A group at East Carolina University is trying to fill in the gaps is trying to fill in some gaps in e-cigarette research.
Credit: Cape Cod Health
The researchers are taking a close look at what happens when people vape inside of their vehicles. Researchers say e-cigarette users told them they like vaping instead of smoking actual cigarettes because it doesn’t make their vehicle smell, according to WNCT.com.
E-cigarette users also don’t worry as much about the effects of second-hand smoke on others in their vehicles. The group is testing that theory with the help of a three-year grant from the National Institute of Health.
“People are now making a choice to vape inside of vehicles, to vape inside their homes and vape around children, so this is something we need to understand more about,” said Dr. Eric K. Soule with the ECU Department of Health Education.
Professors believe the project is a great opportunity for ECU undergraduates to get real-world research experience.
Chinese e-cigarette maker RLX Technology, parent to the RELX brand, jumped 146 percent in its trading debut after raising $1.4 billion in its U.S. initial public offering.
Creit: RELX
RLX Technology’s American depositary shares closed at $29.51 Friday, giving the company a market value of about $46 billion. Backed by Sequoia Capital China, the company sold 116.5 million shares for $12 a piece on Thursday after marketing them for $8 to $10.
The IPO was led by Citigroup Inc. and China Renaissance Holdings Ltd. The company’s ADS, each representing one ordinary share, are trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol RLX.
The IPO, the first major U.S. listing this year by a China-based company, signals continuing investor demand, according to Bloomberg.
RLX, founded in 2018, is China’s largest e-cigarette maker with 62.6 percent of the country’s market, according to a report by China Insights Consultancy cited in the company’s IPO prospectus.
China is the world’s largest potential vaping market, with an estimated 286.7 million adult smokers in 2019, RLX said in its prospectus. But vaping products only have a 1.2 percent penetration rate, compared with 32.4 percent in the U.S.
Californians will decide next year if flavored vaping products should be banned. The California Secretary of State’s office certified a referendum challenging the state’s ban on flavored vapor and other tobacco product sales had garnered more than the minimum number of valid signatures. The referendum will head to the ballot in November, 2022.
Credit: Elsa Olofsson
The ban is on hold and retailers can continue selling flavored e-liquids and other products until votes are cast. The ban had been set to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2021, but was delayed until the signature verification process had been completed. I
n order to qualify for the ballot, organizers of the referendum submitted more than 1 million signatures, as they needed to get 623,212 verified signatures from California voters. On Friday, the Secretary of State’s office published a report indicating that organizers had gathered 781,885 valid signatures.
Had the minimum number of valid signatures not been met, the law would have taken effect once the Secretary of State had verified the process was complete. The election is scheduled for Nov. 8, 2022, and those results will then need to be certified. If the law banning flavors is approved, it would go into effect on Dec. 8, 2022.
It did not make it illegal to possess or use such products, however. In addition to the referendum, the state has also been sued over the ban by R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co., American Snuff Co. LLC, Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. Inc., Philip Morris USA Inc., John Middleton Co., U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Co. LLC, Helix Innovations LLC, Neighborhood Market Association Inc. and Morija LLC, which does business under the name Vapin’ the 619. That litigation is currently ongoing.
U.S. Customs and Border Protections (CBP) officers at Chicago O’Hare’s International Mail Branch seized 50,000 dragster Mountain Vape Pens on Tuesday. The shipment, originated from Hong Kong, and was destined for a residence in Alexandria, Kentucky.
Credit: CBP
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determined the shipment violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) as misbranded consumer goods being imported by an unauthorized agent, according to a press release. Tobacco products imported or offered for import into the United States must comply with all applicable U.S. laws. Read more about the FDA’s regulations governing e-cigarettes and other tobacco products.
The shipment was seized on January 19, and was mis-manifested as Lithium Ion Battereies, a common practice used by smugglers, CBP states. “CBP believed the shipment was intentionally improperly labeled in order to avoid detection,” the release states. “Additionally, CBP presumes the products are being sold without authorization. CBP continues to work diligently to stop non-legitimate products from entering the U.S.” The pens had an MSRP of $450,000.
“Our officers are dedicated to identifying and intercepting these types of shipments that could potentially harm our communities,” said Shane Campbell, Area Port Director-Chicago. “Customs and Border Protection’s trade enforcement mission places a significant emphasis on intercepting illicit products that could harm American consumers, and we will continue to work with our consumer safety partners to identify and seize unsafe and illicit goods.”
Last year the FDA announced an increased enforcement priority of electronic nicotine delivery systems, and issued detailed guidance to the industry of these new enforcement priorities that regulate the unauthorized importation of tobacco products.
CBP provides basic import information about admissibility requirements and the clearance process for e-commerce goods and encourages buyers to confirm that their purchases and the importation of those purchases comply with any state and federal import regulations.
CBP conducts operations at ports of entry throughout the United States, and regularly screens arriving international passengers and cargo for narcotics, weapons, and other restricted or prohibited products. CBP strives to serve as the premier law enforcement agency enhancing the Nation’s safety, security, and prosperity through collaboration, innovation, and integration.
The Canadian Vaping Association (CVA) has vowed to fight any regulations for the vaping industry that it views as onerous. In a press release, the CVA states that the organization has been a consistent advocate for strong youth protection measures and that a balance of youth prevention with allowing adult access to harm reduction products is necessary.
“While the CVA has a history of advocating for reasonable measures to protect youth, policy that violates the right to integrity and personal security as well as freedom of expression will be challenged through the proper legal channels,” said Darryl Tempest, executive director of the CVA. “Science supports vaping as harm reduction and draconian measures have previously been found to be unconstitutional by the Superior Court, which heard the industry’s arguments against Bill 44. Our preference will always be to work with regulators to implement effective policy, however where regulators choose to ignore the data, the industry will challenge policy that is detrimental to public health.”
Provinces such as Ontario and British Columbia have taken adult harm reduction into consideration and implemented equitable policy. Yet, provinces such as Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island have failed to follow the science and instead have jeopardized the health of thousands of smokers, according to the release.
The Canadian Constitution Foundation found that banning flavored vaping products or restricting nicotine content “may violate s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which safeguards the right to life, liberty and the security of the person, because the nicotine ceiling and flavour restriction may potentially make vaping products a less attractive or effective quit-aid for smokers.”
The CVA states that it will continue to provide regulators with the science supporting flavors are the driver for adoption and the key to cessation success. “Canadian’s have a constitutional right to access harm reduction products and reduce the health risks presented by traditional tobacco,” the release states. “Judge Dumais who heard the industry’s case against Bill 44 wrote that while the provisions take into account the well being of non-smokers, it seemed to forget the rest of the population, including smokers trying to quit.”
Despite, the Canadian Constitution Foundation cautioning governments that action such as flavor bans may violate the rights of Canadians, “Nova Scotia proceeded to implement both excessive taxation and a full ban on flavors.” As a result, vape shop owner Bill McEachern has launched a constitutional challenge, that will be heard on January 25th. The CVA has given McEachern its full support and will continue to support all challenges to harmful legislation.
“As a society, we often wrongfully look at addiction as the result of one’s own actions. By viewing nicotine addiction as a choice, smokers are dehumanized and left behind by poor policy,” the release states. “Governments must acknowledge that in Canada all citizens are equal under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Vaping policy must respect the rights of all citizens as the lives of adult smokers quite literally depend on it.”
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Jan. 20 finalized two foundational rules for the premarket review of new tobacco products. These final rules provide additional information on the minimum requirements for the content, format and review of premarket tobacco product applications (PMTAs) and substantial equivalence (SE) reports. PMTA and SE are two of the pathways through which a manufacturer can seek marketing authorization for a new tobacco product from the FDA.
Stephen Hahn
“The finalization of these foundational rules is an important milestone in the FDA’s regulation of tobacco products. The rules enable greater transparency and efficiency of the FDA’s critical task of reviewing applications for tobacco products before new products can be sold in the United States and they describe information that any company must provide if they seek to market a new tobacco product in this country, fulfilling the promise of the Tobacco Control Act,” said FDA Commissioner Stephen M. Hahn.
Mitch Zeller
“These final rules, together with our commitment to ongoing enforcement action against e-cigarettes and other tobacco products that illegally target youth, will help us continue to protect the public from the dangers of tobacco-related disease and death,” said Mitch Zeller, director of the FDA’s Center for Tobacco Products. “These final rules will provide greater clarity and efficiency as we ensure that tobacco products are put through an appropriate series of regulatory gates so that products can be marketed only if they meet the standards under the law.”
Both of these final rules are effective 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
More information about the two foundational rules is available on the FDA website.
The National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center (IPRC) in the U.S. have released an innovative toolkit as part of their nationwide campaign to raise awareness on the dangers of black-market vapor products and empower law enforcement and adult community leaders to prevent and enforce against these illicit activities.
The IPRC and NCPC launched this public-private partnership, with the support of Juul Labs, in October 2019, seeking to raise awareness on the consequences of illicit vapor products, with the objective of delivering tools and resources to communities grappling with this critical issue across the country. Now, the IPRC and NCPC have expanded upon this initiative by providing law enforcement and other key stakeholders with a toolkit that will aid in their efforts to educate and mobilize their communities against this dangerous illicit trade.
The toolkit is a comprehensive resource that details the various forms of illicit vapor products, such counterfeit, compatible and diverted products, and teaches the community how to spot such products. It also contains broader educational resources, along with strategies on how best to elevate these vital messages through social media, community events and meetings, and in cooperation with local businesses.
According to Juul, Illicit vapor products present a number of public health, economic and security consequences. Critically, they undermine underage-prevention measures because of their ease of access and may present additional health and safety risks for adult consumers given that they often are produced in unsanitary conditions without manufacturing and quality controls and lack ingredient testing and product characterization. They also may contain harmful chemicals not present in other, authentic products.
As part of this campaign, and with the support of IPRC, NCPC will leverage its vast, nationwide network to get this toolkit into the hands of law enforcement, trade partners, and other adult community leaders.
“It is imperative that we continue to partner across stakeholders, including law enforcement, to address the illicit market of vapor products,” Juul wrote in a statement. “Supporting public-private partnerships like the IPRC/NCPC initiative is one way we can actively fight back against illicit trade of vapor products. By empowering stakeholders through awareness and education, we can address the illicit trade of vapor products and foster a more responsible marketplace for the category.”
A new bill in the U.S. state of Mississippi aims to add vapor to the state’s 15 percent tobacco tax rules. Senate Bill 2182, authored by Senator David Blount, would define an “electronic smoking device” and add that to the definition of other tobacco products with the additional tax.
Credit: Pieter Van de Sande
“‘Electronic smoking device’ means any device that can be used to deliver aerosolized or vaporized nicotine to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an e-cigarette, e-cigar, e-pipe, vape pen or e-hookah,” the bill states. “Electronic smoking device includes any component, part or accessory of such a device, whether or not sold separately, and includes any substance intended to be aerosolized or vaporized during the use of the device. Electronic smoking device does not include any battery or battery charger when sold separately. In addition, electronic smoking device does not include drugs, devices or combination products authorized for sale by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, as those terms are defined in the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.”
Current Mississippi law indicates that cigars, cheroots, stogies, snug, chewing and smoking tobacco and all other tobacco products except cigarettes shall be taxed 15 percent of the manufacturer’s list price. This bill would add electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) to that list.
A House bill heard a Montana state house legislative committee last week would limit local control on alternative nicotine and vapor products, retroactively canceling the City of Missoula’s flavored vape ban passed by the Missoula City Council last November.
House Bill 137, sponsored by Rep. Ron Marshall, R-Hamilton, aims to amend the State of Montana’s Youth Access to Tobacco Act by clarifying that alternative nicotine products are separate from tobacco products, according to a story on kpax.com
It would also prevent and stop any regulation on nicotine and vapor products by local governments, health boards and the Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services – an agency that attempted to eliminate the sale of flavored e-cigarettes last summer.
“It needs to be addressed,” said Marshall, who was part of a trade association who unsuccessfully sued over former Gov. Steve Bullock’s 120-day flavored e-cigarettes ban as co-owner of Freedom Vapes in Belgrade, Bozeman and Hamilton.
“There’s a lot of holes, and 56 counties in Montana means 56 different sets of rules. Everything should go through the legislative body when it comes to law. It’s just one of those things where everybody needs to be on the same page, and we need to have a clear definition of what these products are.”
Marshall said that HB 137 has been coming for a long time, and with COVID-19, laws restricting alternative nicotine products cause substantial damage to a retailer’s revenue earnings.
“Right now, with the climate out there with COVID and lost jobs and businesses and all that, coming up with another attempt to shut down more business or curtail more business is the wrong answer,” Marshall said. “You’re not only doing that, but you’re also taking away revenue. And that’s revenue that not only goes to the cities and counties, but to the state. Let’s back up and look at the big picture.”
When the Missoula City Council was discussing its flavored vape ban, City Attorney Jim Nugent said it would likely face a lawsuit as it was written at the time. Council members made changes to the ordinance to strengthen it against any legal challenge.
The city’s flavored vape ban will go into effect on Jan. 25, and Missoula County may use its extraterritorial powers to extend the ordinance five miles beyond city limits.
Nugent said the city hasn’t faced a lawsuit regarding the ordinance, and with the final section of HB 137 stating that the bill would apply retroactively, the city likely won’t face a lawsuit. Nugent said the retroactive portion of the bill is aimed at Missoula.
“Instead of a lawsuit, it is now being challenged through the Legislature,” Nugent said.
Councilmember Gwen Jones, one of the five sponsors of the ordinance, said in a statement to the Missoula Current that she hopes the legislature lets the ordinance stand.
A tobacco flavor ban that includes vaping products has cost the state of Massachusetts nearly $75 billion in taxes. According to a study by the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association (NECSEMA), excise tax lost income in Massachusetts from selling fewer menthol cigarettes alone amounted to $62 million in the first six months of the ban. No specific figures were given for electronic nicotine delivery systems in the release.
Credit: Ruben Bagues
That loss also simply transferred to Massachusetts’ neighboring states. Cigarettes excise tax stamp sales dropped 23.9 percent in Massachusetts while New Hampshire gained $28,574,340 or 29.7 percent. Rhode Island gained $12,100,000 or 18.2 percent in excise taxes.
The estimated Massachusetts loss including the sales tax is $73,008,000 while Rhode Island saw a gain of $14,066,740.
“With every month that passes, the state’s ban on flavored tobacco becomes increasingly absurd,” said Jonathan Shaer, executive director of NECSEMA. “All anyone needs to do is look at the excise tax stamp numbers from June through November to understand how ineffective and ridiculous this ban is. Rhode Island and New Hampshire have combined to sell 18.9 million more stamps than they did over the same period in 2019 while Massachusetts has sold 17.7 million fewer. Indisputably, menthol cigarettes are purchased in neighboring states and then brought back into Massachusetts for personal consumption or illicit market sales.”
NECSEMA opposed the flavored tobacco ban in 2019 when it was first presented, and continues to monitor sales data to demonstrate the failure of the law and the wrongful impact to its members. The association represents both chain and independent convenience store owners, including many in urban communities that NECSEMA states are being disproportionately affected by the flavor ban ban.
According to the National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS), there are 3,360 convenience stores in Massachusetts with 54,000-plus employees accounting for $17 billion in sales annually. Over 89 percent of legal cigarette sales occurring at convenience stores.
“I challenge anyone to demonstrate how this ban has been effective,” Shaer said. “New Hampshire and Rhode Island imports have replaced sales once made in Massachusetts by licensed retailers. In fact, the latest data shows an uptick in cigarette sales when you combine the increases for non-flavored cigarettes in Massachusetts with total cigarette sales gains in New Hampshire and Rhode Island. Massachusetts small businesses have lost, the Massachusetts budget has lost, public health has lost, and youth who this law was allegedly intended to protect have lost since prevention revenue has greatly diminished.”
