Simon Clark - Taking Liberties

The Save E-Cigs campaign has written to the Speaker John Bercow about the proposal to ban the use of e-cigarettes inside the Palace of Westminster.

Clive Bates, former director of ASH and now a leading advocate for e-cigarettes, has described the letter as "outstanding" and "a great template for anyone trying to bring reason to the vaping debate".

It's a good letter when it sticks to the facts, adding references for verification. For example:

We know from the latest statistics produced by the Office for National Statistics that e-cigarettes are used almost exclusively by current and former smokers. We know that e-cigarette used in public does not renormalise smoking [5]. We know that e-cigarettes are not a gateway into smoking [6]. We know that e-cigarette use in public does not lead to children using e-cigarettes [7].

What about this, though:

A major scientific study undertaken by Dr Konstantinos Farsalinos and Professor Riccardo Polosa concluded that the “effects of e-cigarette use on by standers are minimal compared with conventional cigarettes". A review of the available literature conducted last year by researchers at the Drexel University School of Public Health in Philadelphia concluded that “exposures of bystanders pose no apparent concern".

I'm sure the "effects of e-cigarette use on by-standers" are indeed minimal but so are the effects of "conventional cigarettes" in most situations. Given their concerns about the use of junk science to undermine the use of e-cigarettes, it's a bit rich for the e-cig movement to embrace the politics of secondhand smoke to advance their cause.

Equally unimpressive are comments that range from subjective to pure speculation. For example:

There is never a situation where it is better to smoke than to vape.

Never? What about people who enjoy smoking and don't like e-cigarettes? I think they should be the judge of whether it's better to smoke or vape.

Professor John Britton from the Royal College of Physicians has said: “If all the smokers in Britain stopped smoking cigarettes and started using e-cigarettes we would save five million deaths in people who are alive today."

Yeah, that must be true because one of the country's leading tobacco control campaigners says so, and they're always right, aren't they?!

We very much hope that you will continue to support your colleagues who have done the right thing by switching from smoking to vaping.

Done the right thing? This isn't about right and wrong. It's a matter of choice.

I may be reading too much into this but language matters and as soon as you introduce the concept of right and wrong it suggests a moral crusade.

Choosing to smoke is no less virtuous than vaping. The battle that has to be fought is freedom of choice versus excessive regulation, not vaping (good) versus smoking (bad).

Unless of course you want to be allied to the anti-smoking industry. Good luck with that!

This letter from @SaveEcigs is outstanding: a great template for anyone trying to bring reason to the vaping debate > http://t.co/Q44CHJKxtC
— Clive Bates (@Clive_Bates) November 26, 2014