EU MEP's reject proposal,so snuck in via "back door"

  Chegs ®™ 13:42 18 Jan 2014

I used to smoke excessive quantities of rolling tobacco & had done for over 35 years.I then discovered e-liquids & Advanced Personal Vaporizers(APV's)so 7 months ago,I quit smoking.I really hate the main description of these devices as "e-cigarettes" as they don't emit smoke,require no tobacco and have been scientifically analysed as "upto" 1000 times safer than a tobacco cigarette,yet the EU have decided that to save them some work,to include these devices in with the Tobacco Products Directive(TPD)specifically Article 18.

I agree that APV's do need a few extra regulations adding to their (presently) 17 regulations,specifically banning their sale to under 18's(whereas Nicotine Replacement Therapies can legally be purchased by 12 year olds)

In Oct 2013,the Commission opted to reject the proposals in Article 18,so a new agreement was drafted and on Dec 16th 2013,these were agreed.There was no "consultation",it was thrashed out "behind closed doors" and the agreement reached will make APV's totally worthless to a smoker looking to cease usage of tobacco products as these requirements of APV's are...

1)No tanks(on refillable devices)larger than 2 ml

2)No larger than 10 ml containers for nicotine liquid storage

3)No higher than 20 mg per ml in e-liquids

There are more,but these 3 items will wipe out the rapidly expanding industry,reduce the likelihood of a smoker switching and put many businesses into bankruptcy.

Also,it is intended to place all Nicotine Containing Products(NCP)under medical regulation by 2016.

I'm not particularly "political" or interested in politics,but I have decided to write to my MP/MEP to explain my reasoning why all this regulation for the industry is wrong(why subject APV's to this level of regulation,yet killer real tobacco products go unscathed?)

Why did the EU ignore the 106 scientific studies demonstrating the safer devices(85 of them specifically about e-cigarettes)in creating these regulations?

Why was the Dr that had done a scientific study,only given (approx) 3 mins to explain his findings?

Why the need to thrash out an agreement in private,when the Oct debate was public?

  fourm member 14:14 18 Jan 2014

My understanding is that the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) is still a draft at this stage.

You may find these links useful.

Pointing out scientific errors in the TPD

First joint declaration by European electronic cigarette user associations! Scroll down for the French

Scientist complains about her words being distorted

I don't know if you use Twitter but @GerryStimson posts links to all the latest on this topic.

  Chegs ®™ 14:51 18 Jan 2014

I do use twitter,and have a Farcebook account.I'm also a member on Planet of the Vapes forum,where this is discussed in minute detail,along with links to all the various Pro-Anti e-cig/APV's media stories/scientific studies,etc.

That is where I just got this posted...

Top Twenty Anti E-Cigarette Arguments

  geoff96 20:58 18 Jan 2014

"Why did the EU ignore the 106 scientific studies demonstrating the safer devices(85 of them specifically about e-cigarettes)in creating these regulations?

Why was the Dr that had done a scientific study,only given (approx) 3 mins to explain his findings?"

Could it be the power of the tobacco companies lobbying politicians to stifle the sale of a product that would seriously hurt their profits?

  Aitchbee 22:18 18 Jan 2014

never been a smoker but ... I am surprised that no entrepreneurial egghead hasn't concocted a safe but effective 'powder' which, when added to water ... gives the equivalent effect of 'a pint-of-lager' ... it must be a tax thing?

  Chegs ®™ 01:21 19 Jan 2014

Could it be the power of the tobacco companies lobbying politicians to stifle the sale of a product that would seriously hurt their profits?

I thought the same(especially when I heard on the news that Tobacco companies profits were down approx 8%)but changed my opinion when I discovered that various tobacco companies are investing in this market.

it must be a tax thing?

True,but the EU Commission has no bearing on our Governments tax take surely?I can understand our MP's being somewhat miffed to discover their cushy incomes are threatened.

I also was informed that the biggest objector to the e-cigarette was in fact the pharmaceutical companies,they can see their expensive to use NRT products being dismissed (as they are next to useless in the percentage of successful users remaining off tobacco)by a product that has a very good success rate,that THEY didn't invent so rather than accept that these APV's are likely to save lives they come up with some pretty old scientific study where traces of anti-freeze were discovered in 1 or 2 devices that were imported from China.Since then,these devices have leapt forward in their innovation to the present where they ARE able to deliver a safer,cleaner shot of nicotine that is good enough to lure a long-term smoker(me)into switching.

  fourm member 08:52 19 Jan 2014

It is tempting to look at financial reasons for the various attitudes to e-cigarettes but don't ignore the stubborn supposedly moral argument.

For some people, people should not be allowed to remain addicted to nicotine. For them, alternatives to smoking must involve decreasing doses of nicotine leading to full recovery.

Then there's the bogus 'think of the children' argument. People claim that e-cigarettes encourage children to become addicted to nicotine when they wouldn't smoke.

For people who are addicted to something, the best option may well be to give them safe maintenance doses for as long as they need them.

And regulation of sales, similar to alcohol and tobacco, would minimise the number of children able to get e-cigs.

There is also the 'nicotine is a poison' argument claiming that toxic liquids around the house would lead to children getting poisoned. To combat that, of course, you'd need to also outlaw bleach and many household chemicals.

The fear for politicians is that one accident will be laid at their door.

  wee eddie 13:25 19 Jan 2014

How stupid do people using eCigarettes look

  geoff96 15:39 19 Jan 2014

wee eddie

It would appear they are doing what the can to quit and as an ex smoker, the best of luck to them.

  wee eddie 16:09 19 Jan 2014

Geoff: that is where you are wrong, it is now being promoted as an alternative way of smoking cigarettes.

I agree with you in that these things were originally promoted as a way to stop smoking, but not any longer.

  Chegs ®™ 03:02 20 Jan 2014

wee eddie,it doesn't matter what I look like as the device is not supplying my nicotine fix along with 4000+ other carcinogenic poisons or choking up my lungs with tar.People have been using tobacco in europe since about 1500 and it was only about the 1920's that it was linked to cancer.I chose to start smoking,and have continued to smoke for the past 35+ years and despite trying many different methods to quit including "cold turkey"(lasted at most 6 months)various NHS NRT treatments(failed between hours & days before I resumed smoking)before finally,7 months ago I switched to an APV & haven't ever wanted a cigarette even when sat in the company of other smokers.

These devices have not been promoted as a way to stop smoking,they have been promoted as a way to cease TOBACCO usage which is entirely different.To claim they can be used to stop smoking means they then fall under medical regulations,to say they can be used as an ALTERNATIVE to the thousands of poisons in tobacco means they only need to be regulated under (approx)17 regulations,same as the majority of electronic devices sold in the UK.

I suggest you read some of the plentiful information about these devices and why people choose to use them instead of tobacco products.

These devices are available in many shapes & sizes,so your saying "people look stupid" using them is wrong.To YOU,they might look stupid but I could buy an APV that is small enough to be concealed in my hand & you wouldn't know I was using it until you caught a whiff of any of thousands of flavours,from coffee to strawberry to ice-cream to gingerbread to pizza,there is even a marmite flavoured e-liquid or a roast chicken(though this one didn't really appeal to me)

A common objection to these devices is "they're a pathway to smoking tobacco" to which I say,utter rubbish! I used to smoke tobacco & tell people I LIKED the taste,since I stopped smoking I can now smell a cigarette from 30+ yards outdoors,and that smell holds NO attraction to me.Since I stopped smoking,food tastes much better & if smoking stops me from enjoying my food I don't wish to resume.I started with a disposable e-cigarette(its battery only lasted an hour or so)but I realised I'd not wanted a tobacco cigarette throughout its entire battery life.I then bought 2 rechargeable type e-cigarettes with replaceable cartridges,after several days without a tobacco cigarette I again realised I'd never craved tobacco so got my remaining tobacco pouch out the draw & it tasted vile initially but I finished the contents over the next couple of days,smoked my last tobacco cigarette before I went to bed & the next morning resumed the e-cigarettes.I have upgraded the e-cigarettes to an Advanced Personal Vaporizer which has a vastly increased battery life,is able to deliver enough nicotine to cure my cravings,and despite its size,mimics my smoking actions sufficiently as the lack of mimicking of smoking is proven to a major cause of relapsing back to tobacco.

I also treat my purchasing of APV's as a hobby,like people collect postcards,or stamps as I have several devices that I will dismantle & rebuild in much the same way an adult model train enthusiast will.I also know exactly what goes into my e-liquids as I now mix them myself.

I agree that a few/lot of smokers use these devices to escape the laws on smoking in pubs etc,but that doesn't mean that the (approx) 1.5+ million APV users in the UK are the same,in the same way that there are millions of cars on the roads,all capable of exceeding the speed limits doesn't mean they all will.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

The Evil Within 2 review-in-progress

Photoshop CC 2018 released with new Curvature Pen and better brush tools

Camera tips to take better iPhone photos

Les meilleures applications de covoiturage 2017