The new year is rapidly approaching.Â For many people that means enjoying a nice beverage or ten.Â This guest post comes just in time to help you with pairing your favorite drink with the perfect e-liquid.Â Just like every other guest bit, the content is solely that of the author.Â Â The Perfect Drinks & […]
CASAA is thrilled and honored to be a participating member of the inaugural fundraising event, #VapesGiving.
Hosted by the American Vaping Association (AVA), funds collected during #VapesGiving (December 13 – 19) will be distributed to more than twenty state and national associations working tirelessly to defend access to vapor products.
Because of a generous commitment from Naked 100, contributions through #VapesGiving will be matched dollar-for-dollar up to $190,000! Factoring in the matching commitment from Naked, #VapesGiving has already raised more than $10,000 in less than 24-hours!
Please help us make this inaugural event a resounding success by sharing this campaign with everyone you know who cares about access to low-risk, smoke-free vapor products.
Dear Members of the Vapor Community:
We write you today as a united front because the vapor industry is under attack and the future remains uncertain. We are all focused on the critical mission of making sure that Americans will continue to have access to the full range of vapor products that millions are using to quit smoking and improve our lives. We need your help to achieve this mission.
We all agree that there are short term and long term policy changes that must be made to ensure a robust vapor product industry in this country, but we are focused today on a near-term step — Changing the âPredicate Dateâ in CongressÂ — which will allow all products on the market before 8/8/2016 to stay on the market and remain available to consumers.
The US House of Representatives has passed an appropriations bill which contains language that would modernize the 2007 predicate date for products newly deemed to be tobacco. But the Senate has not included similar language in its version of the bill. These two conflicting pieces of legislation will be negotiated in Congress in the near future, and we are going to need EVERYONE to weigh in!
In the coming days and weeks, we will be reaching out to our respective members with additional opportunities and guidance on how you can engage with your two Senators and your Representative and urge them to modernize the predicate date for vapor products. We hope that when we call on you, you will take a few minutes to ACT to save the vapor industry.
- Urge Congress to Support Cole-Bishop! (Click Here)
- Say thank you to HR 1136 co-sponsors! (Click Here)
I have already written about why I refused to participate in the activities of the Foundation for a Smoke-Free World, which I believe is essentially a front-group created by Philip Morris International (PMI) primarily to promote its business interests. I explained that if PMI were serious about creating a smoke-free world, it would stop aggressively marketing its deadly products throughout the world and stop opposing public health policies to reduce tobacco use.
The Foundation for a Smoke-Free World recently released a call for research proposals for preliminary projects that entail research to help the Foundation obtain the background information necessary for it to proceed effectively in its supposed mission to create a smoke-free world. By reviewing the call for proposals, we are now able to understand just how the Foundation is essentially a scam operation.
The Foundation calls for âscoping projectsâ to study strategies to reduce smoking. But nowhere in the five-page document does it mention anything about interventions to: (1) severely restrict or curtail cigarette advertising and marketing; (2) require plain packaging; (3) substantially increase cigarette taxes; (4) promote 100% smoke-free environments; and (5) heavily fund aggressive, state-of-the-art anti-smoking media campaigns.
In fact, the word âindustryâ appears only once, and it is not clear that marketing, taxation, clean indoor air, or counter-advertising are what the Foundation has in mind (especially since it groups âindustryâ with âfarmingâ).
In contrast, the Foundation does want to support research on the role of genetics, physiology, individual choices and activities and environmental influences.
Frankly, this is all essentially a waste of time. We already know what interventions are most effective in reducing smoking rates. We donât need more research to find out what works. What we need to do is to heavily fund programs to promote these tried and true policy strategies.
If the Foundation were serious about wanting to create a smoke-free world, then instead of wasting this money on research into topics like genetics and individual choices and activities, it would use its money to fund programs to implement â worldwide â policies and programs that we know are effective. These are: 1) severely restrict or curtail cigarette advertising and marketing; (2) require plain packaging; (3) substantially increase cigarette taxes; (4) promote 100% smoke-free environments; and (5) heavily fund aggressive, state-of-the-art anti-smoking media campaigns. It would also provide funding to create or supplement tobacco control infrastructure in countries throughout the world and to support the development of grassroots coalitions to promote policies to fight the tobacco industry.
In other words, these are all the programs that the Foundation fails to mention at all in its call for proposals.
Sometimes, what you donât say is more important than what you do say. That is certainly the case here. The Foundation says nothing about the most effective interventions to reduce smoking, while focusing almost exclusively on areas that have little to no relevance.
You might argue that the Foundation canât fund programs to promote bans on cigarette marketing, high cigarette taxes, plain packaging, and aggressive anti-smoking media campaigns that attack the industry because it is funded by the tobacco industry. Well â¦ thatâs exactly the point. A foundation funded by a large, multinational tobacco company is not in a position to carry out the types of initiatives that are most effective in reducing smoking. This is why I believe the Foundation is essentially a scam operation.
Read more: feedproxy.google.com
As many of you know, the EU has some oddball vaping laws thanks to the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). One of the oddball rules is you can only buy e-liquid in tiny amounts (10ml bottles.) But, it turns out when someone comes up with a stupid rule, someone else comes up with a clever way […]