Why is Canadian Government Banning Electronic cigarettes?

[gailmiller]

Hey everyone, I am a Canadian Citizen, currently in India for a business meet...i don't understand why the Canadian government is taking stringent actions against electronic cigarettes. According to reports e-cigs will be banned in Canada where as people can smoke conventional cigarettes. As we all know that these conventional cigs are more harmful than e-cigarettes. We can measure the amount of nicotine through e-cigs where as how much tar is getting deposited in our lungs can be calculated if we continue to smoke conventional ones...Is the government getting no benefits in form of taxes from e-cigarette manufacturers? I have been vaping e-cigs for past 6 years and it really helped me almost quit smoking...Electronic cigarettes are Eco-friendly, on the other hand conventional ones are not...then why the government has decided to impose a ban on e-cigs having known the merits of it????

[padiho]

Good question, its utterly ridiculous that they ban ecigs but allow cigarettes to be sold openly. Has to come down to money, big Pharma companies etc.
comes back to Gunjacks post about what we call them...we have to work on changing this. Will you have any problem in sourcing your supplies when you get back to Canada?

[Perpetua]

Welcome to you Gail . . . I've moved your thread onto a more appropriate Board and edited your title as it was a bit misleading for UK forum users.

[Phoenix .]

Mar 25, 2013 7:32:14 GMT gailmiller said:

Hey everyone, I am a Canadian Citizen, currently in India for a business meet...i don't understand why the Canadian government is taking stringent actions against electronic cigarettes. According to reports e-cigs will be banned in Canada where as people can smoke conventional cigarettes. As we all know that these conventional cigs are more harmful than e-cigarettes. We can measure the amount of nicotine through e-cigs where as how much tar is getting deposited in our lungs can be calculated if we continue to smoke conventional ones...Is the government getting no benefits in form of taxes from e-cigarette manufacturers? I have been vaping e-cigs for past 6 years and it really helped me almost quit smoking...Electronic cigarettes are Eco-friendly, on the other hand conventional ones are not...then why the government has decided to impose a ban on e-cigs having known the merits of it????

Hi Gail, and welcome to this forum.
Your question is thought provoking , I do hope you people in Canada have enough e-smokers to challenge this outrageous proposal.

[genguskhan]

Hello and Gail

I just don't understand why governments take this stance at all, let our citizen die of the effects of smoking or give them as much choices as we can to cut out smoking?

[deesigner]

Sadly it's not only Canada that seems to be very narrow minded about the benefits of ecigs, I've recently sent a lot of wire to Singapore and the guy that purchased it was worried sick that I may inadvertantly mention ecigs on the delivery note! They're banned there too and people face huge fines if found to be buying ecig equipment! Pathetic really, I imagine these are countries that rely heavily on income from tobacco products, as yet ecigs are pretty much underground so income towards the government is limited to those larger companies who run a proper business and pay taxes on profits etc.,

[djs]

I still reckon it's all fear of the unknown.

The way I see it, there are ony 3 options for the policy makers.

1) Ban tobacco but allow or regulate non-tobacco nicotine containing products (not going to happen)
2) Allow tobacco but ban e-cigs and nicotine (therefore nothing bad in addition can happen, other than more people die, but that's ok, as people have been killing themselves for years by smoking).
3) Allow both and let people decide.

The easy way is just to do number 3), but NOT doing something about e-cigs is the same as allowing them, therefore nobody wants to take the risk, just in case. Banning nicotine liquids/e-cigs is the safest position regardless of the detrimental effect on established users.

It's madness. Even if they are only harm reduction as opposed to 100% water-tight safe, then logic would suggest number 3) is the sensible course of action. Doctors are mostly "pro" but they cannot officially support e-cigs. Governments feel they cannot officially support them either. It's a question of "better the devil you know" so you can't get sued or be responsible for problems in years to come if they reveal themselves after everyone has said "go ahead!"

[mhyquel]

Hi Gail,

I'm a Canadian living in London.
Canada has some interesting guidance on the books. The only component that is difficult to acquire is liquid nicotine, everything else is perfectly legal in Canada. There are sources for acquiring the prohibited substance in Canada. I've written the health minister for guidance on the topic, and she replied;

Canada is willing to permit this substance, if a suitable scientific study is undertaken to demonstrate its viability. It is the responsibility of the manufacturer to produce this data.


We have a Canadian forum that may be able to answer some more specific questions that you have:
www.wackedoutecig.ca/forum.php

[monty]

I would guess it is the same as the EU proposed ban, which is allegedly due to bribes being taken. Pharmaceutical or tobacco companies or both - I don't know but I'd bet my house on Pharmas even at 10 to 1 on.

[giles]

Mar 25, 2013 12:27:41 GMT mhyquel said:

Canada is willing to permit this substance, if a suitable scientific study is undertaken to demonstrate its viability. It is the responsibility of the manufacturer to produce this data.

How about this for a (Canadian) study? tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/new-study-of-electronic-cigarette-vapor.html
What the f*** does she mean by viability? My dictionary says "Capable of working successfully; feasible" There are 4,000,000 plus of us using the stuff internationally, would we be doing it if it didn't work?

[chrisde]

By that she means - suitable to quit smoking, because that is the only reason-to-be for a NRT, and, of course, that is all that matters for the "public health" people.