Vaping has long since been proven to help smokers quit the habit in a way that is often easier than using other methods, such as patches or willpower. But you wouldn’t think vaping had been proven to be safer than smoking, given the knee-jerk reactions some countries and areas have had to it recently.
Now, we’ve heard that San Francisco has banned flavoured e-liquids from sale. The public safety committee recommended this should be done just one day before the Board of Supervisors in San Francisco brought in the law. Although it won’t come into force until April 2018, it has already led to concerns that vaping shops may die out if they can no longer sell flavoured e-liquids. Menthol cigarettes will also be banned, as will cigars that are flavoured.
Tobacco industry is supporting the ban
Perhaps not surprisingly, the law was heavily supported by the tobacco control industry. Everyone is aware that tobacco leads to cancer, many other diseases, and early death, and yet electronic cigarettes are being targeted and banned. Many smokers are using flavoured e-liquids and vaping devices to help them quit smoking. This new law could change all that, and lead many vapers back to smoking again, not to mention discouraging other smokers from trying to quit by using vaping products.
Protecting kids – or the tobacco industry?
Hmm, we wonder… The idea behind the ban is that kids are being encouraged to start vaping because there are lots of enticing flavours of e-liquids available. The people who voted unanimously in favour of the ban seem to think those kids will then go on to smoke. This is despite several studies revealing that very few kids do this. Most start as smokers and switch to vaping to help them stop.
As things stand, no evidence exists that restricting the sale of e-liquids has any bearing on improving public health. Indeed, if you make it harder for people to buy a safer product that could help them quit smoking, it will only achieve the opposite. But those in local government in San Francisco seem to have overlooked this.
Those in control of such laws say they want to protect people, and particularly the young in society. But the young rarely get ‘hooked’ on vaping. There is little to no evidence people take up vaping and then move to smoking, and yet there is plenty of evidence to prove the opposite happens. Since vaping has not been found to be more dangerous – or even anywhere near as dangerous – as smoking, surely it would make sense to rethink this stance?
Unfortunately, it doesn’t seem like this will happen. We’ve seen it before – countries bringing in new laws to reduce access to vaping products that can help people quit smoking and become healthier. We think we’ll continue to see it happening elsewhere, too. Could this be one of the first cities in the US to bring in the laws, and will others follow? Tell us what you think in the comments.
