An investigation was performed to identify what changes have been made to the Cancer Council's policy on e-cigarettes since its public release in 2014.
Document URL: http://wiki.cancer.org.au/policy/Position_statement_-_Electronic_cigarettes
Archived versions of the document [1] [2]for the dates listed were downloaded from archive.org. These were then compared using Git.
diff --git a/2014-10-03-archive.org-cca-position-ecigs.md b/2016-06-05-archive.org-cca-position-ecigs.md index bbaec86..d2d4dd9 100644 --- a/2014-10-03-archive.org-cca-position-ecigs.md +++ b/2016-06-05-archive.org-cca-position-ecigs.md @@ -24,14 +24,14 @@ Recommendations Cancer Council Australia and the National Heart Foundation of Australia recommend the following public policy measures be considered to assist in protecting young Australians from the potential harms of widespread electronic cigarette use: RestrictingBan the retail sale of non-nicotine electronic cigarettes.cigarettes (unless the product has been approved by the TGA). It is currently unlawful to sell electronic cigarettes that contain nicotine withoutin any form. This is because nicotine is a scheduled poison and can only be lawfully sold in the form of legal tobacco products (a historical anomaly) and approved nicotine replacement products. This position could change in the future for individual nicotine electronic cigarette products that receive approval from the Therapeutic Goods Administration. This restrictionTGA. Similar restrictions should also apply to non-nicotine electronic cigarettes, which come in a variety of fruit, confectionery and other flavours that appeal to children. Laws in South Australia, Western Australia and Queensland prohibit the sale of products that resemble tobacco products. There are no such laws in other states and territories, meaning that non-nicotine electronic cigarettes (when marketed without therapeutic claims) can be lawfully sold, including to young people. Ensuring smoke-free laws in each state and territory cover electronic cigarette use. The purchase, possession or use of electronic cigarettes containing nicotine is currently unlawful under state and territory poisons and public health laws. However, these laws are complicated and difficult to enforce. Prohibiting use of all electronic cigarettes under smoke-free laws would make the law clear for the community and ensure that both nicotine and non-nicotine electronic cigarettes are not used in places where smoking tobacco is prohibited. Prohibiting advertising and promotion of electronic cigarettes, consistent with tobacco advertising prohibitions. Electronic cigarettes are being aggressively promoted, with young people and children clearly identified as a target market. Electronic cigarette advertising should be subject to similar restrictions as tobacco products. Back to top Recommendation 1 – RestrictingBan the retail sale of non-nicotine electronic cigarettes (unless the product has been approved by the TGA) It is currently unlawful to sell electronic cigarettes that contain nicotine withoutin any form. This is because nicotine is a scheduled poison and can only be lawfully sold in the form of legal tobacco products (a historical anomaly) and approved nicotine replacement products. This position could change in the future for individual nicotine electronic cigarette products that receive approval from the Therapeutic Goods Administration. This restrictionTGA. Similar restrictions should also apply to non-nicotine electronic cigarettes, which come in a variety of fruit, confectionery and other flavours that appeal to children. Laws in South Australia, Western Australia and Queensland prohibit the sale of products that resemble tobacco products. There are no such laws in other states and territories, meaning that non-nicotine electronic cigarettes (when marketed without therapeutic claims) can be lawfully sold, including to young people. Evidence and rationale (a) The health effects of electronic cigarette use are currently unknown and should be subject to proper evaluation @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ In addition, testing conducted by New South Wales Health found 70% of e-liquids Given the tobacco industry’s history of deceptively promoting "safer" tobacco products[9], it is important to note that a number of major tobacco companies have recently entered the global electronic cigarette market. This includes Philip Morris with the brand ‘Mark10’[10]; British American Tobacco with the brand 'Vype'[11]; Lorillard with the brand 'blu eCig'[12]; Reynolds American with the brand 'Vuse'[13]; Japan Tobacco International with the brand 'Ploom'[14]; and Imperial Tobacco with the brand 'Puritane' (and the purchase of patent rights and subsequent litigation to enforce those rights against multiple product competitors)[15][16]. Both nicotine and non-nicotine electronic cigarette products are often promoted to be "safer" than tobacco products as well as fun recreational products that can be used 'anywhere'[17][18][19]. This is the case, even though the products have not passed through the kinds of formal safety assessment processes that are normally undertaken with lung delivery products. In light of these issues, non-nicotine electronic cigarettes should be treated in a similar way to nicotine electronic cigarettes and restrictedbanned from retail sale unless their use has been approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA). At the same time, government regulators should be cautious of the possibility that tobacco industry engagement in the electronic cigarette market is part of a broader attempt to re-normalise its community standing so that it can re-establish engagement with policy makers, researchers and other public health stakeholders[20]. Care must be taken so that tobacco industry engagement in the electronic cigarette market in Australia, including under a medicines framework, does not allow the tobacco industry to re-enter the policy space and consumer market in a way that offends Article 5.3 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which aims to protect public health from the commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry[20]. (b) Non-nicotine electronic cigarettes have potentially high appeal and can be lawfully sold to young people, despite the health and social impacts remaining unknown @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ References ↑ 37.0 37.1 Taleb ZB, Maziak W. Harm reduction and e-cigarettes: not evidence-based. Lancet Oncol 2014 Mar;15(3):e104 [Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24599927]. ↑ 38.0 38.1 38.2 38.3 38.4 38.5 Hodge JG Jr, Collmer V, Orenstein DG, Millea C, Van Buren L. Reconsidering the legality of cigarette smoking advertisements on television public health and the law. J Law Med Ethics 2013;41(1):369-73 [Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23581678]. ↑ 39.0 39.1 Democrats Committee for Energy and Commerce. E-Cigarettes Flashbacks. Washington DC: US House of Representatives; 2014 Apr 7 Available from: http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?q=page/e-cigarette-flashbacks#_=1396498603146&count=horizontal&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.strikingly.com%2Fecigflashbacks&size=m&text=Saw%20an%20awesome%20one%20pager.%20Check%20it%20out%20%23strikingly&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.strikingly.com%2Fecigflashbacks. ↑ Stanford School of Medicine. Ecigs vs. Cigs. [homepage on the internet] Stanford School of Medicine; 2014 Oct 32016 Jun 5 Available from: http://tobacco.stanford.edu/tobacco_main/images-ecig.php?token2=fm_tn_st286.php&token1=fm_tn_img9656.php&theme_file=fm_tn_mt001.php&theme_name=E-Cigs&subtheme_name=Ecigs%20vs.%20Cigs. ↑ RJ Reynolds Vapor. VUSE makes South by Southwest debut as official e-cigarette sponsor. Reynolds American Inc.; 2014 Mar 3 Available from: http://reynoldsamerican.com/releases.cfm?ReleasesType=&Year=. ↑ 42.0 42.1 National Association of Attorneys General. FDA should regulate sales and advertising of e-Cigarettes. NAAG; 2013 Sep 24 Available from: http://www.naag.org/fda-should-regulate-sales-and-advertising-of-e-cigarettes1.php. ↑ 43.0 43.1 43.2 43.3 43.4 The Lancet Oncology. Time for e-cigarette regulation. Lancet Oncol 2013 Oct;14(11):1027 [Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24079859]. @@ -316,7 +316,7 @@ References ↑ Therapeutic Goods Administration. Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code 2007. Canberra: TGA; 2007 Available from: http://www.tga.gov.au/industry/legislation-tgac.htm. ↑ Trtchounian A, Williams M, Talbot P. Conventional and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have different smoking characteristics. Nicotine Tob Res 2010 Sep;12(9):905-12 [Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20644205]. ↑ Cobb NK, Abrams DB. E-cigarette or drug-delivery device? Regulating novel nicotine products. N Engl J Med 2011 Jul 21;365(3):193-5 [Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21774706]. ↑ Ploom. The Ploom. [homepage on the internet] Ploom; 2014 Oct 32016 Jun 5 [cited 2014 Apr 8]. Available from: http://www.ploom.com/modeltwo/. ↑ 50.0 50.1 World Health Organization. The History of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. France: WHO; 2009. ↑ World Health Organization. WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 2005. ↑ 52.0 52.1 World Health Organization Convention Secretariat. Electronic nicotine delivery systems, including electronic cigarettes. Seoul, Republic of Korea: Conference of the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, fifth session; 2012. Report No.: FCTC/COP/5/13. @@ -349,7 +349,7 @@ References ↑ The New York City Council. City votes to prohibit the use of electronic cigarettes in places where smoking is banned. New York, New York: The New York City Council; 2013 Dec 19 Available from: http://www.council.nyc.gov/html/pr/121913stated.shtml. ↑ Phend C. FDA: No Suprises Planned for E-Cigarette Regs. MedPage Today; 2013 Oct 27 Available from: http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/FDAGeneral/42506. ↑ Whitcomb D, Gorman S. Los Angeles moves to ban e-cigarettes, joining NY, others. Rueters; 2014 Mar 4 Available from: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/05/us-usa-ecigarettes-california-idUSBREA2324920140305. ↑ Stanford School of Medicine. Helps you quit. [homepage on the internet] Stanford School of Medicine; 2014 Oct 32016 Jun 5 Available from: http://tobacco.stanford.edu/tobacco_main/subtheme_ecigs.php?token=fm_ecigs_mt043.php. ↑ Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. FDA and the States Must Regulate E-Cigarettes To Protect Public Health. Washington, DC: Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids; 2013. ↑ European Commission. Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission; 2012. Report No.: 2012/0366 (COD). ↑ Information Daily. EU Parliament rejects regulation of e-cigarette as medical device. Information Daily; 2013 Oct 15 Available from: http://www.theinformationdaily.com/2013/10/08/eu-parliament-rejects-regulation-of-e-cigarettes-as-medical-devices. @@ -358,7 +358,7 @@ References ↑ 88.0 88.1 European Parliament. Texts Adopted Part III at the sitting of Wednesday 26 February 2014. European Parliament; 2014. Report No.: P7_TA-PROV (2014) 0160 Art 20.1; Art 20.3(b). ↑ European Parliament. Texts Adopted Part III at the sitting of Wednesday 26 February 2014. European Parliament; 2014. Report No.: P7_TA-PROV (2014) 0160, paragraph 38, page 24. ↑ 90.0 90.1 90.2 90.3 90.4 European Parliament. Texts Adopted Part III at the sitting of Wednesday 26 February 2014. European Parliament; 2014. Report No.: P7_TA-PROV (2014) 0160, Art 20. ↑ 91.0 91.1 91.2 91.3 European Commission. Questions & Answers: New rules for tobacco products. [homepage on the internet] European Commission; 2014 Oct 32016 Jun 5 Available from: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-134_en.htm. ↑ European Parliament. Texts Adopted Part III at the sitting of Wednesday 26 February 2014. European Parliament; 2014. Report No.: P7_TA-PROV (2014) 0160, Art 20.5. ↑ European Parliament. Texts Adopted Part III at the sitting of Wednesday 26 February 2014. European Parliament; 2014. Report No.: P7_TA-PROV (2014) 0160 paragraph 48, page 28. ↑ Gornall J. Electronic cigarettes: medical device or consumer product? BMJ 2012 Sep 25;345:e6417 [Abstract available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23014904].