Should children be banned from using e-cigarettes?
Saturday, January 25, 2014 at 20:17 The sale of e-cigs to under 18s in England is going to be banned.
The Government is also going to follow Scotland's example and make the purchase of cigarettes for children a criminal offence.
Last night, just as I was sitting down with my family to watch The Great Gatsby, I got a call from a researcher on Five Live's Stephen Nolan Show.
I was told they were discussing the issues with Professor John Ashton, president of the Faculty for Public Health, and Robert West, Professor of Health Psychology and Director of Tobacco Studies at the Cancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London.
What were Forest's views, she asked?
I explained we supported a ban on proxy purchasing and as for e-cigs we are against excessive regulation but in this instance we wouldn't oppose legislation because we couldn't defend their use by under 18s.
There was a pause.
"Can you hang on a moment? I've just got to speak to a colleague."
When she came back it was to say 'Thanks but no thanks'. Apparently my views were too similar to those of Ashton and West.
Well, I listened to the programme from 11.00pm, when the subject was due to be broadcast, but there was nothing on e-cigarettes (or tobacco) until 11.35 when there was a short discussion with some e-cig guy (whose name I didn't catch) and Edwina Currie, who was there to review the papers but took the opportunity to warn about the dangers of nicotine.
I don't know if they were on earlier but there was no sign of John Ashton or Robert West. As a result the discussion was extremely underpowered. Instead of a proper discussion or debate it felt like filler.
I told the researcher she would struggle to find a spokesman for any group or body who would go on air and defend the sale of e-cigarettes to children and so it proved.
Not even the e-cig guy was prepared to do that.
Nevertheless, I've seen tweets this morning (yes, you, Dick Puddlecote!) that suggest strong opposition to the proposed legislation.
So my question this morning is: 'Should under 18s be banned from buying e-cigarettes?'
I'd be interested to hear your response.
Reader Comments (14)
I thought the "law" is simply taking into law something many many vendors already practise! Nothing new really - not offended. However, NRT in every form, is available to cheeeldren - the "toxic" "deadly" nicotine. Odd yes? My personal opinion is that kids who smoke, would be better served by e cigs than NRT. Kids will smoke and vape despite the law - and probably because of it!
The lethal dose for nicotine is about 1 mg / kg . So it might be an idea to ban the sale to minors. So long as nicotine replacement products are also banned in a similar fashion.
Fredrik, there is a difference, I think, between nicotine replacements products and e-cigs. NRP are there as a quit smoking aid. They are designed to wean you off nicotine. E-cigs, I think, should be available as a smoking cessation tool - for those who want to quit - but also as a recreational nicotine delivery system for smokers who don't want to quit or want get their nicotine hit in a different way. If you agree with the latter option it probably makes sense to restrict their sale to 18s and over, unlike NRP.
I'd agree with vapingpoint, that you can legislate until the cows come home, but it won't make one iota of difference to kids who want to smoke or vape - they'll get hold of them anyway. Also, the age used to be 16; raising the age to 18 was just gesture politics, and will have had no impact whatsoever on kids who want to smoke / vape. So to summarise, the question is academic, really, since whatever they decide will be largely meaningless.
Simon, I think you are right , lazy thinking on my part!
Fixing a problem which doesn't exist? Fear of the dark? Legislation used as a witches brew? Something should be done about these little children eating potatoes - chock full of traces of nicotine, potatoes. Wave the professor's legislative magic wand - all will be well.
Potatoes, tomatoes, caulifowers and tea also contain nicotine.
I tweeted about the article itself, Simon, not the under 18 plan which - as mentioned above - is already industry standard and a bit of a non-story.
It was shocking to see the CMO spouting such ill-informed trash. Plus, one BBC sentence went like this.
"But while smoking rates have fallen to their lowest ever level, experts fear the electronic substitutes could be encouraging teenagers to take up the habit."
It is deliberately couched to imply that the tobacco control industry's bans and restrictions on smoking have been wildly successful - which we know they have not - but e-cigs now threaten that by enticing kids to smoke, precisely the scaremongering nonsense which has been increasing in absurdity in the past few months.
Even ASH concede that the 'gateway theory' for e-cigs is non-existent, not that they raised a peep about it at any time today.
It's clear that if smoking rates are indeed the "lowest ever", then e-cigs must have had a significant part in that and, by the same token, kids have not been seduced into smoking because of them to dilute the effect.
It's either a shoddily written article, or one which is cleverly written to paint e-cigs as dangerous and ripe for more bans/restrictions. Funnily enough, the MHRA have a plan in mind for 2016 and would be quite happy not to have a storm of criticism from the public.
How convenient.
Note too, by the way, that Arnott was already pushing for the 'next logical step' in her comment to the BBC article. She wants them banned from being sold anywhere but shops ... for now.
We've seen it all before, haven't we?
Thanks for the clarification, Dick. Points noted!
Surely youngsters are just as likely to misuse eCigarettes as NRT products.
I hear of many who admit to smoking and when given patches smoke at the same time for an extra 'buzz'!! Naughty, naughty, naughty.
Will smoking cessation practitioners admit to collusion in such heinous practices?
:0)
Compared to the reams of legislation resulting from the childish non-sensical claptrap dreamed up by the anti camaigners, I must admit this has a smattering of logic and common sense about it,except that it will never work due to the ease of online buying.
The whole concept of switching from tobacco to vaping is an alternative supposedly safer means of inhaling nicotine.
Non-smoking youngsters who make a habit of vaping can become addicted to nicotine and tempted to switch to real fags and condemned to a life of abject poverty like the rest of us, not to mention smoking related illnesses such as hypothermia, caused by spending too much time standing outside shivering.
The message is simple- "If You don't need them keep off them"
Xopher: Not just misuse NRT products, but be dangerously and irresponsibly encouraged to use them!
Remember that NHS Choices say that it's perfectly fine for 12 year olds to use NRT and their parents don't even need to be informed.
I'm sure Arnott - in her recent new role as nicotine products tsarina - will soon express outrage at this kind of thing. Or is she only worried about e-cigs?
{tumbleweed}
I don't think kids should be able to buy adult products but when it comes to law allowing kids to have nicotine, it depends on who is selling it.
Anti-smoker groups can get kids addicted to it at a very early age and they don't even have to tell their parents.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/9823681/Children-as-young-as-12-given-nicotine-patches-on-the-NHS.html