San Diego Flavor Ban: Savior or Sabotage?

Jun.20.2022
San Diego Flavor Ban: Savior or Sabotage?
San Diego bans flavored e-cigarettes and tobacco, except for premium cigars, shisha and FDA-approved cessation devices. Experts debate effectiveness.

The SAAFE Act, proposed by Representative Marni von Wilpert, would ban flavored electronic cigarettes and tobacco products, but exempts high-quality flavored cigars, flavored loose-leaf tobacco, and hookah.

 

Flavorless or tobacco-flavored electronic cigarettes, as well as FDA-approved smoking cessation devices, are also unrestricted.

 

Last week, Mayor Todd Gloria signed the ban into law.

 

Marni von Wilpert, a legislator, stated that "This new law will save lives and protect the health of children.

 

Our new partnership with the San Diego School will provide parents with important health resources, and as such, we are taking every possible step to prevent big tobacco from luring our children and hijacking their future.

 

Is a flavor ban the answer?

 

Meanwhile, renowned cardiologist and smoking cessation researcher Dr. Konstantinos Farsalinos has recently reiterated that vape flavors are crucial in helping smokers switch to safer nicotine alternatives.

 

A researcher recently published a paper titled "The Spice of Life: A Case for Mitigating Tobacco Harms to Save Lives," which examines in detail the relationship between flavored nicotine products and successful smoking cessation.

 

The report emphasizes that flavor bans are a form of prohibition that only fuels the growth of a large black market, and leads to an increase in smoking rates as many e-cigarette users will revert back to smoking.

 

In a recent regulatory review, Farsalinos discussed a report examining the proposed ban by the Canadian Department of Health. He suggested that the reasons for implementing such a ban may be weakening, as evidence continues to emerge of its potential negative impact on public health.

 

Source: VapingPost

 


Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

Special Report|AIR H1 Revenue Rises 3.7% as Shisha Volumes Fall 9%, Testing Its Shift Beyond Traditional Hookah
Special Report|AIR H1 Revenue Rises 3.7% as Shisha Volumes Fall 9%, Testing Its Shift Beyond Traditional Hookah
AIR’s first half-year results as a listed company offer a new test of how far a traditional hookah business can transform. H1 2026 revenue rose 3.7%, even as Flavored Shisha Molasses shipments fell 9%, with pricing and mix supporting growth. Traditional shisha still generates almost all revenue, while OOKA, Crown Switch, Greentank and U.S. regulatory spending point to accelerating diversification. The next test is whether those investments can become a second business of meaningful scale and profitability.
Capital Markets
Aug.21
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
Juul Sublicense Reshapes Vuse Alto Patent Bill as Court Ends R.J. Reynolds’ 5.25% Royalty Obligation to Altria
According to Law360 on August 31, 2026, a federal judge in North Carolina ruled that a patent sublicense between R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co. and Juul Labs Inc. relieves Reynolds of its obligation to continue paying royalties to Altria Client Services LLC over Vuse Alto. A jury had previously found that Vuse Alto infringed three Altria patents and awarded approximately $95.2 million in past damages, after which Reynolds was ordered to pay an ongoing royalty equal to 5.25% of positive net sales. The new ruling finds that a valid sublicense can eliminate future infringement, potentially ending what Altria described as hundreds of millions of dollars in future royalties.
Sep.01
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Drug Regulator Target Illegal Vape Sales Disguised as Medical Devices, Define Six Violations
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Drug Regulator Target Illegal Vape Sales Disguised as Medical Devices, Define Six Violations
China’s Jiangsu Tobacco Monopoly Bureau and Jiangsu Provincial Medical Products Administration have issued a joint notice targeting illegal production and sales of vape products disguised as medical devices. The notice identifies six categories of violations, including obtaining medical licenses through false materials, misusing medical device credentials, expanding production beyond approved scopes, and using medical device-related online platforms to promote or sell vape products. The action is based on China’s tobacco and medical device regulations and aims to strengthen vape oversight and consumer protection.
Aug.04
Australia Tobacco Tax Debate Spreads Within Labor as NSW Premier Minns Reaffirms Support for a Cut
Australia Tobacco Tax Debate Spreads Within Labor as NSW Premier Minns Reaffirms Support for a Cut
Australia’s tobacco excise debate is increasingly exposing differences within the governing Labor Party. New South Wales Labor Premier Chris Minns reaffirmed on September 8 that he supports reducing tobacco excise, arguing that current tax settings are pushing consumers toward cheaper black-market cigarettes. Federal Health Minister Mark Butler continues to oppose an excise cut, while Treasurer Jim Chalmers and Assistant Treasurer Daniel Mulino have recently stopped short of ruling out future changes. The divergence follows the opposition Coalition’s proposal to cut tobacco excise by 80%.
Sep.08
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
U.S. Ninth Circuit Upholds FDA Denial of MH Global’s Flavored Vape PMTA Applications
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld the FDA’s denial of MH Global LLC’s applications to market flavored electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). The court ruled that FDA’s comparative-efficacy framework, which requires applicants to show that flavored products provide greater cessation or switching benefits than tobacco-flavored alternatives, is consistent with the Tobacco Control Act’s “appropriate for the protection of the public health” standard. The court also found that FDA was not required to establish the framework through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
Aug.26
South Korea Constitutional Court Upholds Volume-Based E-Liquid Tax, With Challenged Rates at KRW 370 and KRW 628 per Milliliter
South Korea Constitutional Court Upholds Volume-Based E-Liquid Tax, With Challenged Rates at KRW 370 and KRW 628 per Milliliter
South Korea's Constitutional Court has upheld fixed taxes on nicotine-containing e-cigarette liquids based on solution volume, ruling that challenged provisions imposing KRW 370 per milliliter in individual consumption tax and KRW 628 per milliliter in tobacco consumption tax do not violate the Constitution. The cases stemmed from historical disputes involving importers that reported nicotine as being extracted from tobacco stems rather than leaves. South Korea has since broadened its tobacco definition to include synthetic nicotine, while current tax laws provide reduced rates for certain products not derived from tobacco.
Sep.18