California to Vote on Ban of Flavored Tobacco Products

California state senator Steve Glazer, D-Orinda, displayed a box of flavored electronic cigarettes as he discussed his support for a measure proposed by state senator Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo (left), that would ban flavored tobacco products from being sold in stores and vending machines across California, pending approval from the legislative body and signature from the governor. Assembly member Kevin McCarty from Sacramento is pictured on the right. (Source: Rich Pedroncelli)

On November 8, 2022, Californians will have the opportunity to vote on a measure that would ban the sale of flavored tobacco products statewide. Proposition 31 would overturn Senate Bill 793, which passed in 2020 but has not yet gone into effect, and would specifically prohibit the sale of flavored e-cigarettes, menthol cigarettes, as well as fruit and candy-flavored products like sour apple and gummy bear.

If there were no ban, Californians would be better off, and this has had a disproportionate impact on the e-cigarette market. By pushing users towards flavorless tobacco products, typically cigarettes, it does more harm than good. Tobacco policies should focus on harm reduction - the harm of e-cigarettes is lower than smoking.

On one hand, it should be noted that the lawmakers of the state deserve congratulations for recognizing the cost of SB 793. For instance, because the initial version of the ban included pipe tobacco, Doug Shaw of Sanctuary Tobacco in San Luis Obispo planned to close his store. Fortunately, the law was amended to exempt pipe tobacco.

National tobacco policies have often gone too far. When it comes to flavored e-cigarette products, the focus is on minors. As California lawmakers who authored SB 793 noted, "the tobacco industry uses candy, fruit, and other enticing flavors as strategic weapons to addict a new generation.

Concerns about minors are an important policy issue, but the scope is too broad. Adults also enjoy similar tastes. Upon perusing any cocktail menu at a bar, one can find similar-tasting drinks. Don't forget the fruit-flavored alcoholic sodas and craft beers on grocery store shelves.

Fruit-flavored electronic cigarettes are not only attractive to adults, but they may also be safer than traditional cigarettes which may be banned in the state. Burning tobacco in a paper "tube" releases nicotine, as well as tar and other additives into the smoker's lungs. As far as reducing the harm of tobacco products, banning flavored tobacco (primarily electronic cigarettes) products would do more harm than good.

The majority of the harm from smoking bans arises from the increased difficulty of quitting smoking. Studies show that e-cigarettes can be a valuable tool to help people quit smoking.

Journalist Jacob Grier, who focuses on the tobacco and alcohol industries, recently pointed out that England's health department is actively promoting electronic cigarettes as a smoking cessation tool. Californians would be better off looking at these international examples, instead of allowing SB 793 to take effect.

The safety of e-cigarettes does not mean they are entirely risk-free. They may pose a danger of exposing users to carcinogenic substances. However, a balanced approach that considers economic and public health factors should focus on limiting and reducing harm. As James Prieger, an economist at Pepperdine University, notes in his research on e-cigarettes, "there is significant uncertainty regarding their long-term effects, but it is almost certainly true that using e-cigarettes is healthier than smoking.

However, despite this, the issue of tobacco use among minors remains an important public policy issue. However, we can once again find a reason to be concerned that the ban may do more harm than good. Adolescents who use electronic cigarettes are also adolescents who smoke. In a hypothetical group of 100 high school students who do not use tobacco or nicotine products, only 2% regularly use electronic cigarettes.

Research is currently underway regarding widespread bans on menthol and flavored tobacco, such as California's SB 793. However, previous age restrictions on e-cigarettes have not effectively reduced tobacco use. Dr. Michael Pesko of Cornell University studied the impact of age restrictions on the purchase of e-cigarettes. His research shows that these restrictions have not stopped students from consuming nicotine - they simply switch from e-cigarettes to traditional cigarettes.

SB 793 also affects certain groups, who often prefer menthol cigarettes (which were introduced in the 1950s and hold 30% of the US market). This encourages more smuggling activity which is now undermining the state's revenue from consumption taxes and could lead to more dangerous interactions between smokers and the police.

Californians should be aware of the inevitable alternatives that come with the regulation of nicotine sources. Banning flavored e-cigarette liquids may lead some people to switch to riskier smoking alternatives. Public health policies should reflect the relative risks of consumption activities - even flavored tobacco products are not as dangerous as traditional cigarettes.

Statement:

This article is compiled from third-party information and is intended for industry exchange and learning purposes only.

This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS, and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity or accuracy of the article's content. The translation of this article is only intended for industry-related communication and research.

Due to limitations in the level of translation, the translated article may not fully express the same meaning as the original. Please refer to the original article.

2FIRSTS maintains complete alignment with the Chinese government regarding any domestic, Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan, or foreign related statements and stances.

The copyright of compiled information belongs to the original media and author. If there is any infringement, please contact us to request removal.