EU Tobacco directive.

[Acevapers]

Here is a link to the proposal

ec.europa.eu/health/tobacco/docs/...788_en.pdf

section 3.7 is where the concern lays

And also a link for members to contact their local mp's regarding the matter.

www.writetothem.com/

[kickit]

Jan 8, 2013 17:26:50 GMT @storm said:

Jan 8, 2013 10:59:08 GMT kickit said:

It's not an issue of lack of command of the English language, although cheers for putting me in my place . It's an issue of just not making any logical sense. All the words are perfectly spelled, completely comprehensible individually and so on, it's just that once joined together in a sentence they are nonsense. And this isn't a person on here, it's a person whom apparently a lot of people voted for because they presumably thought (s)he was intelligent enough to represent them.

I have the full email and understood what was meant , so please don't start berating someone who has little knowledge of the subject AND is willing to stand in our corner

No, I'll just sod off. Thanks. It's been an education.

[Karma]

Could the claims by the big cig-like-companies be influencing this ludicrous 4mg top strength that's being talked about?

If one cart/cart whatever they want to call it, strength about 16mg and containing just less than 1ml, is apparently equal to 40 ciggies, and if you believe that claim, then us vapers that are vaping 5ml of 20mg strength a day must be consuming the equivalent of over 200 ciggies

[lobeydosser]

4mg is the equivalent of one piece of Nicorette NRT chewing gum, but you are allowed to chew up to 15 pieces of Nicorette a day. 4mg X 15 = 60mg.
Even their 2mg gum is 15 pieces, IE 30mg per day.

Now if BP reckons that 60mg is safe as a daily dose, then surely what is good for the goose, is also good for the gander?

[djs]

Jan 8, 2013 21:45:33 GMT Karma said:

Could the claims by the big cig-like-companies be influencing this ludicrous 4mg top strength that's being talked about?

If one cart/cart whatever they want to call it, strength about 16mg and containing just less than 1ml, is apparently equal to 40 ciggies, and if you believe that claim, then us vapers that are vaping 5ml of 20mg strength a day must be consuming the equivalent of over 200 ciggies

Hold that thought.

E-Lites hold 0.6ml @ 24mg. That's 40 fags (according to them).
That means if I vape 2.0ml a day, that's over 120 fags-worth, as you say.


Except it's not. D'oh.

[djs]

Jan 8, 2013 22:17:50 GMT lobeydosser said:

4mg is the equivalent of one piece of Nicorette NRT chewing gum, but you are allowed to chew up to 15 pieces of Nicorette a day. 4mg X 15 = 60mg.
Even their 2mg gum is 15 pieces, IE 30mg per day.

Now if BP reckons that 60mg is safe as a daily dose, then surely what is good for the goose, is also good for the gander?

Now THAT is a good argument.

[padiho]

Jan 8, 2013 22:24:43 GMT djs said:

Jan 8, 2013 22:17:50 GMT lobeydosser said:

4mg is the equivalent of one piece of Nicorette NRT chewing gum, but you are allowed to chew up to 15 pieces of Nicorette a day. 4mg X 15 = 60mg.
Even their 2mg gum is 15 pieces, IE 30mg per day.

Now if BP reckons that 60mg is safe as a daily dose, then surely what is good for the goose, is also good for the gander?

Now THAT is a good argument.

+ 1 ...excellent point

[hifistud]

[vereybowring]

Just to mention it to people who maybe hadn't thought about it.

It doesn't just have to be us users of electronic cigarettes that can contact MEP's and the like.
If you have good friends or family who approve and support your choice to vape get them to write too if they are willing.

As Clive Bates says though you can't tell them exactly what to say, it has to be what they think about the whole thing. Possibly touching on the way it has changed you in their eyes and what would happen if you ended up back smoking because of this directive.

The more people we can get bringing this to their attention the better, just walk them through what's proposed and what it means to you.

Just something I thought of last night well after VTTV had aired, but I did blog about my opinions and made sure I spread it over social media sites so my friends and family could all see what was going on.

[glynwhite]

Latest MEP reply:

Dear Mr. White,

Thank you for your email.

As you may be aware the Tobacco directive is currently under renewal.

The directive will be coming before the Environment, Public Health and
Food Safety Committee at the European Parliament for consideration in
2013. At this stage the proposals by the European Commission include
regulating packaging and the composition of cigarettes and related
products including electronic cigarettes.

My personal opinion is that I recognise that there are health
implications to smoking and believe that there should be public
awareness but once informed, there should also be freedom of choice.

That said this freedom should not impinge on the freedom of others so a
programmatic solution must be found. Smoking has health implications for
smokers but science has proved that there are also implications for
passive smokers as well. Advertising and the presentation of smoking at
present needs to be looked at and I believe that this directive will do
just that.

More than ten years have passed since the adoption of the current
directive on the issue, during which time various developments have
occurred. In response to this, I look forward to making concrete
contributions towards the proposed directive when the time arrives.

With reference to your specific comments on electric cigarettes the
directive will look at this aspect, and I myself would be very
interested in the scientific background that specifically relates to the
health effects before making any judgements.

Kind regards,

Marina Yannakoudakis MEP

[djs]

Jan 10, 2013 20:27:14 GMT glynwhite said:

As you may be aware the Tobacco directive is currently under renewal.

The directive will be coming before the Environment, Public Health and
Food Safety Committee at the European Parliament for consideration in
2013. At this stage the proposals by the European Commission include
regulating packaging and the composition of cigarettes and related
products including electronic cigarettes.

My personal opinion is that I recognise that there are health
implications to smoking and believe that there should be public
awareness but once informed, there should also be freedom of choice.

That said this freedom should not impinge on the freedom of others so a
programmatic solution must be found. Smoking has health implications for
smokers but science has proved that there are also implications for
passive smokers as well. Advertising and the presentation of smoking at
present needs to be looked at and I believe that this directive will do
just that.

More than ten years have passed since the adoption of the current
directive on the issue, during which time various developments have
occurred. In response to this, I look forward to making concrete
contributions towards the proposed directive when the time arrives.

Weird. Are we talking about smoking?

I know she goes on to touch on e-cigs....but has she missed the point?

What worries me is that the minute people talk about "scientific background" then they will swallow the kind of comments currently availalble on the ASH document. That 1) e-cigs don't provide enough nicotine 2) e-cigs contain dangerous chemicals and 3) no-one has given up tobacco with one.

(Partly tongue in cheek, that last bit) but....

Well done to you....a reply is another person "aware"....

[glynwhite]

My reply:

Dear Marina,

Many thanks for the reply.

Thankfully I have now separated myself from smoking, although through ignorance by authority figures, I still have to stand with the smokers when consuming my vapour replacement.

I was fully supportive of the "Outside for Smokers" regulations and still stand by that.

The argument put against my weapon of choice, the ECigarette, is always the safety and scientific nature, but to date nothing concrete has been done to check them out bar a few studies by pharmaceuticals and tobacco companies who have vested interests elsewhere. Why not an EU or GB PLC study?

All I can testify, is that after 38 years and a considerable amount of cigarettes under the bridge, I have now been clean, with no cravings, for 10 months. I have not smoked in excess or 14000 cigarettes and saved over 3000 pounds. I do not smell, my teeth are fine, I breath clearly and can taste and smell again.

I thank you for your time.

Glyn White

[vereybowring]

First reply from MEP.

Thank you for your email concerning the EU Tobacco Products Directive, and
how it will affect electronic cigarettes.

European Parliamentarians have the bulk of their work concentrated within
specific committees, mine being International Trade, Constitutional Affairs
and Human Rights. All UK Labour MEPs are members of the European
Parliamentary Labour Party, and prior to debate and voting we exchange
information and discuss priorities. My colleague, Glenis Wilmott MEP is a
member of the Environment, Public Health & Food Safety Committee that is
responsible for this piece of legislation. I have forwarded to her office
your concerns and she has responded with the detailed information below that
I hope will be helpful to you.

Because e-cigarettes are a relatively new product they are regulated
differently in each EU country. Some countries allow e-cigarettes to be sold
without any regulation at all. Others have banned the sale of e-cigarettes.
As the UK is part of the EU's internal market it is important that we
harmonise the way we deal with this product, otherwise consumers could be
buying unregulated products which do not conform to basic safety standards,
either within their own country, or by easily purchasing it over the
internet from a neighbouring country.

The European Commission has proposed that all 'nicotine containing products'
with more than 2mg per unit should not be classed as tobacco products.
Instead, under the Commission's proposals, nearly all e-cigarettes will need
to get authorisation as a pharmaceutical product, in the same way as
nicotine patches, sprays and gums.

Of course there is a balance to strike. On one hand e-cigarettes have the
potential to be a helpful way to help somebody quit smoking entirely and
greatly improve their health. On the other hand e-cigarettes currently can
contain up to 48mg of nicotine - far more than a regular cigarette, making
them highly addictive. As nicotine is the drug that makes cigarettes
addictive, somebody that tries e-cigarettes could be much more likely to go
on to smoke regular cigarettes. Furthermore, there is no evidence that
e-cigarettes are safe, and it is concerning that they are being marketed as
a 'healthy' alternative to smoking.
Currently we do not have any conclusive evidence either that e-cigarettes
are helpful for giving up smoking, or that they encourage it.

While we do not have this scientific evidence to rely on I think it is
wise to have a cautious approach to e-cigarettes. If they are
effective in helping people to stop smoking, then it is appropriate that
they are regulated in the same way as other smoking cessation tools, such as
nicotine patches.

The Commission proposal is not final and there will be many months of
negotiations by the European Parliament, as well as health ministers from
the UK and other EU countries, before the legislation is agreed.
During this time Labour MEPs will be looking carefully at all of the
measures and trying to find the best way to ensure that we effectively
reduce smoking rates in the UK and across Europe.

Kind regards,

David


So at least he passed it along to the relevant labour representative on health but again we have the half informed reply.
I need a good reply since we need to point out nicotine content doesn't equal absorption, they are about harm reduction not being "safe" and of course many are using it as a replacement not to quit.

If anybody has any ideas for a reply let me know, especially when she'd gone on about lack of scientific evidence.

[Deleted]

This miseducation is worrying yet understandable. Once you are into vaping, you begin to understand. When I started I had no clue what it was about and am still learning - this forum wouldn't exist if vaping was understood by the masses.

I think a collation of valid research information sources is going to be useful. I looked for some the other day to respond to my MEP but I found it difficult to find a trusted source. Most people will look at the headlines of the articles and where it has come from without reading any further.

I think he needs to be corrected on the mg piece, especially given the quantities that you can ingest with NRT products in comparison - see the earlier response on nicorette dosages. Course counter argument will be that they have been tested ...

Perverse idea that ecigs can lead to smoking ... wtf ??

[Karma]

I've just posted exactly the same on another thread Verey

Yes, for someone worried about scientific evidence i can't find any in that reply ???