Image source: CREATORS. Last week, California approved Proposition 31, which aimed to urge voters to "prevent minors from being influenced by candy-flavored tobacco." This slogan contained a lot of unfounded claims.
The primary goal of this initiative is to regulate the use of nicotine-containing vapor products that do not contain tobacco and legally restrict their use to adults. Proposal 31 states that adults may not purchase such products with non-tobacco flavors, which undermines the most promising market for reduced-risk cigarette alternatives.
The 31st proposal is a referendum on Bill S.B.793, which restricted the use of "flavored tobacco products" in 2020. However, California has now expanded the definition of "tobacco products" to include "devices that provide nicotine," regardless of whether or not the nicotine comes from tobacco.
According to S.B. 793, "tobacco flavor or fragrance" is the only "distinctive flavor" that can be legally added to electronic cigarette products. The regulation aims to reduce the appeal of such products to youth, to prevent underage consumption, and also to prevent smokers from turning to relatively harmful nicotine products.
California Governor Gavin Newsom said after signing Senate Bill 793, "Big tobacco has long targeted minors, trying to lure them with tobacco products, in effect killing the next generation. The author of the bill, State Senator Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo), stated that the industry wants to continue "killing people with their candy, fruit, mint and menthol-flavored poison".
On the contrary, there is currently no evidence to suggest that nicotine products are "killing" anyone. In fact, they are far less dangerous than cigarettes, which expose smokers to countless toxic and carcinogenic combustion products.
A report by the US National Academy of Science, Engineering and Medicine in 2018 found that laboratory tests, in vitro toxicology tests, and short-term human studies on the components of electronic cigarettes suggest that their harm may be far less than combustible tobacco cigarettes. The Royal College of Physicians in the UK similarly stated that "vaping is not without risks, but is far less harmful than smoking tobacco".
The FDA has acknowledged that electronic cigarettes may potentially reduce smoking-related deaths. Brian King, director of the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products, stated, "As a general category, electronic cigarettes are substantially less harmful than combustible tobacco products.
However, the FDA seems determined to ban e-cigarette flavors other than tobacco, and California has also adopted the same policy. Supporters of this policy point out that the majority of young people prefer flavored e-cigarettes. However, adults also enjoy these flavors.
Investigation data reveals that three-quarters of adult smokers enjoy the flavors banned in California. In 2020, a study of 383 adult smokers showed a preference decline for tobacco and mint or menthol flavors, a stable preference for fruit flavors, and an upward trend in preference for chocolate/candy or other sweet flavors. A 2022 study of 851 smokers asked how they would respond if the government banned the flavors they enjoy. 29% said they would switch to any allowed flavor, 28% said they would "find a way" to get the banned flavor, indicating that California's ban may drive consumers towards potentially dangerous black market choices. 17% said they would "quit smoking," which would put them at potential deadly risk, while 13% said they were unsure what they would do. In 2021, a study provided further evidence that the policy just approved by California voters could harm public health: relative to other states' trends, San Francisco's ban on flavored tobacco products was associated with a higher likelihood of recent smoking among self-reported underage high school students. In 2021, 15 prominent tobacco researchers warned in the American Journal of Public Health that flavor restrictions could backfire. They wrote: while flavor bans could reduce youth interest in e-cigarettes, they could also reduce the chances of adult smokers quitting with e-cigarettes. The supporters of California's ban are so focused on depicting themselves as champions of underage protection that they fail to acknowledge this danger, and its consequences may prove deadly.
Author Introduction:
Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at the American magazine Reason and his work has been featured in the Los Angeles Times and The Wall Street Journal. Furthermore, he is a regular contributor on the U.S. National Public Radio (NPR).
Statement:
This article is compiled from third-party information and is for industry exchange and learning purposes only.
This article does not represent the views of 2FIRSTS and we are unable to confirm the authenticity and accuracy of its content. The compilation of this article is intended for industry exchange and research purposes only.
Due to limitations in the quality of translation, the compiled article may not fully convey the same meaning as the original. Please refer to the original article for accuracy.
2FIRSTS maintains complete alignment with the Chinese government regarding any domestic, Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan, or international issues and positions.
The copyright of compiled information belongs to the original media and author. If there is any infringement, please contact us for removal.
This document has been generated through artificial intelligence translation and is provided solely for the purposes of industry discourse and learning. Please note that the intellectual property rights of the content belong to the original media source or author. Owing to certain limitations in the translation process, there may be discrepancies between the translated text and the original content. We recommend referring to the original source for complete accuracy. In case of any inaccuracies, we invite you to reach out to us with corrections. If you believe any content has infringed upon your rights, please contact us immediately for its removal.
