Cynthia Cabrera from the Contra Costa Times offers a great guest commentary on vaping: it’s not the same as tobacco and shouldn’t be treated
According to new information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirm that vapor and e-cigarette products are causing
a reduction in the number of smokers. Research also reveals that vapor and e-cigarette products are considered to be 95 percent less harmful than traditional tobacco cigarettes and do not present a risk of exposure to cigarette toxic compounds.
The biggest issue facing vaping and e-cigarettes right now is the amount of misinformation that is available. The California Medical
Association, California State Council of Service Employees, and American Lung Association in California are trying to introduce a ballot initiative in 2016 to classify vaping products as tobacco and tax them.
Many states and cities are introducing taxes on vapor products equivalent to their tobacco counterparts, the so-called sin taxes. Vaping advocates are staunch in their standing that change needs to be made regarding people’s perceptions, and while no long-term data is available due to the newness of vaping products, they do not produce the same carcinogenic chemicals through combustion.
Because vapor products do not combust, they do not release the 4,000 carcinogenic chemicals created when a traditional tobacco cigarette
is smoked. Vapor products are electric, and the heat produced from the battery releases vapor.
So why tax vaping products like tobacco products? These are generally steep taxes to deter people from using tobacco products, but smokers
transitioning to vaping should be encouraged and not discouraged by sin taxes. These ballot initiatives also overlook the effect that vaping has on public health: a reduction in public harm caused by smoking. There is a strain on healthcare systems caused by smokers. It is not only smokers that are harmed by tobacco products, but the public at large due to second-hand smoke.
The American Cancer Society has already embraced vaping and e-cigarettes, but Cynthia laments that there is a larger issue at hand: tobacco companies are losing money when consumption rates fall, and they have a strong lobbying strategy at their disposal. She notes that California received $1.52 billion in taxes for 2014, but only 4.3% of that has gone to smoking prevention and cessation programs.
Some of the revenue from these proposed initiatives would be used to continue to fund tobacco-taxed programs.
California’s voters are a microcosm of the larger issue. To most, there is no distinction between tobacco and vapor and e-cigarette products, and both sides of the coin (advocates for vaping and tobacco companies) are polarizing with the available information.
No one can predict the future. It may turn out that there are harmful side effects of vaping, but they will not be nearly as devastating
as those from smoking. Currently, it is a battle of public opinion, with both sides having their PR teams work overtime.
InstantGMP offers a cloud-based software solution to help e-liquid companies come into compliance with future regulations and adopt
good manufacturing practices. To learn more, check out our online demo or contact us.