10 replies to this topic

[Kate]

Here's the latest:


Malta: ... “all tobacco devices are to comply with the provisions of the Tobacco Act”, which means that they cannot be freely advertised, that they cannot be smoked in enclosed public spaces and that they can only be used by adults over the age of 18.
http://www.maltatoda.../01/10/t14.html


New Jersey US - "... state ban on the sale of tobacco products to those under 19 years of age to e-cigarettes and include e-cigarettes in the New Jersey Smoke Free Air Act, which prohibits smoking in indoor public places and workplaces." http://www.politickernj.com/thester/3597...signed-law


Some current legal info can be found here - http://vapersnetwork.org/node/7

[Wryly]

Ah, the plague of idiocy spreads. If only they hadn't banned smoking on planes, they would replace the air supply on flights more often, which would help prevent the international spread of airbourn infections (as pointed out by Stephen Fry, on QI).

[Ian]

The article covering the New Jersey legislation beggars belief. It's hard to believe that a politician could make so many ignorrant, uneducated or unfounded assertions in a single interview.

Looking at the legislation itself which can be found here, I'm intrigued by the manner in which they chose to define the subject of the ban:

"The substitute defines “electronic smoking device” to mean an electronic device that can be used to deliver nicotine or other substances to the person inhaling from the device, including, but not limited to, an electronic cigarette, cigar, cigarillo, or pipe."

So the act covers any device that can produce any inhalable vapour, but only if it's electronic. On that basis, a kettle is now illegal but an Iolite is not.

[Wryly]

Stupid legislation is, as stupid legislation does.

[Crossbow]

Well....... theres nothing electronic about an SD with an unproteced battery either. It's electrical, but contains no electronics at all.
Likewise any switch only mod, provided there isn't a battey protection circuit.

Madness.

[Kate]

European Union - Future legislation on electronic cigarettes

Quote

... Considering the other reservations with regard to public health, does the Commission intend to act promptly to set out a legal framework for ‘e-cigarettes’ at European level by proposing either an amendment to Directive 2001/83/EC(1) on medicinal products or else a revision of Directive 1993/42/EC(2) concerning medical devices?

http://vapersnetwork...ead.php?tid=147

[westcoast2]

Kate, on the EU question. At this time this is only asking what the commision intends to do. Although we need to prepare, until this is answered we would just be second guessing the commision's response.

It seems that Judge Leon has made a rulling in the SE/FDA case that could influence these matters. Many of the curent bans and restricitions seem to be dependant on what the FDA has said. Hopefully the text will be available soon. (more info on ECF)

Edit: Judge Leon found in favour of SE. The FDA do not have authority to regulate e-cigs as a drug/device combination and so should not have held SE's imports. Full text here --> https://ecf.dcd.usco...c?2009cv0771-54
-----

Edited by westcoast2, 14 January 2010 - 08:17 PM.

[Kate]

That's great news from the US isn't it :)

Now that the EU has been asked to categorise and define ecigs they might go with their existing line, we'll have to wait and see -

Quote

ORIENTATION NOTE
ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES AND THE EC LEGISLATION

The opinions presented in this document are not an official position of the European Commission.
It is for the European Court of Justice to give authoritative interpretations on Community law.

Conclusions:
• Electronic cigarette not containing tobacco is not a tobacco product under the Tobacco Products Directive.
• Whether the electronic cigarette falls under Directive 2001/83 on human medicinal products depends on whether it can be characterised as human medicine by presentation or by function:

o The electronic cigarette can be regarded as a human medicine by presentation if it is presented as a remedy to get rid of nicotine addiction.
o The electronic cigarette can be regarded as a human medicine by function in so far as it qualifies as "restoring, correcting or modifying physiological functions" in a significant manner.

• Whether the electronic cigarette could be regarded as falling under Directive 93/42/EEC on medical devices depends on the claimed intended use and whether this intended use has a medical purpose or not.
• The Directive 2001/95 on general product safety applies in so far as there are no specific provisions with the same objective in other Community law. This Directive enables the withdrawal of the product from the market if the regulator can show that it is dangerous to the health and safety of consumers.
....
”It is for each national authority to decide, account being taken of all the characteristics of the product, whether it falls within the definition of a medicinal product by its function or presentation.“
...
“At this point, it must be noted that, defining a given product as a medical device or not remains within the competence of the Competent Authorities of the Member States where the product is on the market. This has to be done on a case by case basis, taking all product characteristics into account, and in particular, any claim made by the manufacturer as well as the intended use of the product.“
...

http://ec.europa.eu/...ion_0508_en.pdf

[westcoast2]

The EU seems very either/or either Drug or Tobacco. In the US there is a 'modfied risk' tobacco product which the EU does not seem to have. Also the EU definition of tobacco product is slighlty different. This suggests that the e-cig falls outside the current tobbaco regulatory framework

E-juice containing nicotine can already be regulated.

In addition, in the judgement, Judge Leon says that no evidence of harm from these products was presented in this case. This is something else that can be used if the need arises.
----

[Crossbow]

Indeed, that puts the shoe very much on the other foot.

There are some rather worrying points raised as well though :(

[Kate]

The EU seems certain that it's not a tobacco product so that's one hurdle out of the way. If we can convince them it's not a medical product either but a recreational habit then we still have to persuade them to allow recreational nicotine. The EU banned Swedish Snus which are much more effective than NRT, not harmful like smoking but are not medically classified.

I don't really know what's going to happen but am trying to persuade ASH UK to support the non medical nicotine definition.

Here are some things I mentioned to ASH that might be helpful but I'm not holding my breath, they only endorse things that don't work at the moment:

[INDENT] There is a need for popularised nicotine products which smokers actually want to use instead of cigarettes.

Can nicotine products can be designed to be a popular substitute for smoking, or is smokeless tobacco needed to fulfil that role, as in Sweden?

Support research to develop and test smokeless nicotine products.

Encourage the sale of non medicinal nicotine to increase price competition and innovation as long as no claim is made that it cures people of withdrawal symptoms etc. Allow the claim it can be used as a substitute for cigarette smoking.

Tax each nicotine product according to the health risks associated with using it.[/INDENT]