What Do Editorial Boards Say?
Editorial: A Vaping Ban Will Send Smokers Back to the Pack
Septemer 12, 2019, The Wall Street Journal
"Recent news that e-cigarettes may be linked to hundreds of cases of severe lung disease across dozens of states has refocused public attention on the potentially harmful effects of vaping. As many as six people have already died of severe respiratory illness brought on by use of e-cigarettes. On Wednesday President Trump announced a Food and Drug Administration ban on many flavored vaping products citing safety concerns, calling it “a new problem.”
Editorial: Don’t panic about e-cigarettes
September 12, 2019, The Economist
"It’s time to stop vaping,” says Lee Norman, a health official in Kansas. Six people are dead in America, apparently from smoking e-cigarettes. More than 450 have contracted a serious lung disease. So Mr Norman’s advice sounds reasonable. The Centres for Disease Control and the American Medical Association agree: the country’s 11m vapers should quit."
Editorial: The e-cigarette hysteria is getting out of hand
September 12, 2019, The Washington Post
"President Trump’s announcement Wednesday that he will seek to ban most flavored e-cigarettes comes from a good place — a rarity in this administration. But that doesn’t make a ban any less stupid. It’s reasonable to be concerned about the massive surge in teen vapers over the past few years. The administration, led by former Food and Drug Administration commissioner Scott Gottlieb, was absolutely correct to crack down on e-cigarette companies marketing nicotine-rich products to teenagers. Keeping young people away from the addictive products and regulating them carefully is vital, given that teens who use e-cigarettes are more likely to start smoking."
Editorial: Don’t Ban E-Cigarettes
September 10, 2019, The Washington Post
"At the height of the United States’ experiment with Prohibition in the 1920s, the federal government took an extreme step to combat Americans’ continuing consumption of alcohol. Recognizing that bootleggers were redistilling industrial alcohol to make it potable, the government poisoned the supply to render it irreversibly toxic. People kept drinking. Thousands died, and many more were sickened. Today we look back on this episode in horror, confident that we would never endorse such a cruel approach to prohibition."
Editorial: San Francisco's e-cigarette ban isn't just bad policy, it's bad for public health
LA Times June 24, 2019
“Not only is it bad public policy to outlaw a legal product that’s widely available just outside the city’s borders, but it’s bad public health policy to come down harder on the lesser of two tobacco evils…
…And here’s an even worse scenario: If adults who vape can’t get their hands on replacement nicotine cartridges, they might take up traditional cigarettes to get their fix.”
Editorial: San Francisco has a case of the vapors over Juul
San Francisco Chronicle June 7, 2019
“The most absurd result of the measure would be to render electronic nicotine devices illegal while allowing old analog packs of Camels to populate everyone’s favorite corner store…
…While vaping has known and, given its comparative novelty, possibly unknown risks, it is by every expert analysis safer than smoking, the greatest dangers of which come from compounds other than nicotine. To the extent that adult smokers replace cigarettes with vaping, it accomplishes the same goal as safe injection sites: harm reduction.”
Editorial: San Francisco vaping ban is purely political grandstanding
San Francisco Chronicle March 21, 2019
“Cigarette sales are still legal. Roll your own unfiltered joint, smoke a cigar, light a pipe or fire up a cigarette. You can do it all in San Francisco, now and in the future if the featured proposals are enacted. Vaping is only one corner of a vast, dirty habit.
…this crusade offers no cure beyond symbolism…Tobacco and marijuana will remain on the shelves.
This plan is excessive, unworkable and more about safe politics than public health.”