Tag: flavor ban

  • ‘Draconian Ban’ on Flavored E-Cigs Challenged in California

    ‘Draconian Ban’ on Flavored E-Cigs Challenged in California

    Credit: Peter Gonzalez

    California’s ban on flavored e-cigarettes and other tobacco products is being challenged by several tobacco companies. Reynolds American Inc. (RAI) and its subsidiaries, alongside three other entities, called the ban “draconian” and want the law overturned.

    California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the ban Aug. 28. Opponents filed a petition to put the question to voters in a referendum to overturn it shortly after its passage. The lawsuit could prevent enforcement of the ban if successful.

    Helix Innovations LLC, Neighborhood Market Association Inc and Morija LLC (Vapin’ the 619) have joined RAI in a lawsuit they hope will overturn the law. The lawsuit was filed Oct. 9 in the U.S. District Court of Southern California.

    The filing names Xavier Becerra, attorney general of California, and Summer Stephan, district attorney for the County of San Diego, as defendants.

  • Judge Orders New York State to Pay Vapor Group’s Attorney Fees

    Judge Orders New York State to Pay Vapor Group’s Attorney Fees

    Credit: Bill Oxford

    A judge says the state of New York state will now have to reimburse the Vapor Technology Association’s (VTA) attorney fees after the state attempted to ban flavored vaping products last year.

    Acting state Supreme Court Justice Catherine Cholakis said wednesday that she agreed that state officials overreached their authority and thus should cover the legal costs associated with fighting the ban.

    Several vape shops and the VTA are seeking about $381,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs from the state. Cholakis noted an evidentiary hearing will be set to determine if the amount is accurate, court records show, according to The Journal News.

    In the order, Cholakis noted the state Attorney General’s Office lawyers representing New York made a compelling case that the emergency ban “was in response to the serious problems of underage vaping and pulmonary illnesses traced to vaping.”

    But in explaining why the state must cover the group’s attorneys fees, she added: “There can be no denying the seriousness of the health issues surrounding vaping. Concern for those issues, however, cannot excuse clearly unconstitutional action.”

    Cholakis, however, questioned the amount of money sought by the vaping groups.

    New York state’s lawyers “bristle, though, at the amount of costs and fees sought by (the vaping group),” she wrote.

  • MIchigan to Again Try Banning Flavored E-liquids

    MIchigan to Again Try Banning Flavored E-liquids

    Credit: Sahand Babali

    The Michigan Governor’s administration is working on another statewide ban on flavored nicotine vaping products without legislative approval after Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s first emergency order was struck down by courts.

    The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) held a virtual public hearing on Tuesday to solicit public comments on its proposal to permanently ban the sale and distribution of flavored nicotine vaping products. MDHHS is accepting comments until Friday.

    The hearing is the first step required to impose a ban, which state officials support to crack down on the rise in youth vaping, according to the Metro Times.

    “MDHHS is proceeding with permanent administrative rules preventing the sale and advertisement of flavored nicotine vapor products in the state to protect the health and safety of Michiganders, particularly our youngest residents,” MDHHS spokeswoman Lynn Sutfin tells Metro Times. “The explosive and unprecedented rise in youth vaping continues to be a public health emergency and a nationwide epidemic.”

    Whitmer issued an executive order to ban flavored Michigan in September 2019, becoming the first state to ban flavored nicotine vaping products. But a Michigan Court of Claims judge issued an injunction requested by vape shop owners, who argued Whitmer overstepped her authority by imposing a ban without the approval of state lawmakers. The Michigan Supreme Court last month denied the state’s request to reconsider the lower court’s ruling.

  • Missoula, Montana Wants to Ban Flavors for Vapor Products

    Missoula, Montana Wants to Ban Flavors for Vapor Products

    Credit Getulio Moraes

    Missoula City Council in Montana proposed a ban on flavored vapor products at a public hearing on Monday. The proposed legislative action garnered more support for the ban than opposition.

    Supporters included teachers, pediatricians, dentists and parents, according to an article on nbcmontana.com. “Montana communities need to take action, because our state and federal government have not stepped up to protect kids from being targeted by these addictive and dangerous products,” said Beth Morrison, a volunteer with Parents Against Vaping in Montana.

    Supporters of the ban argue the candy-like appearance of vape product packaging attracts kids and hooks them on nicotine long-term. Many local businesses expressed opposition to the ban, saying it would deeply affect business and employment.

    “We know that if we just remove the tobacco products at the three Noon’s stores in town, we are going to have to furlough three to five employees, because our labor budgets are based on a budget of total sales,” said John Monahan, sales manager at Noon’s, the story states.

    Shops that specialize in vape and e-cigarettes said they would have to shut down completely.

    “76 percent of our juice sales at Liberty Vapor are flavored juices sold to adults. If the ordinance was enacted, it would put us out of business,” said Tommie Dobbs, co-owner of Liberty Vapor. “We don’t have the extra things that we sell in our store. We don’t have the potato chips, the soda, the gas, we don’t have any revenue from those types of things that gas stations do.”

    There are more than five vaporizer stores within Missoula city limits that specialize in selling vaping products and e-cigarettes.

    Store owners argue that underage kids who get ahold of tobacco products usually get it from someone who purchased it legally or they get it online. They say whether a ban on the sale of flavored tobacco products passes, kids are still going to get ahold of it with those methods.

    The City Council will talk about the vaping ban again during Wednesday’s committee meeting.

    Public comment can be left on the Council’s voicemail at 406-552-6012 or an email can be sent to the Council at council@ci.missoula.mt.us.

  • RCPI: Ban E-Cigarette Flavors Except Tobacco, Menthol

    RCPI: Ban E-Cigarette Flavors Except Tobacco, Menthol

    no vaping

    Royal College of Physicians of Ireland (RCPI) has called for a ban on all flavorings for e-liquids available for purchase in Ireland. The group says its goal is to protect children from the device that simulates tobacco smoking.

    The RCPI Policy Group on Tobacco has welcomed the latest findings from a Health Research Board (HRB) review of e-cigarettes and is seeking the introduction of a ban on all flavorings, apart from tobacco flavoured e-liquid. The group is also calling for increased regulation and future taxation on e-cigarettes, according to the Irish Medical Times.

    An HRB review into e-cigarette use found that e-cigarettes were associated with adolescents starting to smoke tobacco cigarettes, which could potentially lead to serious harm.

    “These findings have important public health ramifications and do not support recommending e-cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool,” stated Prof Des Cox, chair of the RCPI Policy Group on Tobacco.

    They recommended that people use nicotine replacement therapies and/or medications prescribed by their general practitioner instead of e-cigarettes when trying to quit smoking.

    “We are concerned about the finding of adolescents who use e-cigarettes being at increased risk of starting tobacco smoking. It is still legal for minors to purchase e-cigarettes in Ireland. Our group is calling for the introduction into legislation of the Tobacco Products Bill that was promised by the previous government,” Cox said. “The findings also show that when it comes to stopping smoking e-cigarettes are no more effective than nicotine replacements therapies, and because e-cigarettes aren’t regulated their safety is not yet known. What we do know is that worryingly they can cause burns, injuries, and lung damage.”

    The Royal College of Physicians in the U.K. has released several studies that found vaping to be 95 percent safer than smoking combustible cigarettes. There was a move to debunk the theory, but several health experts agree with the group.

  • Study: E-Cig Restrictions are Danger to Public Health

    Study: E-Cig Restrictions are Danger to Public Health

    A recent study by Yale School of Public Health, “Rates of E-cigarette and Marijuana Use Not Associated With Larger Outbreaks of Vaping-Related Lung Injuries,” found that higher levels of e-cigarette and marijuana use did not result in more cases of e-cigarette or vaping related injuries (EVALI).

    In a press release, the Canadian Vaping Association (CVA) stated it agreed with researchers that the study should serve as a warning to anti-vape proponents that restrictive vape regulation such as flavor bans are a danger to public health.canada

    The study found that higher rates of e-cigarette and marijuana use resulted in fewer EVALI cases per capita, whereas areas with restricted access had a greater number of cases. Further demonstrating that as the CVA has expressed a numerous occasions, prohibition does not work.

    “If e-cigarette or marijuana use per se drove this outbreak, areas with more engagement in those behaviors should show a higher EVALI prevalence,” said assistant professor Abigail Friedman, the study’s author. “This study finds the opposite result. Alongside geographic clusters of high EVALI prevalence states, these findings are more consistent with locally available e-liquids or additives driving the EVALI outbreak than a widely used, nationally-available product.”

    “From the onset of the EVALI outbreak, the CVA was clear that the sudden onset of illness could not be related to regulated e-liquid products. Millions of people globally use vaping to reduce their harm from smoking and yet the cases were sudden and isolated to specific regions.,”said Darryl Tempest, executive director of the CVA. “Once the CDC confirmed the outbreak was caused by vitamin E acetate used in illicit THC products, our organization was explicit with regulators that this must serve as a warning of the dangers of the black-market. Now that research is supporting our position, we encourage regulators to review the data and regulate in the best interest of public health.”

    In the release, the CVA states that regulators “must take note – flavor bans and excessive taxation create a breeding ground for unregulated products. These products adhere to no quality control standards or ingredient regulations. Moreover, their sales are not subject to inspection by tobacco enforcement or age restriction. Restrictive legislation not only harms ex-smokers by forcing them back to traditional tobacco, it often props up the black market creating public health hazards.”

  • California City Bans Vapor, Statewide Flavor Ban Looming

    California City Bans Vapor, Statewide Flavor Ban Looming

    This week, the San Mateo City Council unanimously approved the first reading of an ordinance that will ban the sales of all e-cigarettes. It will also prohibit the sale of all tobacco products in pharmacies within city limits.

    The move comes as the state prepares to enact its own ban on Jan. 1, 2021, though it could be challenged if a proposed ballot referendum garners enough signatures to delay its implementation, according to an article in Halfwheel..

    It also does not include an exemption for hookah tobacco, something that is contained in the flavor state’s bill.

    The ordinance must still go through a second reading in October before it becomes law. If passed, it is slated to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2021. The ordinance’s original implementation date of April 5, 2021 was amended during discussions to hasten the law’s implementation.

    If passed, retailers would be subject to a number of penalties for violating the law, as a retailer’s tobacco sales permit could be suspended, and fines starting at $100 for a first violation, $200 for a second, and $500 for each additional violation within a year. During discussions, council members discussed increasing those penalties, something that could still be changed during the second reading or at a point in the future.

    The city joins the surrounding unincorporated areas of San Mateo County in passing the ban, as county leaders banned flavored tobacco sales in those areas in June 2018. It also becomes the second city in the Bay Area to support such a ban this week, with Mill Valley enacting a similar ban this week as well.

    San Mateo is located approximately 20 miles south of San Francisco and is home to an estimated 105,000 residents.

  • Florida Governor Vetoes Flavor Ban Bill

    Florida Governor Vetoes Flavor Ban Bill

    Credit: Juan Pablo

    Florida’s Governor Ron DeSantis vetoed a bill that would have raised the legal age to buy vapor and other tobacco products to 21 and banned flavored nicotine products.

    DeSantis vetoed the vape and tobacco bill (SB 810), arguing it was, in part, redundant and also detrimental to smoking cessation efforts, as reported on floridapolitics.com.

    “While originally conceived as a bill to rate the legal age to buy tobacco to 21, (which is superfluous given this is already mandated by federal law) … SB 810 effectively bans tobacco-free vaping flavors used by hundreds of thousands of Floridians as a reduced-risk alternative to cigarettes, which are more dangerous,” DeSantis wrote in his veto transmission letter.

    Raising the age to 21 would have helped the state comply with new federal regulations. The bill would have also banned all vape flavors other than menthol and tobacco until they receive approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

    “Governor DeSantis has shown true leadership and understanding in his decision to veto SB 810,” said Tony Abboud, Executive Director of the Vapor Technology Association (VTA). “On behalf of all the vapor companies, large and small, and the more than one million vapers in the state of Florida, VTA thanks Governor DeSantis for his bold decision to protect Florida’s public health and economy, which comes at a time of great uncertainty for many. This is the positive reinforcement the industry and the people of Florida need.”

    The VTA worked closely with the Florida Smoke Free Association, a VTA member association, to educate legislators throughout the legislative session and had moved a meaningful regulatory bill that would have provided real solutions to the core issue of youth access and/or appeal. However, that effort was tossed in favor of an unnecessary and last minute flavor ban, disguised as a bill that would merely raise the age to 21.

    The legislature delayed sending the bill, as well as others, to DeSantis’ desk to give him time to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. Lawmakers sent the bill to his desk last week.

    Republican Sen. David Simmons ran the bill in the Senate while Reps. Jackie Toledo and Ray Rodrigues made changes delaying the start date of the age hike three months to the start of 2021, ensuring permitted store employees younger than 21 years old can sell tobacco and vape products and clarifying that vape product permits don’t carry a $50 fee, a previous provision removed that would have accessed product license fees.

    “This legislation would almost assuredly lead more people to resume smoking cigarettes, and it would drive others to the hazardous black market,” DeSantis wrote. “The latter consequence is especially significant because the much-publicized cases of lung injury associated with vaping in recent years have been traced to illegal, or black market, vape cartridges containing THC, not the types of legal vaping products that this bill would abolish.”

    DeSantis added, “reducing the use of all nicotine-related products, including vaping among our youth, is an important goal, but this will not be achieved by eliminating legal products for adults and by devastating the small businesses who provide these adults with reduced-risk alternatives to cigarettes.”

    In addition to the vape flavor ban and increased tobacco sales age, foods like tomatoes and potatoes, which contain trace nicotine, were carved out of the bill in a clarification.

    Democratic Senator Randolph Bracy, who said he accidentally voted yes the first time around, called the measure a terrible bill.

    “It will destroy an entire industry that actually helps people as a way to decrease the amount of nicotine they use,” he said.

    Republican Rep. Anthony Sabatini said banning those flavors would create a black market for flavored vape liquids. Off-market liquids and vapes have reportedly been tied to vaping-related deaths.

    “If you look at the history of this country’s war on drugs, I believe it’s been an epic failure,” he said. “The only historic simile is probably Pickett’s Charge. It was an absolute failure.

  • Chicago Seeks to Ban Only Vapor Flavors, Not Leaf Tobacco

    Chicago Seeks to Ban Only Vapor Flavors, Not Leaf Tobacco

    chicago bean
    Credit: Lance Anderson

    The U.S. City of Chicago has its sights set on flavors for vaping products. On Friday, the Chicago City Council Health Committee passed a heavily revised version its tobacco flavor ban. What started out as an attempt to ban the sale of all flavored tobacco product has been stripped down to a ban on only flavored vaping products.

    This means that Chicago would allow menthol and mint combustible cigarettes, as well as flavored cigars and pipe tobaccos. The full council is scheduled to discuss the ordinance during its meeting on Wednesday, the first day that all vaping products that haven’t submitted a premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will be removed from shelves.

    The ban had a good amount of support in its original form, garnering the support of 21 of the city’s 50 aldermen upon its introduction in June, as well as the support of Mayor Lori Lightfoot, according to a story by Patrick Lagreid on Halfwheel.com. However, it was also met with opposition from members who feared that the ban would drive sales of tobacco products to other municipalities and have an adverse effect on businesses.

    The original bill generated a large outcry from retailers who said smokers simply would cross into the suburbs to buy flavored cigarettes and from some aldermen who have long complained that higher prices and stricter restrictions on tobacco sales in Chicago propel a gang-controlled black market in those products. 

    The city also is dealing with a budget crisis due to the Covid-19 pandemic, it remains to be seen if the full council will support the ban if it means the loss of revenue into city coffers. Some aldermen have called for stricter enforcement of existing sales regulations as opposed to an outright ban.

     

  • California Becomes Second State to Ban Flavored Vapor

    California Becomes Second State to Ban Flavored Vapor

    Finding a flavored vapor product in California is now an illegal act. The Golden State’s governor, Gavin Newsom, signed SB793 into law on Friday. His signed the bill after California’s Senate unanimously approved (34-0) an amended version of the bill returned by the Assembly. The law does not apply to online sales.

    The bill prohibits a Vape shop owner or tobacco retailer, or any of those entities retailer’s agents or employees, from selling, offering for sale, or possessing with the intent to sell or offer for sale, a flavored tobacco product or a tobacco product flavor enhancer, subjecting them to a fine of $250 for each violation. It also allows local governments to impose greater restrictions on the access to tobacco products than the bill imposes.

    California joins Massachusetts as the two states having flavored vaping bans, though each have unique exemptions to the laws. In Massachusetts, businesses defined as “smoking bars” are still able to sell flavored vaping and tobacco products.

    In California, premium cigars and shisha/hookah products are exempt. The law also does not include the possession or use of flavored tobacco products.

    The ban goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2021.