The New Tobacco Directive

I’ve been reading through the new directive as passed by the EU Parliament. The whole thing can be found here:

http://www.clivebates.com/documents/TPDtext.docx

[H/T Mr Bates]

Clive Bates has been trying his best for weeks to point out to MEPs the very poor decisions which the new directive enact, such as having a maximum nicotine content of the liquid at 20mg/ml. That level was based upon an average of what most vapers found satisfactory, but, because it is an average, it is not sufficient for a person who is used to smoking a lot of cigs per day. I read about this ‘average’ in an EU fact sheet, or some such, but, in the directive, it says that the 20mg/ml is based upon the nicotine inhaled when a person puffs on a cigarette. Heaven only knows how they worked that out. It is almost certainly a lie – if you read the directive text, you will see that it has been written by Zealots who are not known for their attention to the truth.

As I read the ecigs part of the directive, it struck me that the real difficulties produced by it as regards ecigs is not really stuff like the concentration of nicotine or the restriction of the size of bottles of e-liquid to 10ml. You could buy several bottles and decant them into a bigger bottle if you wished. Even the provision about ‘leak-free’ systems are not, in themselves, particularly onerous, provided that prevalent existing systems, such as applicators for wart remover acids, are considered to be sufficient. My local chemist told me that wart remover liquids are very corrosive. They come in little bottles with a ‘drop applicator’, if you know what I mean. It is up to the individual to take the appropriate precautions, as described in the accompanying leaflet. Interestingly, the directive recommends/demands such leaflets for e-liquids. I think that leaflets are already provided, aren’t they? Ah well…..

The really, really onerous demands are couched in requirements to submit requests for permission to introduce products to the market. For all intents and purposes, these demands are badly disguised medicinal regulations. Is that not odd? The Parliament threw out official medicinal regulation, and then approved medicinal-type regulations. These ecig regulations are really a bit crazy. It is hard to see how they could be implemented. For example, how could a retailer of ecigs know what the youth take up of ecigs might be? Another is a similar requirement for retailers/manufacturers to retain and submit ‘adverse effects’ records. How would they know, and how would they be able to confirm that the allegations were true?

=====

But the directive’s effect on eigs was not my prime reason for reading through the whole load of blather. What I noticed was this:

P7_TA-PROV(2014)0160
Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products ***I
European Parliament legislative resolution of 26 February 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products (COM(2012)0788 – C7-0420/2012 – 2012/0366(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

Note the highlighted words.

“The sale of tobacco”

Interestingly, there is almost nothing in the directive which concerns ‘the sale of tobacco’, but there are implications. The matter is just touched upon, in the sense that the directive suggests that States might wish to control ‘the sale of tobacco’. I think that Poland, for example, taxes tobacco plant leaves, or, at least, the sale of cured tobacco leaves. But I’m not sure precisely – it may just be some sort of VAT. At the moment, however, I can see nothing specific about controlling the trade in the raw produce other than that.

Interestingly, the actual proposed regulations of fags etc is not very important to smokers. According to the propaganda within the directive, the whole thing is aimed at persuading youths not to start smoking. Old smokers are to be allowed to continue until they peg out. Thereafter, there will be a new dawn and tobacco (not only smoking) and nicotine will disappear. I think that was the expectation when prohibition was enacted in the USA in the early 1900s. Oh, and many US States also banned tobacco at the same time. Fat lot of good that did.

=========

The directive demands that States put bigger obscene pictures of diseased body parts on fag packets, regardless of whether or not these diseased body parts were caused to be diseased by smoking. Curiously, the directive requires that snus should also carry health warnings, such as: “This stuff is addictive”. There is no certainty that snus is addictive at all, but that is what is recommended.

The whole thing is an absolute mess. It is a combination of vague, uncertain, unconfirmed factoids and propaganda.

Throughout the directive, there is a constant theme, which is that the prohibitions and standardisations will somehow contribute to the efficiency of the common market. No account is taken of the need for competition to improve efficiency.

Health has replaced religion as the opium of the people.

Advertisements

9 Responses to “The New Tobacco Directive”

  1. harleyrider1978 Says:

    Good news Cousin

    http://www.wave3.com/story/249…

    kentucky Smoking ban bill declared dead by sponsor

    They wont have a chance next year either…………..Kentucky the smoking ban issue is dead and now we move forward to repeal them city by city across the state!

  2. michaeljmcfadden Says:

    “Thereafter, there will be a new dawn and tobacco (not only smoking) and nicotine will disappear. I think that was the expectation when prohibition was enacted in the USA in the early 1900s.”

    I remember all the excitement of the Antis in the 1990s as they gushed about the “Smoke Free Class Of 2000!”

    They seem to miss on the details sometimes…..

    – MJM

    • garyk30 Says:

      But, the kids that start smoking are such a small % of the kids.

      In the USA, there are about 77,500,000 kids under the age of 18.

      Amer Cancer Soc says that 1,000 per day become regular smokers.
      That is 365,000 per year out of the 77.5 million kids.

      1. That is 1/77,500 kids become regular smokers per year.

      2. That is 2/10ths of 1%

      3. 99.8% of the kids do not become regular smokers.

      CDC data shows that half of the ever-smokers are ex-smokers.
      Half of those regular smokers kids will quit someday.

      4.Thus, 99.9% of kids do not become lifelong regular smokers!!!!

      All of this crap that is ‘for the chiiiildren’ will possibly effect only a very small % of the children(1/2th of 1%).

      Having been a kid and having had 2 of my own, I will say that the rebellious 1/2th of 1% of the kids will not be bothered by by EU/ other govt directives.

      • junican Says:

        They also seem to forget that the uptake of smoking occurs among youths in a narrow band between about fourteen and eighteen. Thereafter, the youths have become adults. One of the cardinal beliefs of TC is that smoking is adopted in a person’s teens and that, if a person does not begin smoking in his teens, he will not start at all. I think that this idea is false. At the time when Doll et al were doing their studies and finding that the average age of initiation was 19 among the doctors in the Doctors Study and around 16 in the general population, the reason was related to earnings. 16,of course, was the age at which young people started work and thus earning. It was natural at that time, therefore, for people who had a mind to smoke to start in their teens. Now-a-days, people are starting earning later after uni and such. Thus, smoking initiation will begin at a later age. I think that the “for the children” mantra is a red herring, since most young people will start to enjoy tobacco in adulthood rather than as ‘children’.

  3. The New Tobacco Directive | Bolton Smokers Club... Says:

    […] Clive Bates has been trying his best for weeks to point out to MEPs the very poor decisions which the new directive enact, such as having a maximum nicotine content of the liquid at 20mg/ml. That level was based upon an average of what most vapers found satisfactory, but, because it is an average, it is not sufficient for a person who is used to smoking a lot of cigs per day. I read about this ‘average’ in an EU fact sheet, or some such, but, in the directive, it says that the 20mg/ml is based upon the nicotine inhaled when a person puffs on a cigarette. Heaven only knows how they worked that out. It is almost certainly a lie – if you read the directive text, you will see that it has been written by Zealots who are not known for their attention to the truth.  […]

  4. beobrigitte Says:

    It is up to the individual to take the appropriate precautions

    THANK GOD FOR THAT!!! At LEAST one thing I, as an adult, am “trusted” to do!!!

    For all intents and purposes, these demands are badly disguised medicinal regulations. Is that not odd? The Parliament threw out official medicinal regulation, and then approved medicinal-type regulations.

    A back door for the pharmaceutical industry was opened. I bet, tobacco control et al are still laughing at the politicians they managed to fool so easily…

    P7_TA-PROV(2014)0160
    Manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products ***I
    European Parliament legislative resolution of 26 February 2014 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco and related products (COM(2012)0788 – C7-0420/2012 – 2012/0366(COD))
    (Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

    Note the highlighted words.

    “The sale of tobacco”

    Yep. Can anyone explain to me HOW the e-cig fits into this?

    Interestingly, the actual proposed regulations of fags etc is not very important to smokers. According to the propaganda within the directive, the whole thing is aimed at persuading youths not to start smoking.

    Well, good luck with that!!! Youngsters are drawn to cigarettes – after all it is forbidden!!!
    Teenagers and twens are geared up to rebel. My generation was drawn into demonstrations against nuclear power stations….
    As a youngster, YOU HAVE TO MAKE A POINT that you are ready to take on the world. Well, unless you are a youngster growing up, wrapped in cotton wool… (H&S warns: growing up wrapped in cotton wool may lead to death by suffocation!!!)

    The directive demands that States put bigger obscene pictures of diseased body parts on fag packets, regardless of whether or not these diseased body parts were caused to be diseased by smoking.

    I have seen some of these pictures and must say that these are lies being legalised.
    90% of this health pornography shows conditions that have nothing to do with smoking.

    Throughout the directive, there is a constant theme, which is that the prohibitions and standardisations will somehow contribute to the efficiency of the common market.

    This will need some explanation to me. Destroying businesses will contribute to the efficiency of the market?

    • junican Says:

      Regarding your last point, Beo. The Zealots who wrote the final version kept using two excuses for their prohibitions:
      1. Young people must be forced/persuaded not to smoke.
      2. That standardisation would be good for ‘the free movement’ of goods throughout the market’.

      Both of these excuses are false. Bigger, nastier pictures of diseases will have little or no effect. They have had no effect so far. The reason is obvious, which is that once you have seen a pic, you have seen it. You are never affected by it quite as much as the first time. And the effect gets less and less. Also, as a result of playing computer games etc, young people are quite used to seeing gore and horror.
      Also, standardisation by prohibition can only diminish the market as a whole. This fact is obscured by the Zealot language used in the directive. That is one of the reasons that the directive is such a mess.

  5. The New Tobacco Directive | Bolton Smokers Club... Says:

    […] The New Tobacco Directive. I've been reading through the new directive as passed by the EU Parliament. The whole thing can be found here: http://www.clivebates.com/documents/TPDtext.docx. [H/T Mr Bates].  […]

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: