TweetThirteen public health organizations, including Public Health England, Cancer Research UK and the Royal College of Physicians issued a brief in July titled “E-cigarettes: a developing public health consensus.” The[…]
Tweet The journal Addiction published a study in late June, finding the use of electronic cigarettes and vaporized nicotine products (VNPs) have helped 15 million smokers quit smoking tobacco cigarettes[…]
TweetThe British Medical Journal published a study in June that examined the “effectiveness and safety of electronic cigarettes at 24 months.” Measuring the “sustained abstinence from tobacco cigarettes”, the study[…]
In this episode of the weekly Budget & Tax News podcast, managing editor and research fellow Jesse Hathaway talks about the U.S. Food and Drug Administration new “deeming regulations” for electronic cigarettes, which require e-cigarette manufacturers to submit their products through an arduous federal approval process.
Legislators have long attempted to reduce the negative health impacts of smoking through taxes, bans, and regulations. Some have tried to extend these same policies to electronic cigarettes or “e-cigarettes,” even though they contain no tobacco and are substantially less harmful than traditional cigarettes. This week, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) unveiled new regulations placing electronic cigarettes under an avalanche of new rules requiring that they be approved as a new type of tobacco product — effectively treating them like traditional cigarettes.
No serious study has ever been produced by the FDA to conclude anything but the positive health benefits of vaporized nicotine products compared to smoking cigarettes. So the FDA’s new regulations in the name of protecting public health will actually achieve the opposite … which is sadly typical for government work these days.
Public Health England last in August of 2015 became the first national government agency to endorse e-cigarettes as safer options for current smokers. Its report also dispelled several bogus anti-tobacco claims. Why is it that e-Cigarettes are seen as life-savers by the UK Government, but condemned by the US? Find out why by checking this recent article of Wednesday, April 13, 2016.
Cigarette smoking has become significantly less popular in the U.S. over the past decade, it still remains a public-health scourge. Smoking accounts for more than 480,000 deaths every year in this country, or about one of every five death, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, while an additional 16 million Americans live with a smoking-related disease. Clearly more needs to be done to get Americans to quit smoking.
TweetThe journal Addiction published a study on April 25, with seven international tobacco control experts compelling the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to have an open mind regulating vaporized[…]
The New England Journal of Medicine and authors of a commentary on e-cigarette use have ignored our call for correction of a substantial error regarding e-cigarette use among American schoolchildren in 2011 and 2012. Authors Amy L. Fairchild, Ronald Bayer and James Colgrove of Columbia University double-counted some users in a figure they used to illustrate data from the National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS).
He saved his worst ban for last. Former New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s nanny-state policies have left a trail of damage. His defeated soda ban, the ban on food donations to homeless shelters and other antics have cost New Yorkers money, jobs, food choices, and even their freedom to give charity.
Mayor Bloomberg’s going out with one last ban. The City Council, with the administration’s strong backing, is rushing through a law to treat the vapor from e-cigarettes like tobacco smoke under the city’s “Smoke-Free Air Act.” The use of e-cigs, a k a “vaping,” would be forbidden in indoor and outdoor locations wherever smoking is banned.
TweetNew York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s aggressive nanny-state policies — such as his crusades against trans fats and large-size sodas — have been annoying and, at times, unconstitutional. While some of[…]