Good Grief

Although cell studies for e-cigarettes have some value, presenting them with press statements making ridiculous claims about supposed findings and interpretations makes the whole issue look more like a joke. A wise comment from Dr Farsalinos from May 2015, however these “studies” keep getting churned out some with, and some without scary press releases. But as it is that time of year when folk are more likely to make a quit attempt either due to someone buying them a starter kit for Christmas, or they’ve made a resolution to “kick the habit” at the start of the year; you wouldn’t be surprised to see the useful idiots trumpeting all kinds of daft claims about “the dangers of e-cigarettes”.

December 23rd 2015, a date that has been ingrained in my brain since the Totally Wicked Legal Challenge was heard in the Court of Justice of the European Union on October 1st. As the old saying goes - “hope for the best, prepare for the worst” - as many people suggested that the challenge appeared to be very strong, but it seems that many folks were content to hinge everything on Totally Wicked being 110% successful.

It seems that the run up to Christmas entitles folk to, frankly lose their damn minds. We are all painfully aware of the mantra “think of The Children™”, but never more so has it been apparent that the crusade against smoking and vaping has never really been about health.

First up:

A lawmaker from Louisville is hoping a tax would discourage Kentucky residents from using electronic cigarettes.

Hoping a tax would discourage residents, in other words a sin tax. You nasty, horrible peasants are doing something I don’t like, so you’re gonna have to pay extra for the privilege. Holier than thou, stick-up-the-ass politicians.

If there’s one constant in this multiverse it is the incessant need for folk to have to blame someone else for their stupidity. In some (rare) cases, it is actually the fault of the product either through some kind of wacky early-life failure or through some product design flaw. Sadly, the majority of these kinds of cases is simply down to Darwinism. I mean, a classic case of this is, of course, the McDonald’s Coffee Case…

As many of you will no doubt be aware, the UK implementation of the Tobacco Products Directive is coming whether we like it or not. September 3rd saw the closure of the official public consultation on the majority of the implementation regulations. Today saw the publication of additional ‘guidance’ under Article 20 section 5. Specifically all about the advertising portion of Article 20.

Article 20(5) of the Tobacco Products Directive 2014/40/EC requires EU member states to introduce restrictions on the advertising of electronic cigarettes. In the UK, the proposed implementation will consist of changes to the Communications Act 2003, free-standing new regulations and changes by Ofcom (the communications regulator in the UK) to the BCAP Code and Broadcast Code.

In case you’ve been asleep for most of this past week, Wales held the first reading of the ludicrously titled “Public Health (Wales) Bill” in the Senedd. Many were expecting a fairly inglorious climb down from the nutty Minister for Health and Social Services. At least, that’s how it has been reported by Auntie Beeb:

The decision this afternoon can be interpreted in two ways.

Some critics will view it an embarrassing climb down - and ask why did the health minister press ahead with the proposed ban in the face of significant opposition and unclear evidence.

There’s a problem that those in power want to solve. Or more to the point, they don’t want to “solve” it at all. They want to “control” it. That “problem” is smoking, which to my mind isn’t a problem at all. It’s a choice people make. Yes there’s an “addictive” side to it, yes there’s a big cost to it, and yes there are some risks associated with it. But you know what? I don’t care. If folk want to smoke than that is down to them. Their life, their choice end of story. Almost.

When it comes to anti-smoking campaigns and organisations one of the key mantras is “protecting the kids”, the ever-present “think of the children”. Trouble is, whenever an organisation says to policy makers “thinking of the children” it inevitably tugs on said policy makers heart-strings. Everyone wants their kids to grow up and lead good, healthy, normal lives don’t they? Let’s face it, I grew up to lead a relatively normal healthy life. I made choices along the way, some good and some not so good, it’s all part of this little thing called “growing up”.

There are currently 73 MEPs in the UK. Elected every five years (although I don’t actually remember the last MEP election). Being involved in Europe means the UK needs a lot of bodies to “fairly” represent the UK in matters being discussed in European committees, councils and so forth.

According to the Euro Parliament (Office of the UK) website, the region I live in has 7 representatives. 7!

• Patrick O’Flynn (UKIP)
• Vicky Ford (Conservative)
• Richard Howitt (Labour)
• Stuart Agnew (UKIP)
• Geoffrey Van Orden (Conservative)
• Tim Aker (UKIP)
• David Campbell Bannerman (Conservative)

What do the MEPs actually do? Other than causing us mere mortals a massive headache at times with some utterly ridiculous policies (yes McAvan I’m looking at you!) they are supposed to:

The thing with journalists is they tend to get friendly with regular sources of information. The “go-to” folks for soundbites and information, no matter how bizarre that information is. The flip side of that, is when they are ‘confronted’ by opposing views the immediately adopt the “hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” stance by retreating past la-la land up to cloud cuckoo.

This whole thing really started to gather momentum when Public Health England released the recent evidence update on electronic cigarettes. We knew that there would be some responses from the opponents to vaping, the trouble is the evidence update was in fact a response to the multitude of rubbish science and poor media.