EU outlines smoking crackdown plans

[kibbster]

I've read the original article and the whole thing is nanny state gone mad.

"For nicotine containing products (e-cigarettes) our proposal would see such products containing nicotine above a certain threshold requiring authorization under pharmaceutical legislation, as is currently the case in a number of Member States. For those under the specific threshold of nicotine, health warnings would have to apply."

What a crock, there are very few health issues with Nicotine but yet the EU is out of date enough to make it out to be the big bad wolf.
The EU want's pharma to control nicotene products, which will direcly compete with the useless NRT treatments they get paid a fortune for.

The fact that a lot of vapers will probably go back to smoking if they can't vape seems to escape them.
Because most vapers have already given up on NRT as a bad job.

Ah well.
Truth is where there's a will to purchase and money to pay for those purchases there will eb sales.
Expect e-cigs and PVs to be re-branded and sold as a device for an unrelated purpose if these rules come in.

Where there are rules there is bending and workarounds.

[andy01424]

Dec 20, 2012 9:56:25 GMT hifistud said:

And how, exactly, do you "make your own" when you can't get hold of nicotine??

go to a local farm and get it lol

[hifistud]

The hardware was never going to be a problem. But the best hardware in the world is just a torch if there's no juice to be had.

Dec 20, 2012 10:00:25 GMT kibbster said:

I've read the original article and the whole thing is nanny state gone mad.

Ah well.
Truth is where there's a will to purchase and money to pay for those purchases there will eb sales.
Expect e-cigs and PVs to be re-branded and sold as a device for an unrelated purpose if these rules come in.

Where there are rules there is bending and workarounds.

[kibbster]

Dec 20, 2012 10:05:15 GMT hifistud said:

The hardware was never going to be a problem. But the best hardware in the world is just a torch if there's no juice to be had.

Dec 20, 2012 10:00:25 GMT kibbster said:

I've read the original article and the whole thing is nanny state gone mad.

Ah well.
Truth is where there's a will to purchase and money to pay for those purchases there will eb sales.
Expect e-cigs and PVs to be re-branded and sold as a device for an unrelated purpose if these rules come in.

Where there are rules there is bending and workarounds.

True a ban on nic will pretty much screw us.

[ckc]

BAT who has just purchased Inntelli said they wanted the EU to regulate Ecigs as medical years back. They have the money to get that pushed through,meanwhile they get Intelli through testing and onto the market at what strength to begin ? Eventually way above anything else that's allowed........in time more testing and eventually they will have their fingers in the biggest ecig pie out there.

[AnnaLaw]

Is it a coincidence that the Intellicig announcement came with the EU directive.
Tobacco companies want to market disposable cigalikes in the same way as they used to do with cigarettes. I don't think they're interested in us enthusiasts. As for getting the micotine, pesticides have been suggested but they certainly aren't quality controlled for use in vaping. They're after the nic liquid and the non-medical limit is set to that which wouldn't affect a non-smoker.

If anybody watched VTTV last night, there was a call for all forums to unite, to bring in as many people we know, and start a real movement. They also asked us to send letters to our MEPs and MPs.

I sent one to my MEPs last night and posted it on POTV and UKV. This morning I sent one to my MP and am posted it on all three forums. There's a handy web site that allows you to send letters to both your MP and MEPs at www.writetothem.com/

Anybody who would like to use it as a basis for their own letter is welcome.

]I've just re-jigged my letter for my MP. I changed it a little, added a little, and aimed it more at the UK opting out of this part of the Directive.

The web site for letters is www.writetothem.com

I'm posting it in all the forums, we need to all get together on this and persuade everybody we know to join in.

Here is my letter, in red.

Dear

I am writing to you regarding the new revised European Tobacco Directive, specifically those parts relating to Electronic Cigarettes and asking the UK government not to implement this part of the Directive.

I do not know the extent of your knowledge of this new method of nicotine delivery, but as somebody who smoked 40 cigarettes a day and more for over 50 years and was always unable to quit using any approved medical methods, I ask you to oppose the implementation of this part of the Directive, which, if it becomes law, will be responsible for illness and death in many people who no longer smoke thanks to this invention by a Chinese pharmaceutical company that then became the first company to sell these devices.

Electronic cigarettes do not appeal to children and young people, who are attracted to tobacco. Users of electronic cigarettes are long-term smokers who have been unable to quit.
Both myself and a number of people I know have stopped smoking and are classed as non-smokers by our doctors because we inhale flavoured vapour that contains nicotine. The majority of us either cannot or have no desire to give up nicotine and have failed in all efforts using nicotine replacement therapy and/or other 'stop smoking' drugs.

The amount of nicotine proposed as the maximum permitted in this directive would be useless for the majority of electronic cigarette users. Few can use less than 12 mg/ml concentration without smoking, the majority use 18mg/ml, and a few need as much as 24mg/ml in order not to return to smoking. The maximum permitted to be sold without a medicines license in the EU Directive would only appeal to non-smokers, as nicotine content permitted would be zero or almost so, this amount being calculated as having little or no effect on a non-smoker.

It is true that nicotine is dangerous but the quantity of nicotine used by us is less dangerous than that in a pack of 20 cigarettes if they are eaten and certainly far less dangerous than NRT products in the hands of children.

Electronic cigarettes do not contain the 4000+ toxins in tobacco smoke, very little nicotine is released into the atmosphere, so we no longer smell of smoke or endanger children and non-smokers with second-hand smoke.
In the UK this industry is already tightly regulated under Health and Safety and Trading Standards laws. The liquid for these electronic cigarettes not sold in pre-filled cartridges must be CHIP compliant, all have appropriate heatth warnings and it is batch-tested for purity by independent laboratories.

Unbiased evidence shows that electronic cigarettes are far less harmful than smoking, possibly having only 1% of the danger, as much as drinking coffee, but the benefit is enormous in tobacco harm reduction.

I do know that if this directive is passed and implemented as it stands now, millions of people throughout Europe and hundreds of thousands of people in the UK, will return to smoking and probably cost the NHS a considerable amount of money treating smoking-related diseases, as well as causing many more smoking-related deaths. Therefore I beg you to do all you can to prevent this draconian attack on UK citizens who have given up smoking or are likely to do so in the future by using electronic cigarettes. Vaping, as we call it, is not smoking. True, the nicotine is extracted from tobacco leaves in the same way as it is for NRT, but the same nicotine can be bought at any chemists shop, using methods and flavours that have failed many times for those who could only stop smoking with this method. These devices and the nicotine used with them is intended to reduce harm in those who are unable to quit, not to be used as a quitting method, although some have successfully stopped smoking using them.

There is also a growing European and UK industry in the manufacture and sale of the liquid for electronic cigarettes and the sale of the devices used. This is a young and growing industry, employing more people every year as more smokers learn of electronic cigarettes and give up smoking successfully by using them instead. Pharmaceutical grade nicotine is now produced in the UK and UK manufacturers and vendors would be forced out of business, creating more unemployment and cutting off a new British industry. This industry is so young that the present British companies cannot afford to obtain a medicines license yet, only the big tobacco companies have sufficient money.

The maximum nicotine permitted in this directive, of 4 mg, assuming that is 4 mg/ml as the strength is measured for electronic cigarettes, would be completely ineffective for 99% of those who use them.

If this directive is passed and adopted by the UK, then the EU will be responsible for the ill-health and deaths of millions throughout the EU, the number of smokers will increase as in most of the UK those who have successfully converted completely to electronic cigarettes are as healthy as non-smokers, and no young people will be affected as young people have no interest in these devices. I would in fact argue that if a teenager did decide to use nicotine it would be far safer than smoking, although I know of no young person who has started with electronic cigarettes. According to a poll of those who have swapped cigarettes for electronic ones, which we do not like to call cigarettes, the average age is between 30 and 50, the youngest being in their early 20s, the oldest over 70. In fact I know of a few people in their 80s whose health has improved thanks to these devices and the nicotine they use.

The majority of those who use 'personal vapourisers' (the term preferred to 'electronic cigarettes') no longer like the taste of tobacco. The liquid used in these are to appeal to adults, not to children. Also in the UK the trade follows the law of not selling to under 18s, although that is harder to police until they are available in every high street and we no longer need to use online vendors.

I ask you, for the sake of the health of Britons if for no other reason, to oppose this ban on effective electronic cigarettes in the UK. The government can tax them although I find it hard to imagine a 'sin tax' on something that is relatively harmless compared to tobacco.

The number of people who switch from tobacco to electronic cigarettes is increasing exponentially. The people who switch, from tobacco is increasing every day. It is not easy for most and requires will-power, but is do-able for many who continue smoking even after their health is so affected that they have poor quality of life.
These devices were first developed by a Chinese chemist working for a Chinese pharmaceutical company, to help people stop smoking. The electronic cigarette industry has never attempted to obtain a medicines license because of the cost and also because consumers do not want to take a medicine or be classed as smokers. We do not smoke, no smoke exists and no tobacco burnt.

Although there may be poor regulation of e-cigarette liquid in some EU countries this is not the case in the UK. The nicotine used is pharmaceutical grade.

Please investigate and take up this matter, because if the EU Tobacco Directive becomes law in its entirety in the UK many ex-smokers will become smokers again and many who would stop smoking will be unable to do so.
This part of the Directive would be the equivalent of a death sentence to British vapers, a number of whom live in this constituency.



Yours sincerely,

[andy01424]

add the last paragraph from here is a good indicator=
Here is what Benowitz said about cancer and smokeless tobacco (ST) use, "The lack of increase in common cancers in lifelong ST users indicates that nicotine is not a general cancer promoter." And regarding cardiovascular disease (CVD) he wrote, "Meta-analyses showing increased risk of MI and stroke in ST users are heavily weighted by CPS-I and CPS-II, which are older US studies with many methodologic problems. More recent Swedish studies and an NHANES study indicate minimal if any increased risk of CVD with ST."

There was one caution: "Nicotine likely has adverse effects on reproduction, including increasing the risk of pre-eclampsia and preterm birth."

Of course, this is based on the nicotine intake and TSNAs present in snus. People tend to take in less nicotine from vaping than they do from smoking, and the TSNA levels are much, much smaller.

Snus is processed in such a way to reduce the content of Tobacco-Specific Nitrosamines, thought to be the cancer-causing chemicals in cigarettes. To give you an idea of the range of TSNA content (calculated daily exposure with average use):

one each, 4 mg., Nicotine patch - 8 nanograms
1.5 gram, 16 mg e-cigarette liquid - 12 nanograms
20 pieces, Ariva dissolvable orbs -1,045 nanograms
8 grams of Swedish Snus (General) - 16,000 nanograms
1 pack of Marlboro full flavor -126,000 nanograms

So if 16,000 ng per day of TSNAs from General snus doesn't cause any type of cancer, it seems pretty improbable that 8 ng per day (or even 24 if you vape a lot) would cause cancer.

www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/nicotine/284073-nicotine-causes-lung-cancer-4.html

[pjim]

I think this is a really good idea. Knowing what the EU is like, especially considering their absurd stance on Snus; which is inconsistent with the laws on tobacco sales. Their coming for electronic cigarettes, especially the E-liquid. Hopefully with some concerted action we might be able to prevent this. Particularly in the UK where the directive could not be implemented as law.

Thanks for sharing your letter it could be used as a basis for other responses.

I'm going to be mailing my MP and MEP, its worth a shot.

[pjim]

I've just been looking on Professor Siegel's tobacco analysis blog as he commented on this a couple of days ago, worth a look tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/leaked-copy-of-european-commissions.html

I thought this quote was to the point and may prove useful in letters.

"It's hard to figure out what the purpose of this aspect of the directive is, but its effect will be to increase tobacco-related disease and death in Europe. If approved as drafted, the directive will prevent smokers from having access to a much safer alternative to cigarettes that has been shown to be effective in helping to keep smokers off of cigarettes, or at least, to cut down significantly on the amount they smoke.

Thus, the effect of this directive would be to protect cigarette sales in Europe at the expense of the public's health.

We can only hope that a more sensible strategy will be substituted for this deadly one once the proposal is fully vetted."

Dr. Michael Siegel Professor in the Department of Community Health Sciences, Boston University School of Public Health

I hope people pay attention to this stuff and do something, because if this directive is fully implemented all this vaping stuff is effectively over for us.

[addict]

Forgive the pessimism, but what I have read and heard thus far from people representing the vaping community doesn't fill me with confidence that they will be effective lobbyists.

Purely from a selfish viewpoint, therefore, does this directive mean that if I can wean myself down to zero nicotine over the next couple of years I will be able legally to continue vaping pg/vg with food flavouring?

[Deleted]

Dec 20, 2012 12:35:53 GMT addict said:

Purely from a selfish viewpoint, therefore, does this directive mean that if I can wean myself down to zero nicotine over the next couple of years I will be able legally to continue vaping pg/vg with food flavouring?

Zero or up to 4mg (if said juice is approved medicinally). I don't think pg/vg will be banned nor flavourings individually. The directive also does not talk about devices so I assume you will still be able to buy spares

[AnnaLaw]

The speech I watched included the phrase 'tobacco should taste like tobacco and I get the impression that juice is being seen as a tobacco product. The reason for the ban (because that's what it is) was given as 'nicotine is dangerous and addictive'.
So all you'd be able to buy would be zero nic or so close to that as to make no difference.
Some of us who vape now could cut down to zero in a couple of years, but what about afterwards? This method, which is the only one that works at all for me, can only be used with pharma BRT unlesss Big Tobacco get a medicines license.

[addict]

I suppose that if they ban the sale of nicotine liquid the 4mg won't really be an option except in mass produced pre-filled cartridges. Are they focusing on the cigalikes with throwaway cartridges....the stuff with real money making potential? Any chance that diy mixing could stay under the radar for a while longer? I'm having trouble opening links and viewing videos today because I'm on a slow internet connection.

[giles]

Thanks Anna

Yes, please, everybody write to their MEP. Write your own letter, modify Anna's a bit and send that, modify mine a bit (it is at www.brisbourne.plus.com/MEPletter.html) and send that, but WRITE.

[Deleted]

The EU see flavourings and the whizzy look of ecigs as being attractive to non-smokers especially the young. The directive states that packaging needs to warn new users that nicotine is dangerous product.

The wider document does not levy restrictions against pipe smoking since they see this as a declining market. It is the potential new users and if tobacco giants are involved they will market as such if they are not controlled. This is the one positive thing about it. As long as there is a tobacco industry there will be a vaping industry. In my opinion, cigarettes should be phased out and ecigs allowed to take up the slack. Two generations and no-one would care. This will not be allowed however since it spells the death of major revenues for the tobacco giants, the pharmas, and the ecig industry.

The issue is no one really gives a fig about the health implications of vapers reverting back to stinkies.