June 1st, 2017

Letter to European Commissioner for Better Regulation on the worst regulation in the EU - the snus ban

A damaging regulation that should not exist should not be defended in court

Eighteen of us have just written a detailed letter to Mr Frans Timmerman, the EU’s Commissioner for Better Regulation (amongst other things) drawing his attention to one of the worst regulations in the EU, the ban on oral tobacco, better known as snus. This ban is now facing challenge in the Court of Justice of the European Union (case C 151/17) by a producer, Swedish Match, and the consumer group, New Nicotine Alliance (see NNA background on the case).

The letter is available here (PDF): Lifting the unjustified European Union ban on oral tobacco or “snus” in the light of ongoing legal action

The covering email below outlines the main arguments detailed in the letter. >> read the full post

Category: Law, Snus, Tobacco Products Directive | 6 comments
June 1st, 2017

Democrats press FDA to proceed with destruction of the vaping market - we respond

Nobody knew nicotine policy could be so complicated

Earlier in May, eleven Democrat senators appeared to be channelling talking points from the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids when they wrote a letter to the incoming FDA Commissioner Dr Scott Gottlieb.

Together with my co-conspirator, Sally Satel from the American Enterprise Institute, we have responded firmly but fairly with an article in Forbes: Senators’ Letter To FDA Commissioner Gottlieb Perpetuates Misconceptions About E-Cigarettes [pdf] >> read the full post

Category: FDA, Gateway | One comment
May 8th, 2017

U.S. E-cigarette Summit Survival Guide

It’s the US E-cigarette Summit …and it’s going to get weird

Today is the first US E-cigarette Summit in Washington DC

It is likely that some very deceptive, weird or hysterical arguments will be made the course of the day by organisations that usually avoid situations where they may be called out it. So here is a brief survival guide to the day. >> read the full post

Category: Uncategorized | 10 comments
April 7th, 2017

In cheap publicity stunt Royal Society of Public Health sounds a fake alarm about a non-problem

Life-saving retail outlet serving adults – no need for ‘public health’ to be involved (note: photo not UK)

Today the Royal Society of Public Health is pitching its ‘undercover investigation’ into vape shops selling stuff to adults who don’t smoke. Naturally, the primary purpose of this exercise has little to do with public health but is a publicity stunt for an ailing organisation in a declining field that offers ever less to the public or to health.

Here’s the release: Undercover investigation finds 9 in 10 vape shops prepared to sell to non-smokers – and some predictable media have duly obliged the RSPH’s lust for publicity with the uncritical reporting we have come to expect in this field.

I have written to this Royal Society of Public Health explaining why I am “dismayed and disappointed” by such a cheap stunt. Here’s the letter: >> read the full post

Category: Antis, Public health | 26 comments
March 4th, 2017

Challenging the proposed e-cigarette prohibition in Taiwan

Vaping in Taiwan – the approaching darkness of prohibition or a new dawn for rational policy-making?

The government of Taiwan has been consulting on amendment its Tobacco Hazards Prevention and Control Act. Article 14 of the amendment bill bans the manufacture, import, sale, and display of e-cigarettes (unless authorised as a pharmaceutical product).  See newspaper coverage.  The original Taiwan Chinese language bill is available online and a vendor has produced a summary in English.

See my full response here (PDF) and the summary below

Obviously, I strongly advise against this measure. E-cigarettes present an important strategy to reduce the harm caused by smoking and offer a way to achieve rapid reductions in smoking through market-based means. There is no evidence anywhere in the world that e-cigarettes add to harms associated with smoking.

The danger of a prohibition of e-cigarettes is that it will protect the cigarette trade from competition, increase smoking and harm health. This is exactly the opposite of what the Act and the government are trying to achieve. The summary page is below.  >> read the full post

Category: Countries, Law, Medicine regulation, Science | 5 comments
« Newer Entries  
  Older Entries »