The new law is hardly an anomaly. Increasing numbers of town councils are passing ordinances that heavily regulate the sale, purchase, or public use of the smokeless, tobacco-less, tar-less e-cigarettes. The FDA, which considered completely banning e-cigarettes in 2009, is expected to propose extensive regulations for them by the end of this month.
Why are cities and health agencies cracking down on e-cigarettes? As Reason’s Jacob Sullum has extensively reported, such regulations fail to accurately account for their real (relatively harmless) risks:
Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)… concedes "e-cigarettes appear to have far fewer of the toxins found in smoke compared to traditional cigarettes." Boston University public health professor Michael Siegel, who supports vaping as a harm-reducing alternative to smoking, notes that "we actually have a much better idea what is in electronic cigarette vapor than what is in tobacco smoke."
As a result, Sullum wrote, imposing these regulations could be seriously hazardous to smokers’ health:
Survey data indicate that e-cigarette use is overwhelmingly concentrated among current and former smokers.
It's in the shift from the former category to the latter that the disease-reducing potential of e-cigarettes lies. Impeding that transition by imposing arbitrary restrictions on e-cigarette advertising, sales, and flavors would be a literally fatal error.
For more Reason coverage of e-cigarettes, watch a Reason TV interview with the CEO of e-cigarette maker NJOY here. Watch a Reason TV video on the heavy price of FDA regulations below:

No comments:
Post a Comment