quit smoking because of the higher price and are using this as a way of quitting smoking, which is what we want them to do,' the governor said. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]." No junk.
---
US: NORTH DAKOTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Praise for e-cig restrictions
(Bismark ND US local paper) http://bismarcktribune.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_233898ea-b6f8-11e3-98d5-0019bb2963f4
.html
Although this is supposed to be an opinion piece that lauds the passage of simple minor bans on sales and possession, it goes way beyond that. As soon as I saw the FDA '09 junk in there, I thought that it was starting to sound like something written by the ALA. Yep, that's exactly what it is. Not a word in there about cessation or harm reduction (which is good in a way - if something had been said, it wouldn't have been very nice, either). Poisoning children? You bet, in droves! And those kid-friendly flavors that BT offers? Yep. It's all about hooking the kids on nicotine (I thought that was interesting, apparently this ANTZ hasn't yet heard about Dutra & Glantz ... nor is she aware that the CDC stats she's citing don't actually involve nicotine use as such - just "e-cigarettes").
"These products are targeting youth to begin smoking." (with all the gov't and MSA cash they're rolling in, one would think the ALA could afford to hire someone who can write literate English).
---
US: TEXAS
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette debate reaches McLennan County [Woodway and Waco TX]
(Waco TX local paper)
If there ever was a poster city for the idea that "nicotine = tobacco," it's Woodway TX. Waco could be next.
"Woodway is ridding its city campuses of any tobacco products, and that includes electronic cigarettes or 'vaporizers,' City Manager Yost Zakhary said. Zakhary said the city stopped hiring tobacco [by that he means 'nicotine'] users in mid-February and all its campuses will become tobacco-free Tuesday. The city hasn't changed its ordinance for private entities yet, such as restaurants, to include e-cigarettes, but Zakhary said his recommendation is that the Woodway City Council do so. 'We see electronic cigarettes (as being) the same thing as cigarettes,' he said. [...] There's not a lot of clear-cut answers on whether or not it helps people quit smoking or if there are any other underlying health conditions that could be (worsened) by that,' health district spokeswoman Kelly Craine said. 'At the health district, we feel that nicotine is unhealthy. It is unhealthy. It's a poison.' [...] 'They're not presenting this as a tool to help you stop smoking. It's being presented in a way as a tool where you can smoke in restaurants or bars,' she said.
Waco Mayor Malcolm Duncan Jr. said the Waco City Council hasn't discussed expanding its nonsmoking ordinances to include e-cigarettes, but is open to examining anything brought to the meetings. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
As an afterthought, a local vape store owner is interviewed. He seems to have no objections to any form of usage prohibitions. (Inquiring minds would like to know what he'll say when his license is revoked in order to make the town "tobacco free.")
[ TX's legislature is out of session for the year, unless Gov. Perry calls for a special session. ]
Title: Readers sound off on e-cigarettes
(Ft. Worth TX US local paper) http://www.star-telegram
.com/2014/03/30/5690339_readers-sound-off-on-e-cigarettes.html
Collection of letters regarding Ft. Worth's potential vaping=smoking indoor clean air act extension. What's fascinating is that not a single anti-vaping letter writer uses the word "tobacco" - even in cases in which they are clearly refering to tobacco cigarettes. For example, one says that he "grew up in a cloud of nicotine smoke."
Your Correspondent is a little surprised. Rarely - if ever - do people who are unfamiliar with the discussions concerning vaping regard "nicotine" as a synonym for "tobacco" or "cigarette." Could it be that some of these letters were planted, or edited? Or have average people just adopted the ANTZ terminology? I have no clue. Another reader claims that he is now "now subjected to giant clouds of vapor filled with irritants."
---
US: OKLAHOMA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: As e-cig use grows, so does talk of regulation
(Muskogee OK US local paper) http://www.muskogeephoenix
.com/local/x2010447612/As-e-cig-use-grows-so-does-talk-of-regulation
http://newsok
.com/as-e-cig-use-grows-so-does-talk-of-regulation/article/feed/667973
This rather general article is appropos of the Muskogee Co. Health Dep't's request to the city manager to ban vaping on city property. Despite some good work by Sean Gore of the Oklahoma Vapor Advoacy League (OVAL), which has been very active in OK, the reporter evidently felt forced to write this context-free sentence:
"The FDA, the World Health Organization, the American Lung Association, and other health organizations all agree on one thing about e-cigs. Nobody knows the potential harm that may be caused by using them."
However the report is - for the most part - fairly junk-free. The health dep't official didn't get to put in many digs, other than the expected statistics about minor use, which Sean Gore of OVAL got a chance to address.
Sadly, one has to read the report very carefully to realize that the health dep't official who is pushing the city manager to ban vaping on city property is also the person who will oversee an up-to-$120K grant from the OK MSA funds. This is the same grant fund that provided money to a number of OK cities that banned vaping on their property, according to a report in this space yesterday:
http://ournewsoklahoma
.com/article-view/80-county/5920-e-cigarettes-banned-in-some-ok-cities
[ SB 1892 is a mixed bag for proponents of smoke-free alternatives, because it raises the tax on Snus and other smokeless products, but exempts vaping. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...g-bills-introduced-oklahoma-hearing-held.html
and: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/oklahoma-ok.html ]
---
US: NEW MEXICO
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigs raise new questions about ‘vaping’ in the office
(Santa Fe NM US local paper)
I figured this was going to be a brutal read after viewing the title. To my astonishment, it's completely junk-free, and written by someone who's described as "an etiquette consultant and owner of the Etiquette School of Santa Fe." (I didn't know they had "charm" or "finishing" schools anymore?)
Anyway if you're looking for her to fume in rage over "cigarette smoke" (due to vaping), it seems that you'll be disappointed. You came to the wrong age group. Incidently, the article begins with her description of seeing a drug store's security gaurd engage in a "2-second" stealth vape. She said that she felt it was a questionable thing to do on the clock, but couldn't figure out why. (Maybe she wouldn't have thought that if he'd been chewing gum?)
One can be certain that local ANTZ will be calling up all their friends to pack this one with feedback. Perhaps one will respond with an opinion piece.
[ CASAA supports simpl eminor ban HB 15 [just passed house] http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-new-mexico-urgent.html ]
***
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) Israel bans sale and development of PVs - usage is apparently still legal.
2) Indoor/outdoor vaping bans that affect private businesses being considered in: Calgary AB; Ft. Worth TX, and probably Waco TX. Woodbury TX and Muskogee OK seem to be all-but-authorized by the city managers.
3) Eaton Rapids MI's city manager bans smoking (and presumably vaping) in public parks, to "promote a healthy lifestyle" and "set a good example for children."
4) Dr. Rodu on Gov. Kasich's proposed tax increases on all tobacco-related products.
5) German Nat'l Cancer Research Ctr. lit. survey criticizes Drexel (Burstyn), but not much else.
6) More on MN, re: opposition to Gov. Dayton's decision not to support an indoor/outdoor vaping=smoking ban.
Coverage: Isreal, Ca(AB), US states: NY, MA, FL, OH, KY, MI, MN, KY, ND, TX, OK, NM
Not covered: Poison control call center stories are slowing to nil, I'm still collecting them. The very limited amount of excitement (if one can use the term) over the introduction of PCECAA to the US House seems to have entirely died down.
***
STUDIES, BLOGS, ETC
Title: Electronic Cigarettes - An Overview - Supplement March 2014
(German [Nat'l Gov't] Cancer Research Center) http://www.dkfz
.de/de/tabakkontrolle/download/Publikationen/RoteReihe/Band_19_e-cigarettes_an_overview_supplement_March_2014.pdf
This is basically a literature summary, and from what I can tell it is has been written with considerable care. Beyond that, I don't think I'm qualified to make more than a couple basic observations. The "gateway" section (5.4) seemed to offer very little of substance, and I was unable to discern why a national poll of Americans' attitudes towards the gateway effect was germane to the document's purpose. Few if any of the papers were critiqued to any extent, except for the Drexel (Burstyn) study, which was analyzed at length in an unfavorable light (sec. 3.4).
***
ISRAEL
Title: Law Prohibits Development or Sale of Electronic Cigarette
(Israeli Radio Station?) http://www.israelnationalnews
.com/News/Flash.aspx/289938#.Uzismc5obfg
[I have no idea whether this is a legitimate web site. I've tried unsucessfully to find a second source. The dateline on the story is 3/30 1:23pm local time. That's +2GMT, i.e. 7 hours ahead of US ET, which in turn means that it was 12 hours ago, I would've expected to see a second source by now.]
Here's the entire news flash:
"The Ministry of Health has approved a ruling against the creation, development or sale of 'electronic cigarettes.' The ruling was issued after an investigation of the product raised concerns that the electronic cigarettes contain dangerous and noxious poisons. [para break omitted]"
---
CANADA: ALBERTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Council may consider merits of banning e-cigarettes indoors
(Calgary AB Ca. local paper)
No reports of complaints and no comments from the health authorities. However:
"In the absence of any provincial direction on electronic smoking devices, [Councilperson] Colley-Urquhart believes it's important for action on the municipal level. 'To me, it's a public health policy issue that we need to deal with,' she said. 'People are promoting these as a smoking cessation substitute but a lot is unknown about the chemicals that are in them.'
[...] Colley-Urquhart believes the matter carries urgency. 'There are things that people probably feel are a bigger priority,' she said. '(But) much like the prostitution issue that I brought forward a couple of weeks ago, in the absence of the federal government or the province taking a lead on this, we need to get to work and take the lead ourselves at a community level.'[para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
Apparently the process is that the council must first vote for some kind of initial investiation, and then: "... a working group would consult with AHS, Alberta Health and Wellness as well as other stakeholders and provide recommendations to the standing policy committee on community and protective services in September."
Some vape store owners and vapers express surprise, because they say that most Canadian vapers are discreet about it.
***
US NATIONAL
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-Cigarette Overdose: How Much Liquid Nicotine Would It Take To Kill You?
(San Diego CA US public radio) http://www.kpbs
.org/news/2014/mar/28/e-cigarette-overdose-how-much-liquid-nicotine-woul/
Your Correspondent has to wonder how NPR let this one by, given its usual penchant for biased reporting on all subjects vaping-related. However the explanation could be related to the first few paragraphs, which might lead one to believe that the author is buying into the poison control center call hysteria. Nothing of the kind - in fact the excellent junk-free discussion is remarkably similar to what you'll see in this existing ECF thread: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...tine-may-not-toxic-weve-been-led-believe.html
Title: With Big Three solidly in vapor game, analysts weigh in on what it might mean for category [by Melissa Vonder Haar, noted tobacco industry analyst]
(US Convenience Store trade 'zine) http://www.cspnet
.com/category-management-news-data/tobacco-news-data/articles/e-cig-lessons-cigarette-margin-squeeze
In a nutshell, this junk-free piece suggests that retailers are facing declining tobacco cigarette revenues and loss of promotional income from the manufacturers (due to MSA payments - although it's not clear from the article why these have fallen off lately). However retailers can do better in part by taking advantage of the current regulatory climate for vaping products, and the "fragmented" nature of the industry. BT's entrance into the market is no more likely to be a boon for retailers than it will be for consumers, particularly if regulations favor larger firms (as seems inevitable with the EU TPD, and perhaps likely here in the states - given that FDA's tendencies and the section 901 regulatory framework). Much of this is written in "gobbledygook," but it's a fascinating read for anyone with a background in retailing and/or an interest in the future of the vaping industry. (And if that's to your taste, you might also consider following Ms. Vonder Haar closely - she's a top notch reporter.)
Title: The E-Cig Factor
(US convenience store distribution co. site) http://mrcheckout
.net/the-e-cig-factor/
This junk-free article says what most of us probably already know: namely traditional tobacco product sales are significantly down, inventory carrying costs are up (due to lower turn), as are the overall margins (in part because of tax increases). By contrast, vape products are trending in the opposite direction, and their higher built-in margins are exceedingly attractive. That said, like all vaping articles, there are "fears, concerns and unknowns" - but in this case, these have to do w/ the regulatory climate at all levels of gov't.
---
US: NEW YORK
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Study saying e-cigarettes don't help you quit disputed
(Poughkeepsie NY US local paper) http://www.poughkeepsiejournal
.com/article/20140330/NEWS06/303300042/Study-saying-e-cigarettes-don-t-help-you-quit-disputed
I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw this story, which gives Dr. Siegel the last word. It's the only piece I've seen since Gana et al.'s bogus cessation "letter" was published in JAMA last week which cites any form of criticism. Unfortunately this "factiod" (vaping has been shown to have absolutely no cessation value) is now part of the media landscape. It will be interesting to see if any other local Gannet outlets pick up this excellent article.
[ NY has a vaping=smoking bill indoor ban now in the legislature. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ng-e-cigs-contain-tobacco-all-workplaces.html also tax bill: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-tax-e-cig-cartridges-75-wholesale-price.html ]
---
US: MASSACHUSETTS
[REPOST due to new title - first reviewed 3/22/14]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: It's time to ban cigarette sales
(Lowell MA US local paper) http://www.lowellsun
.com/lifestyles/ci_25452404/its-time-ban-cigarette-sales
Title: JEFF EDELSTEIN: Forget banning smoking; it's time to outlaw cigarettes
(Delaware Co. PA US local paper) http://www.delcotimes
.com/opinion/20140323/jeff-edelstein-forget-banning-smoking-its-time-to-outlaw-cigarettes
Title: Why the government should ban cigarettes but ‘grandfather' current smokers
(Lansdale PA US local paper) http://www.thereporteronline
.com/lifestyle/20140319/why-the-government-should-ban-cigarettes-but-grandfather-current-smokers
"My reasoning is simple: Because virtually all smokers start smoking as children, and I can’t believe there’s one adult smoker who looks back on that decision and thinks, 'Hey, you know what? That was a good choice I made back when I was a teenager. So glad I started smoking.' In short: No reasonable adult would ever pick up the habit. People start when they’re young, and then spend the rest of their life fighting off an addiction many studies claim is even more powerful than ....... So yeah. Enough is enough. One in five deaths in America each year would be avoided if every smoker could turn back time."
Evidently this writer doesn't know the difference between vaping and smoking. Nor is he apparently aware that not all e-juice contains nicotine. And this from someonewho describes himself as "a capitalist, as a libertarian-lite, as a 'don’t tread on me'-type of character."
Readers will not be surprised to learn that he quit cold turkey some years ago. (What is it that they say about blood being thicker than water?)
[ HB 3726 would ban vaping wherever smoking is banned, see CASAA call: http://blog.casaa.org/2013/09/call-to-action-massachusetts-e.html ]
---
US: FLORIDA
[Reposted due to re-run]
Title: E-cigarette bills draw fires
(Tampa Bay FL US local paper web site) http://highlandstoday
.com/hi/local-news/e-cigarette-bills-draw-fire-20140330/ Title: E-Cigarette Bill Draws Fire
(Miami FL US CBS affiliate) http://miami.cbslocal
.com/2014/03/27/e-cigarette-bill-draws-fire/
FL HB 169 is a minor sales/possession ban, which is very similar to SB 224 (the latter was unanmously passed by the sen. last week). However HB 169 contains one additional provision at the end:
(11) PREEMPTION - This subsection expressly preempts to the state the regulaton of products and activities under this section and supercedes any municipal or county ordinance on the subject.
Apparently the FL League of Cities and (surprise) the ALA both object to this provision. Article notes that FL's clean indoor air act also has a similar clause. In the case of HB 169, it appears that the principal effect would be to prevent local juridisctions from enacting stiffer penalties or more restrictive signage requirements (etc.). No junk.
---
US: OHIO
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Tax smokeless tobacco, e-cigarettes at lower rates [By Brad Rodu & Nantapron Plurphanswat]
(Youngstown OH US local paper) http://www.vindy
.com/news/2014/mar/30/tax-smokeless-tobacco-e-cigarettes-at-lo/
Junk-free opinion argues that if taxation policy is based on social costs, then reduced-harm nicotine delivery systems should be taxed less. Dr. Rodu is the lead author.
[ OH's simple minor sales ban HB 114 signed, but we don't know anything specific about Gov. Kasich's tax proposal yet. ]
---
US: KENTUCKY
Title: Lawmakers Could Ban Stores from Selling E-Cigarettes to Minors
(Bowling Green KY US ind. radio station) http://www.wbko
.com/news/headlines/Lawmakers-Could-Ban-Stores-from-Selling-E-Cigarettes-to-Minors-253069911.html
No junk. This piece has a little local content, but nothing of interest. It's basically a recap of the story below out of Louisville:
[Reposted due to effective re-run]
Title: House passes compromise e-cigarette ban
(Louisville KY US local paper) http://www.courier-journal
.com/story/news/politics/ky-legislature/2014/03/27/house-passes-compromise-e-cigarette-ban/6975443/
HB 299 - a simple minor sales/possession ban - which defines PVs as a "vapor product" (not as a "tobacco product") has been passed by the KY house, over the objections of the ALA and other ANTZ orgs. The language of HB 299 has been incorporated into SB 109, which is expected to be passed by the Sen. tomorrow. No junk.
[ KY also has a Vaping=smoking bill indoor clean air act ext. proposed, as well as both a 40% and 20% tax proposal, see CASAA call: http://blog.casaa.org/2014/01/kentucky-bills-to-ban-e-cigarette-usage.html Also some minor ban bills - esp. HB 309 which may morph into a tax, and SB 267 which establishes burdensome reporting requirements: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...-require-reporting-e-cig-sales-retailers.html ]
---
US: MICHIGAN
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Eaton Rapids policy change bans smoking at all city parks
(Lansing MI US local paper) http://www.lansingstatejournal
.com/article/20140330/EATONRAPIDS01/303300055/Eaton-Rapids-policy-change-bans-smoking-all-city-parks?nclick_check=1
City of Eaton Rapids bans smoking in parks. Although the article says nothing about vaping, it seems rather likely that it's included. City Manager says:
"'The reason behind this is promoting healthy lifestyles. We just aren’t allowing something at our parks that is a bad example for children and doesn’t promote a healthy lifestyle.' [boldface added]
No other relevant info. in this short note.
[ MI appears to have several simple minor sales bans in the works - SB 667/8 and HB 4997 5007. SB 667/8 have passed the Sen. Most significantly, MI is under threat from HB 5393, which would effectively ban vaping sales entirely:
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/legislation-news/536975-michigan-legislation.html ]
---
US: MINNESOTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Opponents worry it will re-socialize smoking
(Mankato MN US local paper) http://www.mankatofreepress
.com/local/x1387895252/Ground-shifts-on-e-cig-debate
Of course this is Sen. Sheran's home town, so naturally things are going to get ugly ... [for Gov. Dayton's position, see the last article in this section on MN]:
"We're nervous about balancing between individual freedom and public health,' health commissioner Ed Ehlinger said. 'E-cigarettes are pushing that gray area and they're pushing it on purpose.' [what does "on purpose" mean?]
There's no bright line but there's a lot of gray,' he said.
During a Monday state Senate hearing, Ehlinger cited a study that found the vapor emitted from 12 brands of e-cigarettes contains potentially toxic and carcinogenic substances. He conceded that the vapor's chemicals are at lower levels than in cigarette smoke but are 'in the air nonetheless.' The study's findings are even more ambiguous than that summary. It said that the levels of those chemicals were between nine and 450 times lower than in cigarette smoke. It concluded that using e-cigarettes as a harm reduction strategy among smokers to quit warrants further study. Another study, published in the journal Inhalation Toxicology in 2012, concluded there is 'no apparent risk to human health from e-cigarette emissions based on the compounds analyzed.' To that evidence, Ehlinger asks if you would use an e-cigarette around a 3-month-old. 'Most people say they probably wouldn't,' he said. 'If that's the case on an individual level we need to think about what we're exposing other people to.'"
[At this point, the reporter seems to have completely forgotten that he's a journalist, not an advocate ...]
"So, why not put regulation on hold while e-cigarettes are standardized and studied by federal scientists? Because, from a public health perspective, the regulation of secondhand vapor is about more than just the vapor itself. It's about e-cigs' social effect on would-be smokers, especially young people, and about whether it threatens to reverse the hard-earned progress made by anti-smoking campaigns. In other words, social perception has a bigger impact on smoking rates than legal regulations do. It's already illegal to sell e-cigs to minors, and other parts of Sheran's bill would further limit how e-cigs can be marketed to children. That said, the indoor e-cig ban, the first article in the bill, might have the biggest effect on adolescents even though it's the only part that doesn't regulate their behavior."
[Okay, now we're back to playing the journalist game:]
'Taking out Article 1 is playing into the hands of the tobacco industry because they know it (the rest of the bill) will not decrease the growth' in e-cigarettes, Ehlinger said. That's especially true considering the rapid rise in e-cig use; one study showed those rates doubling among middle school students in just one year. [para breaks omitted, boldface added
So, evidently the whole point of the indoor vaping ban is really to set a good example for minors, and to keep them from wanting to vape. (At least the title is accurate.)
The article concludes with a reference to the Gana et al. junk letter concerning cessation, in which cessation results from 88 smokers who had happened to have tried vaping at least once (but who didn't express an interest in quitting) were used to justify the conclusion that vaping isn't an effective cessation tool.
[Well, we knew this one would be rough.]
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Through the vapor: where to set e-cigs restrictions
(Hibbing MN US daily paper) http://www.hibbingmn
.com/news/local/through-the-vapor-where-to-set-e-cigs-restrictions/article_84d30ee4-b79f-11e3-873b-001a4bcf887a.html
Not much new in this one, but just for recap purposes, here's more from the MN Health Comm'r [see next article for Gov. Dayton's position]:
"On Monday, Ehlinger said his support of the indoor ban was, in part, because 'E-cigarettes may re-normalize smoking, making it look like an acceptable behavior that's appealing to youth.' Ehlinger was also concerned about e-cigarettes because they are not regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, are made by 300 manufacturers, lack consistency in ingredients, often falsify ingredient labels and the inhalant liquid is often mixed in the same store where the device is sold. Calling it a 'major public health issue,' Ehlinger said e-cigarettes 'are being offered as a safe alternative to tobacco so then people are starting to think this is a safe way to go.' 'The state has a responsibility to act on this,' he added. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]
No other junk in this piece.
[Reposted for readers who haven't been following the story]
Title: Gov. Dayton has doubts about moves to restrict use of e-cigarettes
(Twin Cities MN US local paper) http://www.startribune
.com/politics/statelocal/252366351.html
[H/t to JustJulie for posting this link in legislation.]
It's not clear if this means that he'd veto the bills or whether he'd change his mind on them. SF 2027 is ready for a full vote in the MN sen., HF 1931 - the companion vaping=smoking indoor ban, is still in a house cmte. That said, many MN local gov'ts have already passed indoor/outdoor vaping bans.
"[Gov.] Dayton said that while he would sign a bill to restrict children's ability to buy e-cigarettes, he is likely to oppose proposed restrictions on their use indoors. 'After we came down pretty hard on smokers last session, that's probably enough for this biennium,' Dayton said. The state raised taxes on cigarettes last year. 'We did enough to smokers last session.' The governor's position may quash the growing movement at the Legislature to restrict where Minnesotans can use the newly popular smokeless devices. [...] Dayton said he does not know whether there is definitive evidence that secondhand vapors pose a danger similar to secondhand smoke.[...] Dayton said if e-cigarettes cut down on the use of regular cigarettes, as some users maintain, that may be a boon. Dayton supported an increase in cigarette taxes partly as a way to curb smoking. 'A lot of people are trying to quit smoking because of the higher price and are using this as a way of quitting smoking, which is what we want them to do,' the governor said. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]." No junk.
---
US: NORTH DAKOTA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: Praise for e-cig restrictions
(Bismark ND US local paper) http://bismarcktribune.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_233898ea-b6f8-11e3-98d5-0019bb2963f4
.html
Although this is supposed to be an opinion piece that lauds the passage of simple minor bans on sales and possession, it goes way beyond that. As soon as I saw the FDA '09 junk in there, I thought that it was starting to sound like something written by the ALA. Yep, that's exactly what it is. Not a word in there about cessation or harm reduction (which is good in a way - if something had been said, it wouldn't have been very nice, either). Poisoning children? You bet, in droves! And those kid-friendly flavors that BT offers? Yep. It's all about hooking the kids on nicotine (I thought that was interesting, apparently this ANTZ hasn't yet heard about Dutra & Glantz ... nor is she aware that the CDC stats she's citing don't actually involve nicotine use as such - just "e-cigarettes").
"These products are targeting youth to begin smoking." (with all the gov't and MSA cash they're rolling in, one would think the ALA could afford to hire someone who can write literate English).
---
US: TEXAS
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigarette debate reaches McLennan County [Woodway and Waco TX]
(Waco TX local paper)
If there ever was a poster city for the idea that "nicotine = tobacco," it's Woodway TX. Waco could be next.
"Woodway is ridding its city campuses of any tobacco products, and that includes electronic cigarettes or 'vaporizers,' City Manager Yost Zakhary said. Zakhary said the city stopped hiring tobacco [by that he means 'nicotine'] users in mid-February and all its campuses will become tobacco-free Tuesday. The city hasn't changed its ordinance for private entities yet, such as restaurants, to include e-cigarettes, but Zakhary said his recommendation is that the Woodway City Council do so. 'We see electronic cigarettes (as being) the same thing as cigarettes,' he said. [...] There's not a lot of clear-cut answers on whether or not it helps people quit smoking or if there are any other underlying health conditions that could be (worsened) by that,' health district spokeswoman Kelly Craine said. 'At the health district, we feel that nicotine is unhealthy. It is unhealthy. It's a poison.' [...] 'They're not presenting this as a tool to help you stop smoking. It's being presented in a way as a tool where you can smoke in restaurants or bars,' she said.
Waco Mayor Malcolm Duncan Jr. said the Waco City Council hasn't discussed expanding its nonsmoking ordinances to include e-cigarettes, but is open to examining anything brought to the meetings. [para breaks omitted, boldface added]"
As an afterthought, a local vape store owner is interviewed. He seems to have no objections to any form of usage prohibitions. (Inquiring minds would like to know what he'll say when his license is revoked in order to make the town "tobacco free.")
[ TX's legislature is out of session for the year, unless Gov. Perry calls for a special session. ]
Title: Readers sound off on e-cigarettes
(Ft. Worth TX US local paper) http://www.star-telegram
.com/2014/03/30/5690339_readers-sound-off-on-e-cigarettes.html
Collection of letters regarding Ft. Worth's potential vaping=smoking indoor clean air act extension. What's fascinating is that not a single anti-vaping letter writer uses the word "tobacco" - even in cases in which they are clearly refering to tobacco cigarettes. For example, one says that he "grew up in a cloud of nicotine smoke."
Your Correspondent is a little surprised. Rarely - if ever - do people who are unfamiliar with the discussions concerning vaping regard "nicotine" as a synonym for "tobacco" or "cigarette." Could it be that some of these letters were planted, or edited? Or have average people just adopted the ANTZ terminology? I have no clue. Another reader claims that he is now "now subjected to giant clouds of vapor filled with irritants."
---
US: OKLAHOMA
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: As e-cig use grows, so does talk of regulation
(Muskogee OK US local paper) http://www.muskogeephoenix
.com/local/x2010447612/As-e-cig-use-grows-so-does-talk-of-regulation
http://newsok
.com/as-e-cig-use-grows-so-does-talk-of-regulation/article/feed/667973
This rather general article is appropos of the Muskogee Co. Health Dep't's request to the city manager to ban vaping on city property. Despite some good work by Sean Gore of the Oklahoma Vapor Advoacy League (OVAL), which has been very active in OK, the reporter evidently felt forced to write this context-free sentence:
"The FDA, the World Health Organization, the American Lung Association, and other health organizations all agree on one thing about e-cigs. Nobody knows the potential harm that may be caused by using them."
However the report is - for the most part - fairly junk-free. The health dep't official didn't get to put in many digs, other than the expected statistics about minor use, which Sean Gore of OVAL got a chance to address.
Sadly, one has to read the report very carefully to realize that the health dep't official who is pushing the city manager to ban vaping on city property is also the person who will oversee an up-to-$120K grant from the OK MSA funds. This is the same grant fund that provided money to a number of OK cities that banned vaping on their property, according to a report in this space yesterday:
http://ournewsoklahoma
.com/article-view/80-county/5920-e-cigarettes-banned-in-some-ok-cities
[ SB 1892 is a mixed bag for proponents of smoke-free alternatives, because it raises the tax on Snus and other smokeless products, but exempts vaping. See: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...g-bills-introduced-oklahoma-hearing-held.html
and: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/infozone/news/oklahoma-ok.html ]
---
US: NEW MEXICO
{Comments posted to page containing this story, &/or e-mail to Editor would be helpful.}
Title: E-cigs raise new questions about ‘vaping’ in the office
(Santa Fe NM US local paper)
I figured this was going to be a brutal read after viewing the title. To my astonishment, it's completely junk-free, and written by someone who's described as "an etiquette consultant and owner of the Etiquette School of Santa Fe." (I didn't know they had "charm" or "finishing" schools anymore?)
Anyway if you're looking for her to fume in rage over "cigarette smoke" (due to vaping), it seems that you'll be disappointed. You came to the wrong age group. Incidently, the article begins with her description of seeing a drug store's security gaurd engage in a "2-second" stealth vape. She said that she felt it was a questionable thing to do on the clock, but couldn't figure out why. (Maybe she wouldn't have thought that if he'd been chewing gum?)
One can be certain that local ANTZ will be calling up all their friends to pack this one with feedback. Perhaps one will respond with an opinion piece.
[ CASAA supports simpl eminor ban HB 15 [just passed house] http://blog.casaa.org/2014/02/call-to-action-new-mexico-urgent.html ]
***
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:
