menu

“Science ‘wrong’ in EU’s proposed e-cigarette law”


Well, who saw this coming? New Scientist puts it best, well worth a read and a click.

Fifteen prominent scientists who have investigated the health consequences of electronic cigarettes have accused European Union regulators of misinterpreting their results. The scientists say the EU aim is to draft an unjustifiably burdensome new law to regulate e-cigarettes.

Their argument is made in a letter to the EU’s health commissioner Tonio Borg. The scientists state that if the newly amended Tobacco Products Directive becomes law as it stands – which could happen as soon as April – it will severely limit the scope for smokers of real cigarettes to give up or cut down by switching to e-cigarettes, which contain nicotine but not the tobacco that contains tar and thousands of other substances harmful to health.

“If wisely regulated, e-cigarettes have the potential to make cigarettes obsolete and save millions of lives worldwide,” the signatories say in the letter, which was also sent to members of the European Parliament, European Commission and the Council of Ministers – the three bodies that will decide the fate of the directive. “Excessive regulation, on the contrary, will [perpetuate] the existing levels of smoking related disease, death and health care costs,” it continues, pointing out that smoking currently kills 700,000 Europeans each year.New Scientist

Read the full article on New Scientist

Update

The Commission has replied, and then the Scientists have replied back. The plot doesn’t thicken, obviously the EU Commission hasn’t back down and is sticking to it’s guns and saying that they’re interpretation was correct. But,, there is some clarification about ‘consistent dosing’ and it seems they mean in the vapour and not the delivery device.

The commission – ‘As regards the consistent nicotine dosing of electronic cigarettes, I would like to clarify that only puffs of the same strength would have to deliver the same amount of nicotine. Diverging degrees of nicotine intake depending on the puff strength would thus remain possible – similar to normal cigarettes. The co-legislators wanted the consumers to be informed of the nicotine dose and uptake and wanted to provide the authorities with a basis to assess the risk profile of a product.’

Scientists– ‘We accept your clarification about the consistent dosing as concerning nicotine content in vapour rather than nicotine delivery to users as the wording implies. The wording could be made clearer.’

And the Scientists most recent reply here. You’ll need Google Translate or Chrome if you don’t speak French.

One highlight, and the thing we all need to remember about the TPD

HOWEVER, we do not think our Concerns That Were Addressed. The legislation remains based on misunderstood or Misinterpreted evidence and imposed restrictions All which are not justifiable. A Legislation That Regulates e-cigarettes in a restrictive way than tobacco cigarettes are much more harmful That By Any standard of measurement Will Be Damaging for public health more.


Go to top
Skip to toolbar